Can JP Losman & Kelly Holcomb be on the same team?

[RayFinkle]

Holcomb is argueably one of the best 2nd string QBs in the league. He is a solid vet who can come in and win a couple games in a pinch. It isn't his fault JP crapped his drawers last year. I love how folks try to bash Holcomb for not being Joe Montana when that was never the reason he was even signed.

[Taro T]

I don't think relationship has anything to do with it.   Holcomb is too old to be a 3rd String QB.   Holcomb is a nice guy to have as the #2 to come in in the event of an injury, manage the game, and not make mistakes.   At the #3 spot, I would think that you would want a developmental guy.

 

For a moment there, when it looked like his old target, Andre Davis would be starting for us, it seemed like Holcomb had a shot to win this thing.   That's harder to see nowadays...

 

JDG

708668[/snapback]

I don't believe that Holcomb will win the starting job, but I expect that he will be the #2.

 

If JP wins the starting job, I'd expect to see Holcomb as the backup and Nall as #3. Should JP end up ineffective or injured in a game, Holcomb would come in, but the following week Nall would be the starter and Holcomb would go back to being #2.

 

If JP does reasonably well this season, then I'd expect Holcomb to be released this off season and Nall would move into the #2 role. Whichever one of the camp fodder arms that wins the practice squad job this season would then have the inside track on the #3 job next year. Considering expectations for this team are extremely low and there are a ton of WR's in camp, nearly all who appear to be reasonable and need to get the ball to show what they can or can't do, I don't see a problem with the team getting an early look at who may be the #3 next year.

 

If JP stinks, then I'd expect to see him gone and depending upon what Nall does this year, either he has the inside track at #1 with Holcomb backing him up or the Bills go to the draft looking (once again) to find their starting quarterback of the future on draft weekend.

 

If Nall wins the competition this preseason, I'd expect to see JP on the trading block or cut outright. Marv and Dick have nothing invested in JP, so if they feel he can't get the job done there is no reason to think that they wouldn't get rid of him. If JP is gone, then they definitely keep Holcomb.

 

Holcomb is a very serviceable backup and is the only experienced quarterback on the roster. IIRC, he's not making a ton of money, so I don't think there would be huge cap savings if he was cut. He was brought in to be the backup, so if he doesn't win the starting role, I don't see him causing problems.

 

I actually like the idea of having the guy coming in off the bench having a different style than the #1 as the D has game planned all week for the #1 and may have a difficult time adjusting to the #2 guy's style.

[smokinandjokin]

Holcomb is argueably one of the best 2nd string QBs in the league. He is a solid vet who can come in and win a couple games in a pinch. It isn't his fault JP crapped his drawers last year. I love how folks try to bash Holcomb for not being Joe Montana when that was never the reason he was even signed.

708736[/snapback]

 

That's fine. Don't start him, though. Don't pull the project and start the backup to win a few home games against the Jets and Dolphins. I'm not bashing him because he can't throw deep- he is what he is and the Bills knew that when they signed him. I'm just saying his style is not fun to watch, and playing him restricts progress for the young QB, the young RB, and probably the franchise as a whole. If the starter gets hurt, I'd feel pretty darn good about Holcomb coming in. But that's what he is and should be- a band aid, a relief pitcher- not a starter. This preseason should be equal snaps for Losman and Nall to duke it out for the starting job. Holcomb takes whatever snaps are left and is the #2. I am certain that right now he is better than Losman and Nall in several areas, but he's proven he can't consistently win in the NFL, and is no better than 8-8. If Holcomb's the opening day starter, say buh-bye to this season.

[Beerball]

I can only think of 1 reason we're loading up on all these 3rd string QBs.  Dick & Marv have seen enough of Nall & Losman to know that if either wins the starting job, which is very likely, there's not a need for Kelly Holcomb, since either Losman or Nall is adequate enough to be the 2nd stringer. 

 

This is nothing but speculation.   Please provide a link to these "facts". 

 

I still think we carry these 3 QB's on the roster for 2006.

708579[/snapback]

Of course it's speculation, he began his post with "I can only think". To me that means one man's opinion. Get off your high horse and relate the facts on why you think that all 3 will be carried in 2006. After all, your post carries much the same message "I still think".

[Pyrite Gal]

Of course it's speculation-that's why the 1st 2 paragraphs start with "I think"

I'll be glad to provide a link when the final cuts are announced, or when Holcomb is traded, whichever comes 1st.

