What do you think are chances 4 starting QB?

[Dibs]

So in 2004, the Bears had to face Nall, and they finished with the 21st ranked defense.  In 2005, they avoided Nall, and their defensive ranking went up to #1 or #2.  Coincidence?  I think not. 

687842[/snapback]

 

[Pyrite Gal]

This is so completely wrong in terms of understanding the last 12 years+ or so of football, that my first thought was that you could not be claiming what you seemed to be claiming.

 

However, the words above are the words above and they are completely counter to how decisions have been made under the salary cap.

 

1, Where a player is drafted is slotted and determines his initial contract. The Bills hung onto MW not only because they had sunk a bunch of $ into him.but because if the cut him the acceleration of the bonus paid to him would kill the team. Where a player is drafted has a big impact on decisions on whether to keep him or not/

 

2. The HC may ignore where a player was drafted and his costs if he is commited to making straight football descisions. However, it is the owner who owns the team and its his money. Just as Ralph hated having an $8 million bonus sit on the bench and anointed RJ the starter after he rolled over an Indy team that had given up when they realized the game outcome would not improve their playoff position the decision about the future was driven by $ rather than football.

 

3. Pro football used to be a sport which happened to be a business but today it is a businss that happens to also be a sport.

 

Please do not fool yourself into thinking that draft position due to slotting and sunk costs do not make any difference in future decisions. Often they are the key thing.

687752[/snapback]

 

Sorry, Yvel, but Holcomb's Arm is right-on here. The difference with some high draft picks is that the high signing bonus makes the marginal cost of cutting them prohibitive.

 

But you can't change the past, you can only affect what happens in the future... and so sunk costs are irrelevant.

 

JDG

687773[/snapback]

 

I'm simply saying that the accelerated cap hit after a cut or trade and the issues of pride (and also the issue that the budget every team sets for positions simply means that even after the draft is done and the contract is signed that these salary issues have a huge impact on football decisions.

 

If by sunk money you mean afet a player is cut or retired his contract has no effect on football decisions involving him you and Holvomb's Arm are right. If you consider the money to be sunk already and of no relevance the day after the draft or the day after he is cut a paycheck, I think you are wrong.

 

Contract issues do not determine everything or completely rule the day. However just as foolish and ignoring reality as it would be to claim contract rule everything it is equally ignoring reality to make the claim HA made that it is irrelevant when ctritical football descision are made like how long do you try to make it work at TY with MW,

[1billsfan]

Which fierce Chicago defense are you referring to?

 

The game where Nall lit up Chicago was the last in 2004. 

Chicago finished that year 5-11 with the 21st ranked D.

Nalls stats were 7-13-131, 1TD... QBR: 114.6

 

Nall did not play at all last year.

 

I honestly cannot see how anyone can be certain one way or the other on either JP or Nall.

I don't understand....we are Bills fans....how could any of us be upset about the possibility of any QB stepping up & succeeding?

687833[/snapback]

 

Oh that's just great...they were building such a solid case for Craig Nall starting and you had to go and screw it up with your stupid facts. Thanks a lot bro.

 

As for your last question, they're upset because they've got weak stomachs which can't handle a QB "growing pains" period lasting more than eight games.

 

If Nall is as great as they think he is then I guess he'll be sending Losman to the bench soon enough. They shouldn't have a care in the world right now.

[Orton's Arm]

As for your last question, they're upset because they've got weak stomachs which can't handle a QB "growing pains" period lasting more than eight games.

And yet you've written Nall off after fewer games than that! Which is better: Losman's 13 appearances with a 63.5 rating, or Nall's six appearances with a 139.4 rating? If you need to write off one guy or the other, this one's an easy call.

[Pyrite Gal]

And yet you've written Nall off after fewer games than that!  Which is better: Losman's 13 appearances with a 63.5 rating, or Nall's six appearances with a 139.4 rating?  If you need to write off one guy or the other, this one's an easy call.

687990[/snapback]

 

 

Actually there is nothing in 1billsfan post which I see as writing Nall off, he simply lampoons posts where some folks seem to declare Nall the next savior based on an incorrect recitation of the facts.

 

I think that most Bills fans have not reached any conclusion which either elevates JP, Holcomb, or Nall to being a certainty or even a probability of being the next savior. Nor do I think most Bills fans have written off either JP, Holcomb or Nall as a failure either.

