Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 Honestly then, who would you like to see as our QB? I still say Nall is our best bet. Some say Nall was just a back up to Favre. 718106[/snapback] like me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 When Bledsoe came back from his injury, they could have very easily gone back to him. They didn't. There was a reason they didn't, and it wasn't entirely due to the play of Brady. 718095[/snapback] Are suggesting that if instead Brady had turned in JP numbers over that season they still wouldn't have gone back to Bledsoe, and would have waived him at seasons end? I think NE waived Drew because of Brady showed them he was as good as Drew already. Not might-be-someday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 Are suggesting that if instead Brady had turned in JP numbers over that season they still wouldn't have gone back to Bledsoe, and would have waived him at seasons end? I think NE waived Drew because of Brady showed them he was as good as Drew already. Not might-be-someday. 718123[/snapback] I'm saying if Bledsoe were in the same league as a Favre, Kelly, Marino, Young, Montana, etc, then they wouldn't have kept Brady in there. It was a combination of Brady playing well and something they didn't like about Bledsoe. It was not based solely on the play of Brady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 Are suggesting that if instead Brady had turned in JP numbers over that season they still wouldn't have gone back to Bledsoe, and would have waived him at seasons end? I think NE waived Drew because of Brady showed them he was as good as Drew already. Not might-be-someday. In Brady's last 8 starts, he threw more INT's than TD's. The rest of the team won the games, not Brady, because the coaching staff didn't put it all on him. And what the Pats realized they had in Brady was a former-6th round nobody who would listen to them and how they wanted things done, not a well-established former top overall pick who wanted to do things his way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 In Brady's last 8 starts, he threw more INT's than TD's. The rest of the team won the games, not Brady, because the coaching staff didn't put it all on him. And what the Pats realized they had in Brady was a former-6th round nobody who would listen to them and how they wanted things done, not a well-established former top overall pick who wanted to do things his way. 718131[/snapback] Thank you, you said it better than I did. It was a case of addition by subtraction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 In Brady's last 8 starts, he threw more INT's than TD's. The rest of the team won the games, not Brady, because the coaching staff didn't put it all on him. And what the Pats realized they had in Brady was a former-6th round nobody who would listen to them and how they wanted things done, not a well-established former top overall pick who wanted to do things his way. 718131[/snapback] Now I resent Brady & the Pats as much as anyone for being successful while we suck but you are not seriously implying that Brady is a 'system' QB are you? A blind man's dog can see that some of the poise & on field decision making that Brady displays is extraordinary. Thank you, you said it better than I did. It was a case of addition by subtraction. 718137[/snapback] Yes, Brady didn't enter the equation. The Pats won 3 SBs because they dropped DB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 Yes, Brady didn't enter the equation. The Pats won 3 SBs because they dropped DB. 718149[/snapback] Well, it's true that they would not have won any SB's with Brain Dead Drew starting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 Well, it's true that they would not have won any SB's with Brain Dead Drew starting. 718156[/snapback] True....but I doubt they would have made the playoffs if not for Brady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 True....but I doubt they would have made the playoffs if not for Brady. 718157[/snapback] You're right... no way Drew could've led them to the playoffs, at least not in this decade. I blame it all on karma... I loved and cheered Mo Lewis' beautiful hit in early 2001. Little did I know it would lead to 3 SB wins for the Pats and living hell for the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 I'm saying if Bledsoe were in the same league as a Favre, Kelly, Marino, Young, Montana, etc, then they wouldn't have kept Brady in there. It was a combination of Brady playing well and something they didn't like about Bledsoe. It was not based solely on the play of Brady. 718128[/snapback] I agree as the decision to cut a player is always a balance and the Pats clearly judged with the strengths and weaknesses of Bledsoe versus the strengths and weaknesses of Brady thwe choice was obvious. The mistake people seem to make however is to assume that because Nrady was the better choice this means Bledsoe cannot do anything right. I think that events in real life show us that even after that decision that a team can get a winning record with Bledsoe at the helm, but an SN with him at QB is incredibly doubtful. Bledsoe's play and performance with the Bills demonstrated that under the right circumstances (running an O which folks did not have a lot of tape on yet) he was capable of producing a season which merited his reserve Pro Bowl nod in 2002 (id you disagree simply name the QBs who deserved the AFC reserve slot more), However, once the NFL had tape to study and BB provided a blueprint on how to destroy a Bledsoe led O he was done. TD stupidly extended him for 2004 when he should have chalked up hi one good year and one bad year as a wash (particularly after he replaced the lost 1st round choice by having the cojones to tag PP). However, under TC's guidance the Bills once again showed that if you use Bledsoe in a far better way and with more diversity in playcalling than Killdrive did, Bledsoe could in fact QB a team to a winning record. Hpwever, hos limitations comvined with a majopr ST power failure (Lindell missing a chip shot and Clements laying a PR on the carpet and the D getting shreded by a bunch of Pitts back-ups that the Bills could not close the deal after a winning season. Now Parcells is using his mastery to once again use Bledsoe in a manner they are knocking on the playoff door. Bledsoe is no Montana, Young etc, (though he does have a ring he played a key role in his team earniong and Marino and Kelly never pulled that off). However, if uised properly he can QB a team to a winning reocrd. That is simply a fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 Bledsoe's play and performance with the Bills demonstrated that under the right circumstances (running an O which folks did not have a lot of tape on yet) he was capable of producing a season which merited his reserve Pro Bowl nod in 2002 (id you disagree simply name the QBs who deserved the AFC reserve slot more), 718161[/snapback] This has already been answered... in 2002, there were 6 AFC QBs who did not suffer 2nd-half-of-the-season meltdowns that kept their teams out of the playoffs. As such, all 6 were more worthy of the Pro Bowl than Drew.. lucky for him that voting closed weeks before the end of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 This has already been answered... in 2002, there were 6 AFC QBs who did not suffer 2nd-half-of-the-season meltdowns that kept their teams out of the playoffs. As such, all 6 were more worthy of the Pro Bowl than Drew.. lucky for him that voting closed weeks before the end of the season. 718162[/snapback] Hey Rico have you noticed how much this smiley... ....looks like your avatar? Just thought I'd mention it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 Hey Rico have you noticed how much this smiley... ....looks like your avatar?Just thought I'd mention it. 718163[/snapback] Now that I fixed it, you're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 Now that I fixed it, you're right. 718164[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 Yes, Brady didn't enter the equation. The Pats won 3 SBs because they dropped DB. 718149[/snapback] Dibs, read my posts....I said it was a combination of how Brady played AND the fact that there was an issue with Bledsoe. Do you really think that if any of the QBs I listed above were injured, and some 6th round pick came in and helped them win some games, that those QBs would not have gotten their job back?? It doesn't make any difference how well Frank Reich plays....if Jimbo is healthy, Jimbo is the QB. That was NOT the case in New England. Bledsoe was not an untouchable by any means, and Belichick proved just that. And yes, the decision to stick with Brady WAS the reason why they won those superbowls. If you think they would have won them with Drew, you're off your rocker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 Dibs, read my posts....I said it was a combination of how Brady played AND the fact that there was an issue with Bledsoe. Do you really think that if any of the QBs I listed above were injured, and some 6th round pick came in and helped them win some games, that those QBs would not have gotten their job back?? It doesn't make any difference how well Frank Reich plays....if Jimbo is healthy, Jimbo is the QB. That was NOT the case in New England. Bledsoe was not an untouchable by any means, and Belichick proved just that. And yes, the decision to stick with Brady WAS the reason why they won those superbowls. If you think they would have won them with Drew, you're off your rocker. 718167[/snapback] Sorry AJ, I must have got the wrong end... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 Sorry AJ, I must have got the wrong end... 718175[/snapback] lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarthur31 Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 Scout.com is a reputible site..but any article is only as good as where the info comes from... Still, thought this was interesting http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=126&p=2&c=544132 Buffalo Bills – As scout.com reported earlier this year, the Minnesota Vikings were very interested in signing free agent QB Craig Nall. The problem was they wouldn’t give him any assurances that he would be given a chance to compete for the starting job which is why he signed with the Bills. Not only is he being given a chance to compete for the job, those who watched their off-season practices noted that Nall was the most impressive of the three competing for the No.1 spot. Nall showed the ability to get the ball in to tight areas and on time which is an important facet of offensive coordinator Steve Fairchild’s scheme. Another player to watch on the offensive side of the ball is TE Robert Royal who was essentially used as a blocker previously with the Washington Redskins. Royal, a former fifth-round pick in 2002, had a very good week of Senior Bowl practices so it was a surprise to some that he wasn’t used more as a receiver in the first four years of his career (29 catches). With the club lacking a physical presence at the receiver position, Royal’s role with his new team could certainly increase. 717770[/snapback] According to Chris Brown, Kelly was the better QB early on then JP started playing a llot better and in his opinion was the best throughout OTA's. Nall had a helluva time llearning the system and only in the last week did he start playing better. Reading that, JP played a tad better than Holcomb when mini camp ended. I trust Brown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 And he has done so much to deserve such reverence. I know, give him a chance.....it is only his 3rd year, and he only cost us a 1st, 2nd, and a 5th! 717837[/snapback] Oh yeah, it's a friggin' riot. Once again, Losman did NOT cost the Bills three draft picks. He cost them two -- a 2nd and a 5th. The Bills SWAPPED 1st round picks and chose Losman with Dallas' pick. The Bills had two 1st rounders that year. Why is this math so difficult? Bill, your silence was notable on the Jaworski-JP thread. Are you so slanted these days that you don't give ANY credence to one of the best X-and-O analysts out there giving props to Losman? Oh, I see, Jaworski didn't say that Losman "rubbed the vets the wrong way with his attitude" as you have previously opined. He must have his head up his ass. There's no way in hell Losman might have been !@#$ed with by Donahoe and Mularkey with their ridiculous "hand the job to him and then yank it away before you give him a chance" carnival last season, is there? Seriously, you talk about what a great fan you are and how you want the Bills to be good, but you are one friggin' pessimistic broken record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 Oh yeah, it's a friggin' riot. Once again, Losman did NOT cost the Bills three draft picks. He cost them two -- a 2nd and a 5th. The Bills SWAPPED 1st round picks and chose Losman with Dallas' pick. The Bills had two 1st rounders that year. Why is this math so difficult?. 718209[/snapback] What did Whitner cost us this year? A first, right? So Losman cost us a 1st, 2nd, and a 5th. He cost us a 2nd and a 5th EXTRA. Since we could have drafted someone else in the next years draft, that pick definately cost us. Not that I care, I think it was a good pick, but he did cost the Bills 3 picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts