Albany,n.y. Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 If Losman & Nall show enough, and JP is the starter, Holcomb will be elsewhere on opening day. You don't need 2 vets as backups when 1 has 1-2 years left in the NFL in what is basically a build upon year, if not a total rebuild year. No matter how many games played in (or not played in), Nall is a veteran.
RuntheDamnBall Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 If Losman & Nall show enough, and JP is the starter, Holcomb will be elsewhere on opening day. You don't need 2 vets as backups when 1 has 1-2 years left in the NFL in what is basically a build upon year, if not a total rebuild year. No matter how many games played in (or not played in), Nall is a veteran. 708143[/snapback] I'm kind of wondering about that, if Nall will be gone for not showing enough or Holcomb will be gone for the reason you point to. The signings of extra 3rd QB candidates would make a little more sense, then. Right now it seems like there's a glut, even if Ochs and Woodbury are gone due to injury/expired clock.
richNjoisy Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 I'm kind of wondering about that, if Nall will be gone for not showing enough or Holcomb will be gone for the reason you point to. The signings of extra 3rd QB candidates would make a little more sense, then. Right now it seems like there's a glut, even if Ochs and Woodbury are gone due to injury/expired clock. 708179[/snapback] Ahh - but the assumption is that the Bills need the cap room. Do they? What player or players are out there that we want to sign? None? Well, then we need to think about how releasing Holcomb helps the team next year or how filling his spot with another (I assume younger) QB is best for this year and the future. The signing of all the QB's is not costly at all - so the question is there enough footballs around to make having so many QB's in camp make sense? Or does it only mean that they are considering letting one of the top three guys loose? IMO, all three will be on the team at the start of the season (baring injury)
2003Contenders Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Yea, I actually like Holcomb -- as a backup QB. He has the right temperment for the job and would be capable of stepping in, so I am not in favor of getting rid of him. But for the long haul, I'd rather see Losman -- and if Losman can't win the job outright then Nall -- at the starting position. Obviously, we want the best man barking signals... If Losman and Nall are both so pathetic that Holcomb does indeed win the starting job, then it tells us that we need to continue shopping for another starter. In the best of all possible worlds, Losman wins the starting job outright with Nall playing well enough to push him. (We already know what Holcomb brings to the table.) In the instance that Losman loses the starting job either to injury or poor play -- if it's in mid-game, then turn to Holcomb. If it's for a stretch of games, then give Nall the nod. Of course, with a couple of weeks to go yet before training camp even starts, I suppose we are getting ahead of ourselves...
RuntheDamnBall Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Ahh - but the assumption is that the Bills need the cap room. Do they? What player or players are out there that we want to sign? None? Well, then we need to think about how releasing Holcomb helps the team next year or how filling his spot with another (I assume younger) QB is best for this year and the future. The signing of all the QB's is not costly at all - so the question is there enough footballs around to make having so many QB's in camp make sense? Or does it only mean that they are considering letting one of the top three guys loose? IMO, all three will be on the team at the start of the season (baring injury) 708183[/snapback] No, I didn't say a word about cap room. Rather, the assumption is KH doesn't really help us if he is not playing (and I'd argue, doesn't help us much when he is, either). If both Nall and Losman outplay KH, and he's going to be #3 here, we may as well pay less (not cap money, pay less salary this year) for another young buck who is almost certain not to play. I'd imagine Holcomb would also appreciate the opportunity to get the #2-spot replacement gig elsewhere as opposed to being clipboard man.
nobody Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Really, I can't wait to see your reaction if JP succeeds. It will probably ruin your whole year. 707584[/snapback] Of course with the next report that metions Losman threw an interception everyone will say it is time to cut him.
RuntheDamnBall Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Of course with the next report that metions Losman threw an interception everyone will say it is time to cut him. 708218[/snapback] Not I. I'm in it for the long haul.
Mickey Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Is throwing a 1 yard pass on 4th and 10 a good decision or a bad one? If it's bad we're used to that. Who would have thought that he ball would have enough velocity to be tipped that far...either that or Greer was velcroed to Stamer's back, or already lying on the ground 707402[/snapback] If the point here is that Holcomb suks, I agree but as suky as he is, he still was more effective than JP was last year and that makes me very, very nervous. ....and yes, I know all the reasons why we should beleive that JP is going to improve drastically this year and I am not aruging that they don't make sense. However, I will believe it when I see it.* *Please do not leap to the conclusion that I think Holcomb or Nall should start based on this post, I don't.
Mickey Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Yea, I actually like Holcomb -- as a backup QB. He has the right temperment for the job and would be capable of stepping in, so I am not in favor of getting rid of him. But for the long haul, I'd rather see Losman -- and if Losman can't win the job outright then Nall -- at the starting position. Obviously, we want the best man barking signals... If Losman and Nall are both so pathetic that Holcomb does indeed win the starting job, then it tells us that we need to continue shopping for another starter. In the best of all possible worlds, Losman wins the starting job outright with Nall playing well enough to push him. (We already know what Holcomb brings to the table.) In the instance that Losman loses the starting job either to injury or poor play -- if it's in mid-game, then turn to Holcomb. If it's for a stretch of games, then give Nall the nod. Of course, with a couple of weeks to go yet before training camp even starts, I suppose we are getting ahead of ourselves... 708211[/snapback] Of the three, the most unkown in terms of quality is Nall. He just hasn't had much experience on the field in a game to know much about him. JP has had limited time as well but he does have 1/2 a season of starts and spent a whole off season and camp as the starter getting all the reps. Holcomb is obviously a known quantity, no surprises, what you see is what you get. This is JP's third year in the league and so he is pretty ripe to get it all figured out finally....I hope.
Matt in KC Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Ahh - but the assumption is that the Bills need the cap room. Do they? What player or players are out there that we want to sign? None? 708183[/snapback] Peters? Fletcher? If we start the year significantlly under the salary cap I'm going to be pissed. If we still have space, we should try to extend some of our talent and use this year's space to fund it so we're less strapped in the future.
RuntheDamnBall Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Peters? Fletcher? If we start the year significantlly under the salary cap I'm going to be pissed. If we still have space, we should try to extend some of our talent and use this year's space to fund it so we're less strapped in the future. 708318[/snapback] Yes. Not to be underestimated. And I know there's the policy of not dealing with contracts mid-year, but making a pre-emptive strike wrt McGahee and a couple others might not be bad. If we feel confident, I'd extend TKO longer, too.
SnakeOiler Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 what about resigning nate clements? Need mad cash to keep him, but i hope they can work out a deal that's reasonable.
Buftex Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 what about resigning nate clements? Need mad cash to keep him, but i hope they can work out a deal that's reasonable. 708335[/snapback] If Clements has another year like this past season, let him go...he isn't worth "mad cash". Not that it means much, but he is ranked as the 22nd best corner in the leauge, by PFW. I think only he, and Bills fans think he is an elite CB. His value was really over-inflated last offseason, simply because he was projected to be the top free agent corner, in the 2006 off-season. Not the best corner in the leauge, just the best corner set to become a free agent. Before that, he was rarely mentioned, outside WNY, as one of the best corners in the leauge. This team is re-building from the ground up. It would be nice to keep Clements, but not for some absurd price. There have been very few corners in the leauge who can take away their side of the field. Nate Clements is not one of them. He isn't worth franchise player type money. Maybe he and his fellow Ohio State alums have a monster season this year....down for down, Terrance McGee had a much better season, at corner, than Nate Clements did. I know, I know, this is a topic for another thread....
ganesh Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 Yea, I actually like Holcomb -- as a backup QB. He has the right temperment for the job and would be capable of stepping in, so I am not in favor of getting rid of him. 708211[/snapback] The problem with Holcomb on the roster is that he is always going to be an option for the coaching staff/Veterans to switch to the starting job if the real starter (JP or Nall) falters. Considering how Meathead kept going back to KH to save his own job or under the pressure of Veterans, it would rather be that KH not be on the roster. The problem is KH desires to be the starter, not be content with a backup with an oppurtunity to start if the starter is injured. Unfortunately that kind of intention causes division within the team as seen last year or 5 years ago with Flutie and Johnson
dave mcbride Posted June 14, 2006 Posted June 14, 2006 If Clements has another year like this past season, let him go...he isn't worth "mad cash". Not that it means much, but he is ranked as the 22nd best corner in the leauge, by PFW. I think only he, and Bills fans think he is an elite CB. His value was really over-inflated last offseason, simply because he was projected to be the top free agent corner, in the 2006 off-season. Not the best corner in the leauge, just the best corner set to become a free agent. Before that, he was rarely mentioned, outside WNY, as one of the best corners in the leauge. This team is re-building from the ground up. It would be nice to keep Clements, but not for some absurd price. There have been very few corners in the leauge who can take away their side of the field. Nate Clements is not one of them. He isn't worth franchise player type money. Maybe he and his fellow Ohio State alums have a monster season this year....down for down, Terrance McGee had a much better season, at corner, than Nate Clements did. I know, I know, this is a topic for another thread.... 708340[/snapback] he had a great 04 season, and both lenny p and dr. z had him on their all-pro teams. i trust them more than i do pfw these days. that said, he had a pretty rough year last year.
Recommended Posts