 

In fact, a big part of what has made Bills life a lot more difficult and flat out killed the season several times is that folks like Butler, TD and Ralph have acted like legends in their own minds and simply handed the job or big bucks to a QB in a futile search for the next savior.

 

This recipe or approach has resulted in:

 

1. The Bills waiting a year (at least too long to find a replacement for Kelly as folks like Ralph made a horrendous assessment in operating from the concept he would last longer than he did.

 

2. Stretched to draft TC in terms of value and then rushed him along into starting when he clearly needed to have happy feet trained out of him (if it ever could).

 

3. Panicked and made a dumb deal giving up a 1st day draft pick for Hobert who was so bad he needed a mid-season cut.

 

4. Did a smart thing by signing Flutie but then went back on their word by not giving him any chance to win the job on the field in pre-season.

 

5. They not only killed that season by giving a big bonus to RJ before he proved himself on the field, but setup a situation where when Flutie played as well at the hoped and AJ Smith exoected, the resulting cap hit from him making his bonuses and also rolling them into his base pay forced them to resign and extend Flutie to control his cap hit because they already had a huge QB cap hit for RJ.

 

6. Again, TD made a move that worked out well initially on the field by trading for Bledsoe but he made a dumb move by not simply calling bledsoe a wash fter a very good season and a horrendous season and cutting him, but he extended Bledsoe after a horrendous season.

 

7. Again, the Bills got killed by not awarding the QB job based on on field performance but TD correctly lost his job by activing like a legend in his own mind and making the mistake of extending Bledsoe worse by cutting him and handing the job to JP who played like well. a first year QB.

 

The dumbest thing that the Bills can do is to declare either JP, OR Holcomb, OR Nall the starter based on an assessment of their play to date instead of letting these athletes duel it out on the field based on their present play in camp and at exhibition games.

 

Is there a dead lock certainty, likelihood, or even a probabilty that Losman will be the Bills' QB of the future?

 

IMHO NO!

 

 

Is there a dead lock certainty, likelihood, or even a probabilty that Holcomb will be the Bills' QB of the future?

 

IMHO NO!

 

 

Is there a dead lock certainty, likelihood, or even a probabilty that Nall will be the Bills' QB of the future?

 

IMHO NO!

 

However, i still feel very good about things because I feel there is a likelihood that one of these players (I don't care which one it is) will play well enough to be a solid QB for the Bills.

 

I think the Bills will be OK if they act like football adults and choose a starter for the season based on which player has the best pluses and minuses in pre-season on the field rather than choosing on based mostly on what they hope happens or did happen in the past.

 

Its fine for us fans to have our favorites, i just hope that this popularity contest does not drive football decisions.

[1billsfan]

And yet you've written Nall off after fewer games than that!  Which is better: Losman's 13 appearances with a 63.5 rating, or Nall's six appearances with a 139.4 rating?  If you need to write off one guy or the other, this one's an easy call.

687990[/snapback]

 

I didn't write off Nall at all. I do write off any QB rating based on 33 passes though. I'm willing to wait and see what the QBs do in the upcoming competition for the job, are you?

[Orton's Arm]

- It's a mistake to write off any of the Bills' three QBs, because we don't know enough about them to do so.

 

- The Bills have made a real mess of the QB position ever since the search for Kelly's replacement began.  One notable mistake has been handing the job to players who hadn't necessarily earned it.

 

- To avoid the mistakes of the past, the Bills should give the job to whichever player does the best in camp and the preseason.

 

- Any favoritism towards any of the three quarterbacks should be avoided, because it would impair an unbiased assessment of who actually won that quarterback competition.

I agree with 90% of the above, and I don't feel like arguing about the remaining 10%. Certainly the Bills should do their best to look at the camp competition with unbiased eyes. Kelly the Fair and Balanced Dog made an interesting point about that competition, in that Holcomb would have the edge based on his veteran experience. Nonetheless, Kelly TFABD thought Holcomb shouldn't be allowed to win the competition, based on his age and limited upside. I have to admit that if Holcomb and Nall played roughly evenly, I'd give the benefit of the doubt to Nall for those reasons.

 

I can only speak for myself, but I'm not trying to annoint Nall the savior based on just 33 pass attempts. It'd be like offering a woman a marriage proposal after the first date. Still, if a woman is everything you could possibly hope for on that first date, you ask her out again. A 139.4 QB rating is everything you could possibly hope for from your quarterback. Marv made a good decision by bringing Nall in for a closer look.

[Ramius]

I agree with 90% of the above, and I don't feel like arguing about the remaining 10%.

 

In other words...you are saying..."my assinine logic regarding the bills qb situation and my utter refusal to even consider the possibility that JP has talent and will win the job has caused me to post random pointless crap with no sense of anything even resembling a logical view of the situation. Furthermore, every single one of my attempts to continue my crusade against JP Losman has been shot down. I have spanked like a little B word in this arguement, so i am not going to continue spewing this crap for fear i may get spanked again."

[Dan Gross]

In other words...you are saying..."my assinine logic regarding the bills qb situation and my utter refusal to even consider the possibility that JP has talent and will win the job has caused me to post random pointless crap with no sense of anything even resembling a logical view of the situation. Furthermore, every single one of my attempts to continue my crusade against JP Losman has been shot down. I have spanked like a little B word in this arguement, so i am not going to continue spewing this crap for fear i may get spanked again."

688112[/snapback]

 

I agree with 90% of the above. My contention though is he loves the spanking which is why he keeps playing and presenting the crayonz-worthy arguments....

[Orton's Arm]

I agree with 90% of the above. 

688117[/snapback]

That's my line. The difference is that I used it in reference to a reasonable post.

[Orton's Arm]

Furthermore, every single one of my attempts to continue my crusade against JP Losman has been shot down.

In the eyes of a Losman partisan such as yourself, I'm sure they have been. Obviously there's nothing anyone can say about Losman which will change your mind, so I'm not too worried about what you believe or don't believe.

 

My main point about Losman is that there's nothing special about him which should cause the Bills to be any more patient with him than with a relative unknown like Nall. Yes, Losman was selected with a first round pick. But the guy who selected him didn't have a clue about how to judge a quarterback. I've heard there were other general managers who wouldn't have drafted him even in the seventh round.

 

I'm tired of reading about how much physical talent Losman has. Akili Smith had plenty of physical talent too. I'm even more tired of reading about how, if you've already given up on Losman after just nine games, you must eat hot pockets. You know how many games Billy Joe Hobart played for the Bills? Nine. You know what his career passer rating was? 67.0 Losman's is 63.5.

 

As long as Losman's on the roster, you may as well have him take part in the quarterback competition. But the main part of being a good quarterback is the ability to throw accurately, to read defenses quickly, and to make good decisions. I see no reason to act as though Losman is more likely to develop these traits than any other young quarterback who may happen to be on the roster.

[Orton's Arm]

He knows there are differences in Palmer.  He told me in this exact thread that the Palmer situation was completely different when I brought Palmer up.  Yet all of a sudden the Losman situation reminds him of the Palmer situation... 

688104[/snapback]

The above quote is from a different thread. I'm responding to it here to give that other thread a chance to drift back towards its original topic.

 

Carson Palmer was generally regarded as being worthy of a very high draft choice. At least two general managers felt that way about Losman; but both men have since been fired. Other general managers saw the situation differently, including at least one who said he wouldn't take Losman even in the 7th round. While nobody questioned Losman's athletic abilities, many felt he wasn't accurate enough or a good enough decision maker to be worthy of a high draft choice.

 

A widespread endorsement by general managers around the league--such as the one Palmer had--is more convincing than the endorsement of a general manager who, at least in the past, allowed himself to place more importance on a quarterback's athletic gifts than on his accuracy or decision-making. The two situations are vastly different from a pedigree standpoint.

 

But both Losman and Palmer faced similar situations in terms of gaining the respect of their teams' veterans. Both sat on the bench their rookie years, both were annointed the starter ahead of a popular veteran leader going into their second years, and both suffered early-season struggles. Based largely on what the Bengals saw of Palmer in practice and in games, they chose not to revolt. Based on what the Bills saw of Losman in practice and in games, many chose differently. I'm not saying the two situations are exactly the same; but they're similar enough that you should be worried.

[Dan Gross]

But both Losman and Palmer faced similar situations in terms of gaining the respect of their teams' veterans.  Both sat on the bench their rookie years, both were annointed the starter ahead of a popular veteran leader going into their second years, and both suffered early-season struggles.  Based largely on what the Bengals saw of Palmer in practice and in games, they chose not to revolt.  Based on what the Bills saw of Losman in practice and in games, many chose differently.  I'm not saying the two situations are exactly the same; but they're similar enough that you should be worried.

688197[/snapback]

 

Bolded version is your words, unless you can show otherwise. The big difference between the Bills and Bengals situation is that the "popular veteran" stayed with the team in the Bengals' case. Kitna supported the move, and he and Palmer actually became good friends. Regardless, he was still on the team if Palmer completely failed, so it was a good 'security policy.' Look at the Bills' situation. Losman is named the starter, Bledsoe says "I'm not a backup," and the Bills release him. At that point you have Losman and veteran backup Shane Matthews (who was talking of retiring)...and nothing else. What would you, as a team member, think about the season faced with that situation?

 

Another difference is that Palmer was able to practice with the team that whole first year, so they "knew" him better.

 

I won't even get into the feeling that some players on the Bills' team felt that only tweaks were needed after 2004 (falling one game out of the playoffs), and that the timing of the change at QB seemed suspect because of that. The Bengals, while going 8-8 in 2003, lost 3 of their last 4 games, so I wouldn't think they'd go into 2004 with those same expectations.

 

And that's even acknowledging that there was a "player revolt" over Losman. It's clear that Moulds did not care for the fact that Losman preferred Evans, but can you say he "revolted" based solely on the decision to go with Losman? And if so would it have to do with Losman directly, or just the simple fact that he'd be working with his umpteenth new QB since he was drafted by the Bills, tired of the inconsistency?

[Orton's Arm]

Bolded version is your words, unless you can show otherwise.  The big difference between the Bills and Bengals situation is that the "popular veteran" stayed with the team in the Bengals' case.  Kitna supported the move, and he and Palmer actually became good friends. 

Kitna's support is something I hadn't considered. Still, the Bills' players couldn't hope to bring back Bledsoe by revolting, because Bledsoe was with the Cowboys. The same was not the case with the Bengals and Kitna, or with the Giants and Warner. Moreover, Kitna's rating in 2003 was 87.4, while Bledsoe achieved just a 76.6 rating in 2004. So the Bengals were benching a higher producing veteran than were the Bills.

Regardless, he was still on the team if Palmer completely failed, so it was a good 'security policy.'  Look at the Bills' situation.  Losman is named the starter, Bledsoe says "I'm not a backup," and the Bills release him.  At that point you have Losman and veteran backup Shane Matthews (who was talking of retiring)...and nothing else.  What would you, as a team member, think about the season faced with that situation? 

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. There's always turmoil in the offseason, and players have come to expect it. But soon enough, the Bills had provided themselves with Plan A in the form of Losman, and Plan B in the form of Holcomb. The Bengals had Palmer as Plan A, and Kitna as Plan B. Are you saying that the Bills lost trust in management because they didn't like their Plan B as much as the Bengals liked theirs, and that this is the reason for the revolt? If so, the revolt sure took on a strange form.

Another difference is that Palmer was able to practice with the team that whole first year, so they "knew" him better. 

A good point.

I won't even get into the feeling that some players on the Bills' team felt that only tweaks were needed after 2004 (falling one game out of the playoffs), and that the timing of the change at QB seemed suspect because of that.  The Bengals, while going 8-8 in 2003, lost 3 of their last 4 games, so I wouldn't think they'd go into 2004 with those same expectations.

You're drawing a bigger distinction between 8-8 and 9-7 than I'd care to. This isn't exactly your strongest point.

And that's even acknowledging that there was a "player revolt" over Losman.  It's clear that Moulds did not care for the fact that Losman preferred Evans, but can you say he "revolted" based solely on the decision to go with Losman?  And if so would it have to do with Losman directly, or just the simple fact that he'd be working with his umpteenth new QB since he was drafted by the Bills, tired of the inconsistency?

Regardless of whether the Bills chose Holcomb or Losman, Moulds would be stuck working with a new quarterback. So I don't see his desire for familiarity being the driving factor in his disrespect for Losman. On the contrary, leading up to that Miami game, Moulds had practiced more, and had played more, with Losman, than he had with Holcomb.

 

If it was just Moulds' opinion, I wouldn't be too concerned. But the lack of faith in Losman wasn't just coming from Moulds.

[EC-Bills]

My main point about Losman is that there's nothing special about him which should cause the Bills to be any more patient with him than with a relative unknown like Nall.  Yes, Losman was selected with a first round pick.  But the guy who selected him didn't have a clue about how to judge a quarterback.  I've heard there were other general managers who wouldn't have drafted him even in the seventh round. 

688159[/snapback]

 

And I have heard of people who would take him in the first round. Sherman was one, but you quickly dismissed him as an idiot. Mike Martz also liked Losman, but in your mind Martz probably doesn't know anything either. So go ahead if it makes you feel better because some folks wouldn't have drafted him even in the seventh round.

[EC-Bills]

But the lack of faith in Losman wasn't just coming from Moulds.

688283[/snapback]

 

I am not going to say JP didn't rub some folks the wrong way, but don't rule out the fact that these so called veterans didn't have a problem throwing the kid under a bus as opposed looking in the mirror and realizing they were also part of the reason this team sucked last year. Then throw in on top of that we had a meathead for a coach...

[1billsfan]

I am not going to say JP didn't rub some folks the wrong way, but don't rule out the fact that these so called veterans didn't have a problem throwing the kid under a bus as opposed looking in the mirror and realizing they were also part of the reason this team sucked last year.  Then throw in on top of that we had a meathead for a coach...

688598[/snapback]

 

Spot on. The Bills were the worst team in 3rd down defense and second worst team in rushing defense. Pass protection and run blocking were clearly optional. Don't even get me started on that fraud Malarkey. But it was all JPs fault. A lot of players, coaches and the GM chose not to look in the mirror last season. Let's hope this team will play like professionals and not a like bunch of babies this season.

[justnzane]

I'm not sure what you're getting at here.  There's always turmoil in the offseason, and players have come to expect it.  But soon enough, the Bills had provided themselves with Plan A in the form of Losman, and Plan B in the form of Holcomb.  The Bengals had Palmer as Plan A, and Kitna as Plan B.  Are you saying that the Bills lost trust in management because they didn't like their Plan B as much as the Bengals liked theirs, and that this is the reason for the revolt?  If so, the revolt sure took on a strange form.

 

688283[/snapback]

 

H_A, that is a really good reason to revolt. Kitna was a very solid QB and he had proven himself as a starter quality quarterback that can lead the team. With the Bills, they got a plan B of a guy that hasn't been the main starter for any team. With that in mind, Palmer was also the #1 overall pick and was very successful at USC, and Losman was a guy that was on a crappy teamand had to run for his life. If i were in the bills locker room, i would have been pissed to lose Bledsoe and get Holcomb in return.

[Dibs]

I'm tired of reading about how much physical talent Losman has.  Akili Smith had plenty of physical talent too.  I'm even more tired of reading about how, if you've already given up on Losman after just nine games, you must eat hot pockets.  You know how many games Billy Joe Hobart played for the Bills?  Nine.  You know what his career passer rating was?  67.0  Losman's is 63.5. 

688159[/snapback]

 

H_A....I think you should drop(totally) your arguements regarding passer ratings.

 

1st year QBRs are generally worthless.

 

EXAMPLES:-

 

Eli Manning 1st year..........7 starts.....................55.4 QBR

Peyton Manning 1st year....16 starts..................71.2 QBR

Don McNabb 1st year.........6 starts(12 games)...60.1 QBR

 

BEST COMPARISON....

C. Palmer....1st year DNP

JP Losman...1st year DNP(close enough to)

C.Palmer....2nd year...13 starts..............77.3 QBR...BUT

C.Palmer....2nd year...1st 8 starts...........66.3 QBR

JP Losman..2nd year...8 starts(9 games)..64.9 QBR

 

1st YEAR QB STATS ARE WORTHLESS

(Remember Rick Mirer?)

 

...You may now resume general viewing...

[Orton's Arm]

I am not going to say JP didn't rub some folks the wrong way, but don't rule out the fact that these so called veterans didn't have a problem throwing the kid under a bus as opposed looking in the mirror and realizing they were also part of the reason this team sucked last year.  Then throw in on top of that we had a meathead for a coach...

688598[/snapback]

I'll buy the fact that this team's problems were coming from a number of places, including the veteran players. So Losman failed to earn the respect of many of his teammates, but those teammates were often ineffective. Maybe he would have gotten more respect from a more effective bunch, but I doubt it.