Orton's Arm Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 H_A....I think you should drop(totally) your arguements regarding passer ratings. The Carson Palmer comparison I can buy. But in the other cases, you're comparing rookie quarterbacks who haven't yet learned the playbook or the offense with a second year guy who's been given ample opportunity to learn both those things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 The Carson Palmer comparison I can buy. But in the other cases, you're comparing rookie quarterbacks who haven't yet learned the playbook or the offense with a second year guy who's been given ample opportunity to learn both those things. 688857[/snapback] <sigh> The point wasn't if we can compare the stats of 2 or more rookie QBs, the point was.... The stats are worthless. AND.... even more worthless in this case(if that can be possible) since we can only compare QBs who basically DNP their rookie year but did in their second year. Do you not see that your comparison of JP to Billy Joe Hobart is... (& I'll word this the kindest way I can) ...not valid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Do you not see that your comparison of JP to Billy Joe Hobart is... (& I'll word this the kindest way I can) ...not valid? 688901[/snapback] Especially since Billy Joe lost his job not because of his quarterbacking skills but because he publicly admitted that he didn't read the playbook.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#1TN Bills Fan Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Craig Nall has the big arm you need to hit those deep throws in the Fairchild offense. Also, Nall's QB rating is 139.4, while Losman's is just 63.5. Bear in mind a lot of Nall's success came against a very good Chicago defense in a game late in the year. I'm not sure whether the game was at Chicago or Green Bay, but either way it was someplace cold and windy. Of the three players, Nall clearly has the most upside--if he can continue to play at the level he's achieved in his limited playing time. He's also the only QB of the three selected by the current regime. But if Nall isn't what the coaches were hoping for, Holcomb is a very solid plan B. 687202[/snapback] Oh please! Where do I start? I agree with you that Nall has the arm to make the deep throws in our new offense, but so does JP! We don't even know what we have yet in JP. Obviously, the Packers weren't sold on this guy because they desperately wanted to draft Losman, and they did draft Rogers. If this guy had soo much potential, why did the Pack let him go?? Also, as far as Losman's QB rating is concerned, I happen to remember another number 7 that was drafted in 1983. His first year as a starter was absolutely horendous!! His QB rating was like below 50 if I remember correctly. All he did was go on and become the best QB to ever play the game! Am I saying that Losman will be the next Elway, absolutely not. But I am saying that we need to give one FULL SEASON as the starter before giving the job to someone else. My prediction is 85% Losman, 15% Nall, 0% Holcomb, 0% Ochs, 0% Woodbury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Also, as far as Losman's QB rating is concerned, I happen to remember another number 7 that was drafted in 1983. His first year as a starter was absolutely horendous!! Yet another comparison between a rookie QB's stats and those of a second year player. Ho hum. I brought up the Billy Joe Hobart situation because many Losman fans suggest you eat hot pockets if you give up on a guy after nine games. Billy Joe was given only nine games before getting the boot. I'm not suggesting that the Losman and Hobart situations are identical; just that the whole hot pockets concept is invalid. Losman makes the occassional pretty throw, but he's done nothing in college or in the pros to suggest he can be a consistent pocket passer. He was drafted by a guy whose track record indicates a willingness to overlook the absence of pocket passing skills in favor of athletic gifts. The general manager who said he wouldn't take Losman with the last pick in the seventh round is probably a better judge of quarterback talent than Tom Donahoe. In the highly unlikely event Losman outplays the other guys, he should be declared winner of the QB competition. It's possible for even a blind squirrel like TD to find the occassional nut. However, if Losman fails to win the competition, I don't see any reason to give him starting experience at the other guys' expense in the vain hope he'll become something he's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 I brought up the Billy Joe Hobart situation because many Losman fans suggest you eat hot pockets if you give up on a guy after nine games. Billy Joe was given only nine games before getting the boot. I'm not suggesting that the Losman and Hobart situations are identical; just that the whole hot pockets concept is invalid. 689144[/snapback] And once again: 1.) Billy Joe wasn't brought in to start, 2.) He only played 2 games for the Bills (who gave up a 3rd round pick for him based on the 12 games he had played previously in his career), and more importantly, 2.) HE WAS CUT BECAUSE HE PUBLICLY ADMITTED HE DIDN'T READ THE PLAYBOOK! It had nothing to do with his play/potential, though obviously from not reading the playbook his play suffered.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted May 11, 2006 Author Share Posted May 11, 2006 I think many Bills fans are coming to the conclusion that the best real world thing you can say about our QB is that EITHER Losman, or Holcomb. or Nall will prove to be andequate QB. Though ALL of them present a rational POSSIBILITY of working out NONE of them present any rational PROBABILITY that they will work out. Together these three less than probable shots may well add up to a probability that the Bills will have a QB who can do the job. If the primary thing for a poster is to be a fan and a rooter for the Buffalo Bills football team, then that probability that the team has an adequate QB on its roster is a welcome change and quite exciting. Now granted some folks have their fandom and rooting go beyond the team to a specific individual player and thats more than fine. having individual heroes and making football arguments about which player is better is a lot of what is entertaining about this. However, from my football based standpoint, its hard for me to see debates about which QB is the man or is failed as much more than a debate of dueling excuses. Whether JPs troubled career as a Bills is excused by the talent he showed at Tulane which attracted the Bills to draft him and the fact has started way less than a full season games is a close question where the outcome mostly seems determined by the biases one brings to the debate. Whether Holcombs failure to ever be a consistent starting QB in the NFL despite 20 years of trying is excused by the chance that his experience leading to better decision-making than the young Losman and the possibility that we may go with a short pass RAC oriented Rams style O is a close question where the outcome mostly seems determined by the biases one brings to the debate. Whether Nall's failure to be more than a back-up during his brief career is excused by him putting up some gaudy numbers in his brief appearance he was able to get because when you play behind Brett Favre and his NFL record of starts in a row you are simply not gonna get a lof real snaps is a close question where the outcome mostly seems determine bythe biases one brings to the debate. What it comes down to is that from what I have seen of football and these men's play, I find it pretty easy and a clear case to reject an arguments that any of these three are head and shoulders above or head and shoulders worse than the other two. It just does not seem like smart football to anoint any one of these three as the obvious winner nor to reject any of these three as the obvious loser in this battle not worthy of getting a real shot to prove what he can do on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Now granted some folks have their fandom and rooting go beyond the team to a specific individual player and thats more than fine. I'm glad I've risen well above that level. On a more serious note, I hope you're right in saying it's probable the Bills have their QB of the future on the roster. I've heard it said that if you have two quarterbacks, you really don't have any. Meaning, that if one guy isn't head and shoulders above the other, neither is going to work out as your starter. Well, you're telling me the Bills don't have two quarterbacks on their roster. They have three. If having two quarterbacks is the same as having zero, maybe having three quarterbacks is the same as having -1. In fact, I know just who the -1 is! But with each of these guys being given more of a chance to prove himself, maybe one will emerge as the true quarterback of the future. If not, there's always next year's draft. If our three guys tank, let's hope for a 1-15 season to get Brady Quinn! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 If not, there's always next year's draft. If our three guys tank, let's hope for a 1-15 season to get Brady Quinn! 689232[/snapback] So does he get 8 games or 9 before he's declared a bust? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 So does he get 8 games or 9 before he's declared a bust? 689300[/snapback] Brady Quinn probably won't be a bust. Unlike Losman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Brady Quinn probably won't be a bust. Unlike Losman. 689431[/snapback] Ahh, so he gets 9 then. just checking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Ahh, so he gets 9 then. just checking. 689435[/snapback] If you're impressed with what a guy's done in college, you give him time to develop in the pros. If, on the other hand, a guy didn't necessarily demonstrate the skills you're looking for back in college, and if he's not doing anything in the pros either, there's not a compelling need to be all that patient with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 If you're impressed with what a guy's done in college, you give him time to develop in the pros. If, on the other hand, a guy didn't necessarily demonstrate the skills you're looking for back in college, and if he's not doing anything in the pros either, there's not a compelling need to be all that patient with him. 689648[/snapback] I just don't get how you achieved your definitive negative assessment on JP. As shown, stat-wise he is similar to Palmer so....stats out. You seem to agree that 8 games is not enough to fully realize the potential of a young QB....so.... Do you do this just to stimulate conversation.... or are you too stubborn to step back & acknowledge that any definitive assessment on JP(positive or negative) is premature? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDRupp Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 Losman 50% Nall 30% Holcomb 20% At least that this is what I think it should be heading in to training camp and preseason. Unless Nall or Holcomb are just clicking perfectly, JP gets the nod for at least 8-10 starts, if he is healthy. Hopefully, that is a small "if". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 I just don't get how you achieved your definitive negative assessment on JP. As shown, stat-wise he is similar to Palmer so....stats out. I think it was JDG who showed Losman's first nine games were worse than Palmer's first nine. But more importantly, Palmer did a lot more to prove himself as a pocket passer back in college than Losman did. Do you do this just to stimulate conversation.... That's a good question. I know it's unlikely the Bills management is influenced by what's written on these boards. Perhaps the most recurring theme on this board is the importance of the offensive line--and rightly so. Yet TD typically found offensive linemen by signing low-priced free agents or by low draft picks; while using first-day picks on offensive skill players. No matter how persuasive I manage to be, it's extremely unlikely to do any good. But even if it did, what would it matter? Suppose everything went as well as I could possibly imagine, and the Bills won the next ten Super Bowls? Would it really improve the world in any fundamental way? Would those victories help build a better future for the next generation? I guess the real reason I'm doing this is to get practice at the generic skill of persuading others of something I happen to believe in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 If you're impressed with what a guy's done in college, you give him time to develop in the pros. If, on the other hand, a guy didn't necessarily demonstrate the skills you're looking for back in college, and if he's not doing anything in the pros either, there's not a compelling need to be all that patient with him. 689648[/snapback] Why do you contradict yourself and your own opinions in the same thread just to bash someone? You say if a guy did nothing in college, and nothing in the pros, why be patient? Well, Nall did nothing in college, and frankly hasnt done much in the pros either. So why should be get so much more of a chance over losman? and dont give me that lame ass passer rating arguement. he's thrown what, 30 career passes? theres this little thing called statistical significance. I guess the real reason I'm doing this is to get practice at the generic skill of persuading others of something I happen to believe in. 690043[/snapback] if this is what you are pursuing, i would advise you NOT to quit your day job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 So does he get 8 games or 9 before he's declared a bust? 689300[/snapback] Are those 9 games as a rookie, his second year, or his third year? And are those games overall mediocre, below average, or abysmal? Are there any really good games mixed in among those? JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 Why do you contradict yourself and your own opinions in the same thread just to bash someone? You say if a guy did nothing in college, and nothing in the pros, why be patient? Well, Nall did nothing in college, and frankly hasnt done much in the pros either. 690059[/snapback] There's a difference between "nothing" = "played badly" and "nothing" = "never started." JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 I think it was JDG who showed Losman's first nine games were worse than Palmer's first nine. 690043[/snapback] Actually it was me who showed you how similar JP & Palmer's first 8 starts (stat-wise) were.(page 5 this thread) I did that to show you how futile using statistics from early in a QBs career is(yet you persist). I guess the real reason I'm doing this is to get practice at the generic skill of persuading others of something I happen to believe in. If you really do, try.... 1)Spending more time on the research & less on the waffle. 2)Remaining consistent with your arguments. 3)Picking a point of view that can actually be defended...i.e. saying JP is crap cannot be logically defended at this point in time. It may end up being a truth but till then it is just an opinion with no real basis aside from hunch. 4)Listening to others' arguments with an open mind & a willingness to adjust your viewpoints if warranted. You will never convince anyone of anything if you simply reject/ignore intelligent rebuttals without logically countering them. One huge thing I send your way though....you keep your sense of humour which I really, really appreciate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDG Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 I just don't get how you achieved your definitive negative assessment on JP. As shown, stat-wise he is similar to Palmer so....stats out. Huh? Keep in mind that JP Losman threw more NFL passes as a rookie than Carson Palmer did - who did not take a single snap as a rookie. Losman's 1st 9 games: 113 of 228 (49.6%) for 1340 yds, 5.88 YPA, 149 YPG, 8 TD and 8 INT One Game with +60% passing, (60.1% in Game 1 vs. Houston) One 200+ yard passing game (224 at Miami) 2-7 Record Palmer's 1st 9 games: 181 of 318 (57%) for 1897 yards, 5.97 YPA, 211 YPG, 7 TD and 12 INT Three Games with +60% passing, including his 8th and 9th games (vs. Dallas and @Washington) Four 200+ yard passing games AND One 316 yard game vs. Baltimore 4-5 Record I don't see how there is any similarity here. With the exception of Palmer throwing a few to many INT's, he was clearly superior to Losman's performance in every other way. Do you do this just to stimulate conversation....or are you too stubborn to step back & acknowledge that any definitive assessment on JP(positive or negative) is premature? 689863[/snapback] So, Andre Ware and Cade McNown were also prematurely assessed? Just to be clear, though, I'm not bold enough to say definitively that Losman will be a bust - I'm just pointing it that: a) it is not unreasonable to reach solid conclusions regarding a player after 9 games in his second season b) there seem to be few to no examples of a QB performing as badly as Losman did in his second year and then going on to stardom JDG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts