MadBuffaloDisease Posted September 26, 2004 Posted September 26, 2004 Here are his stats in 3 games: Bills: 18-36, 147 yards passing, 1 TD, 2 INT's; 2 rushes for 11 yards Broncos: 8-16, 120 yards passing 1 TD; 2 rushes for 8 yards Titans: 14-20, 124 yards, 1 TD; 3 rushes for 5 yards
c-biscut Posted September 26, 2004 Posted September 26, 2004 Way better than Bledsoe... I wish the Bills had him. He's a winner
MadBuffaloDisease Posted September 26, 2004 Author Posted September 26, 2004 Way better than Bledsoe... I wish the Bills had him. He's a winner 46171[/snapback] You MUST be kidding.
zow2 Posted September 26, 2004 Posted September 26, 2004 The Bills game was a miracle comeback...a fluke. The other two I don't think he did anything to lose the game. NO turnovers in his last 2 games and I think he was sacked only twice in each game. Remember...each sack is like a turnover or a failed 3rd down conversion (especially when were dealing with the Bills). If Drew can get us through a game with no turnovers and minimal sacks we should win our share of games with our D.
Campy Posted September 26, 2004 Posted September 26, 2004 Remember...each sack is like a turnover or a failed 3rd down conversion (especially when were dealing with the Bills). 46180[/snapback] That may be the most absurd football-related statement ever posted to TBD/TSW.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted September 27, 2004 Author Posted September 27, 2004 The Bills game was a miracle comeback...a fluke. The other two I don't think he did anything to lose the game. NO turnovers in his last 2 games and I think he was sacked only twice in each game. Remember...each sack is like a turnover or a failed 3rd down conversion (especially when were dealing with the Bills). If Drew can get us through a game with no turnovers and minimal sacks we should win our share of games with our D. 46180[/snapback] Despite those 7 "turnovers/failed 3rd down conversions," Bledsoe led the Bills to what should have been 17 points, and probably 20, if not more. Against the Jags it wasn't he who allowed 2-4th down conversions, but then again, RJ didn't allow that Homerun Throwup either.
Ray Posted September 27, 2004 Posted September 27, 2004 Sacks are not like turnovers--TO are much worse than a sack. But the point of the original post is well taken. Leftwich is not a good QB and their team still wins. Watching today was upsetting as I keep thinking the Bills should be 2-0 not 0-2. Also they could easily be 0-4 in another 2 weeks.
maddog Posted September 27, 2004 Posted September 27, 2004 Watching games today made me realize that there are a bunch of mediocre teams and quarterbacks out there. After watching Baltimore vs. Cincinnati (Boller & Palmer), things are going to have to be really bad before I'd be ready to hand the reins over to J.P. Losman. I have no reason to think he's not going to be good, but there will undoubtedly be some growing pains. I think Marvin Lewis is finding himself in a tough situation right now. The QB that gives them the best chance to win now is probably Kitna. I can't see them making the move back to him at this point though.
zow2 Posted September 27, 2004 Posted September 27, 2004 The point is that sacks are a negative football play and tough for the Bills to overcome. Sacks are drive killers much like the failed 3rd down conversion or a TO. That's all I'm trying to say. Leftwich is avoiding the negative plays except the two TO's in Buffalo. But like I said, they won on a one out of a hundred drive....converting 3 out of 3 4th downs on the last drive is something extraordinary.
Recommended Posts