708734[/snapback]

 

I think a good link is to the article today where an explanation is given by Jauron/Fairchild about the status of their current QB decision making and the issue of QBs not getting reps because their are a bunch in camp.

 

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20060...?tbd2015941.asp

 

 

Specifically, they seem to answer the notion presented in an earlier post by you (which I unfortunately attributed to Mark VI in an earlier response as I reacted to the insane notion that the braintrust had already decided Holcombwas done). Rather than it being prompted by some galactic pop psychology conspiracy theory that at decision has been made, the braintrust feels they can manage the competition between player.

 

They go even further than I would go saying they would be comfortable with no answer emerging until after the 3rd pre-season game while I has targeted after the 2nd game as the Bills pursuing the Marv Levy method that a team which has two starting QBs has no starting QB.

 

I think may fans are really getting their panties all up in a wad wanting to see a decision made by the braintrust right now rather than until after these men compete on the field. This strikes me as a key to why we repetitively have made poor QB decisions that the braintrust has let their hearts decide this notion based on pre-season assessment rather than let their heads decide this based on game competition.

[Albany,n.y.]

I think a good link is to the article today where an explanation is given by Jauron/Fairchild about the status of their current QB decision making and the issue of QBs not getting reps because their are a bunch in camp.

 

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20060...?tbd2015941.asp

Specifically, they seem to answer the notion presented in an earlier post by you (which I unfortunately attributed to Mark VI in an earlier response as I reacted to the insane notion that the braintrust had already decided Holcombwas done).  Rather than it being prompted by some galactic pop psychology conspiracy theory that at decision has been made, the braintrust feels they can manage the competition between player.

 

They go even further than I would go saying they would be comfortable with no answer emerging until after the 3rd pre-season game while I has targeted after the 2nd game as the Bills pursuing the Marv Levy method that a team which has two starting QBs has no starting QB.

 

I think may fans are really getting their panties all up in a wad wanting to see a decision made by the braintrust right now rather than until after these men compete on the field. This strikes me as a key to why we repetitively have made poor QB decisions that the braintrust has let their hearts decide this notion based on pre-season assessment rather than let their heads decide this based on game competition.

708795[/snapback]

I don't think a decision has been made, but I think that Nall was brought in to replace either Losman or Holcomb, depending on the circumstances. While I believe that Holcomb can be on a depth chart ahead of JP, I don't think he can be on a depth chart behind JP.

Here are the scenarios as I see them:

1) Losman wins the starter's job. Backup-Nall, 3rd QB Young guy, no Holcomb

Reason is because after last year JP can't play with Holcomb as his primary backup & Holcomb is a perfect #2, not #3. Obviously this is pure speculation, but it's what my crystal ball says.

2) Nall wins the starter's job. Two possibilities: If JP is #2, Holcomb is gone. If Holcomb is #2, JP may stay-but it's his last year here and he's only kept to avoid a massive salary cap hit. Best young QB ends up on practice squad.

3) Holcomb wins the starter's job (a scenario I see as unlikely, but if the other two guys stink in preseason, he's the only other choice). If Holcomb wins the job under the scenario described, Nall is the backup & JP is #3 due to cap reasons or gone if Marv is willing to bite the bullet. Once again, this means JP is gone before 2007.

 

Basically, JP is the starter this year or is gone before 2007. If JP wins the starter job, Holcomb is gone unless Nall plays bad enough to get cut, an unlikely scenario. Nall will not be #3 under any of the scenarios I foresee.

[ganesh]

Not to turn this into a #21 thread, but the fact that McGahee ran for 1247 yards last year with that OLine and those QBs is a miracle in itself.  Everyone dogs Willis for his 3.8 yd per carry average.  I will agree, he didn't look like he had the 'burst' that makes special RBs special.  But would it look so bad if he averaged 4.0 yds per carry (the minimum benchmark of an 'effective' RB)?  That difference is 4 yards when spread over 20 carries (76 yds vs. 80 yds.)  I don't think we were 5-11 last year because Willis didn't get four more yards per game.

708724[/snapback]

 

One of the reasons for the 5-11 season was WM did not get enough TDs...For your starting RB to have 5 TDs in the season is setting up for failure. Of course it is not his fault that he kept being taken out in goal-line situations or on 3rd downs...

 

The other reason his YPC dropped off is the play on the right side. Until both MW

and CV played on the right side, they were ploughing holes for the RBs. WM yards per game are as follows:

 

Houston 22/117

Tampa 13/34

Atlanta 27/140 1TD

NO 16/84 1 TD

MIA 31/86 1 TD

NYJ 29/143 1 TD

OAK 16/50

NE 31/136

 

========> 8 games: 185/ 790 = 4.27 YPC, 4TDs

 

MW gets benched around this time and CV is injured.....Look at the rest of

his stats....

KC 20/ 66

SD 10/39

Car 21/53

MIA 27/83

NE 3/8

DEN 9/36 1 TD

CIN 23/66

NYJ 22/113

==========> 8 games: 135/464 = 3.4 YPC, 1TD

 

If you see the above stats, Willis was having a stellar year until midway

through the season when things fell apart....MW what ever people may say

was a dominate RUN blocker....He just wasn't a good pass blocker.....

 

Peters might have stopped the carnage in the passing game later in the

second half, but his contribution to the Running game has been zilch......

The final 100 yard game came against the Jets who were pathetic against the

Run through the year.....

 

If we want to improve the Bills running game, that Right side better start opening the holes for McGahee....

[MartyBall4Buffalo]

Why blitz?  Isn't the purpose of blitzing to get the QB to release the ball early to a 'hot' read, thus making the passing game semi-predictable?  Holcomb doesn't throw more than six yards downfield regardless; I'd rather keep my LB's in the box and pound the receivers when they catch those dink passes.

 

708724[/snapback]

 

Because short passing games typically rely on timing and accuracy the best way to throw off timing and accuracy is to blitz the quaterback. While bringing your cb's up in press coverage throwing a short passing attack completly off balance.

[MartyBall4Buffalo]

Peters might have stopped the carnage in the passing game later in the

second half, but his contribution to the Running game has been zilch......

The final  100 yard game came against the Jets who were pathetic against the

Run through the year.....

 

If we want to improve the Bills running game, that Right side better start opening the holes for McGahee....

708809[/snapback]

 

 

I wouldn't specifically point the finger at peters as cause as why WM fell off. I think a lot of it was the inability of our guards to pull on sweeps and traps, and I think thats a big reason why as the course of the season went on we saw less of Mcgahee bouncing runs outside like he did in 2004 and more off guard stuff where bennie and villarrial could just try to plow defenders, this didn't seem to work either as villarrial had nagging injuries and anderson was so unathletic that if a dt was quicker then him the hole would be plugged quickly. Another reason for the dropoff is teams just didnt fear our passing game and the offense would consistently see 8-9 man fronts to stop mcgahee with no fear of the qb, making it all the more difficult to run and further exposing the Inadequacy of our quaterback.

[BUFFALOTONE]

I think they can, they did it all of last year.

[John from Riverside]

Actually I think the ideal situation is having Holcomb as a backup to Losman.....

 

I think historically Holcomb has shown he is much better off the bench.....it is when you try to force him into the starting role where he struggles.

 

I will say it now and I will say it again....the Losman project HAS to work out....or this team is dead for a while.

[ganesh]

Actually I think the ideal situation is having Holcomb as a backup to Losman.....

 

I think historically Holcomb has shown he is much better off the bench.....it is when you try to force him into the starting role where he struggles.

 

I will say it now and I will say it again....the Losman project HAS to work out....or this team is dead for a while.

709172[/snapback]

 

The fact that Holcomb harbors for the same starting job can cause division

within the locker room by Holcomb and other Veteran players....as it was

evident last year.....You cannot have both....Alex Van Pelt never ever

threatened the starting QB....but at the same time he could come in and

play the game....That is the kind of QB we need.

[1959BillsFan]

I really don't think there is a Holcomb versus Losman between these two players. It really looks to me they cherish the competation because that helps them to learn and to tune their skills.

 

The actual division last year seemed to come from the "veterans" first and foremost. It was mularkey's inability to handle the "veterans" that drove the locker room division in itself.

 

Even Fletcher said the "veterans" were not fully behind Losman because mularkey/d?o?n?a=how gave Losman the position. As a consequence, the rift was in reality between "head coach"/"management" and "veterans". This division resulted in much more than a QB competation, but a loss of faith and confidence between players and coaches.

[Sisyphean Bills]

They were last year and look at how well that turned out.