Mickey Posted August 3, 2006 Author Share Posted August 3, 2006 Not sure what to say except that I'm sure the state of Texas is glad you weren't in charge of determining Troy Aikman's fate. 734412[/snapback] I have no problem starting JP this year, my only concern being that if he doesn't prove himself this year, we may have a bust on our hands. Obviously, if he does well in this, his third year, that won't be a problem. Same as with Aikman. In his third year, Aikman had a 65% completion percentage and a QB rating of 86.7 and he made the pro bowl. If JP does that well this year, we'll all be happy campers. In his second year, Aikman had a 56% completion percentage and a 66.6 QB rating. Had I been in Texas, I would have said that Troy needs to play better in his third year and if he doesn't, start considering another option. He played well, better than well so it would not have been necessary. Thus, even if I had been in Texas, Aikman would have had a fine career. I suppose if you had lived in Cincy, we'd still be waiting for David Klingler to develop, or Akili Smith and Carson Palmer would be playing for someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 3, 2006 Author Share Posted August 3, 2006 I can appreciate Mickey's impartial impatience, but the reality is even a guy like me with limited knowledge of Xs and Os can factor in the truth that the way JP was treated last year did absolutely NOTHING to foster his confidence. Give JP a year. A full year. If Mickey's right, I'll be the first to admit it. But to suggest he's done after 8 starts is just crazy. The moment they pulled JP and put in Holcomb, I was officially out of the TD/MM camp. 734430[/snapback] If I had suggested that he was done after 8 starts, I would plead guilty to the "crazy" charge. By week 8 he will have had 16 starts and I think that it would be fair to evaluate him. Not give up on him you understand, but begin thinking about a "plan B". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 I have no problem starting JP this year, my only concern being that if he doesn't prove himself this year, we may have a bust on our hands. Obviously, if he does well in this, his third year, that won't be a problem. Same as with Aikman. In his third year, Aikman had a 65% completion percentage and a QB rating of 86.7 and he made the pro bowl. If JP does that well this year, we'll all be happy campers. In his second year, Aikman had a 56% completion percentage and a 66.6 QB rating. Had I been in Texas, I would have said that Troy needs to play better in his third year and if he doesn't, start considering another option. He played well, better than well so it would not have been necessary. Thus, even if I had been in Texas, Aikman would have had a fine career. I suppose if you had lived in Cincy, we'd still be waiting for David Klingler to develop, or Akili Smith and Carson Palmer would be playing for someone else. 734466[/snapback] Mickey, don't forget that by his third year Aikman had ca. 32 starts (give or take any injuries, I do not have his stats in front of me) under his belt, having been a starting QB for two full years... whereas JP, entering his third year, has 8... If you want to get hung up on numbers, that one is important too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnakeOiler Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 We coulda had Leinart. We coulda been a contendah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 3, 2006 Author Share Posted August 3, 2006 Mickey, don't forget that by his third year Aikman had ca. 32 starts (give or take any injuries, I do not have his stats in front of me) under his belt, having been a starting QB for two full years... whereas JP, entering his third year, has 8... If you want to get hung up on numbers, that one is important too. 734475[/snapback] I agree but would add that the reason Aikman had 32 starts and JP only 8, is in part because JP couldn't keep Kelly Holcomb on the bench. Yes, part of that is the fault of the coaches for not sticking with JP though I didn't hear a lot of complaining when the switch was made and we won two in a row. By the same token, if JP had played better, he wouldn't have given the coaches the chance to make that mistake. Although the lack of starts hurt his development without question, its not like he was selling bibles on sunday. He was there for every practice, every meeting and had a chance to learn without dealing with the pressure to produce right away. At the time, quite a few folks around here were full of praise for how we wisely let him sit back and learn instead of wasting a year throwing him to the wolves. There has always been a legitimate debate over whether its better to throw them in to the ring from the get go like Aikman and Peyton Manning or to let them sit a year and learn like Palmer. I have no idea which is better, I am sure we could find examples where each worked or didn't work for this or that player. Arguably, JP has had the benefit of both, one year learning and another year in the lion's den, 1/2 on the field, 1/2 dealing with being benched. Hopefully, this year is his year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 Hopefully, this year is his year. 734566[/snapback] If DJ and ML will let him play......If KH was a 5-6 year veteran like a Billy Volek, then it makes sense to have a competition, as he could serve as the future of the franchise...but KH is done.....I don't see any value in the future for him.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 I agree but would add that the reason Aikman had 32 starts and JP only 8, is in part because JP couldn't keep Kelly Holcomb on the bench. Yes, part of that is the fault of the coaches for not sticking with JP though I didn't hear a lot of complaining when the switch was made and we won two in a row.734566[/snapback] I'll yell louder next time. JP doesn't have 8 starts "in part" of anything other than the fact that the coaches panicked. It had nothing to do with JP being unable to keep Holcomb on the bench and had everything to do with coaches refusing to take their lumps. I want to see this guy play 16 consecutive games and then we'll talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jukester Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 I have to believe that this whole not naming the starting QB thing started as a plan by DJ/ML to figure out which young qb was going to get the job – JP or Nall. Considering the team’s current state, the long term future of the position, and the relative sanity of the GM and head coach, there’s absolutely no reason why Holcomb would factor in. Get this straight: Holcomb will be the veteran backup on opening day – barring injury of course. Now that Nall is injured, it’s basically a shoe-in for JP (unless he literally craps the bed in preseason games). But there’s no reason for DJ to name him the starter at this point. He wants JP to stay competitive and focused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 I'll yell louder next time. JP doesn't have 8 starts "in part" of anything other than the fact that the coaches panicked. It had nothing to do with JP being unable to keep Holcomb on the bench and had everything to do with coaches refusing to take their lumps. I want to see this guy play 16 consecutive games and then we'll talk. 734635[/snapback] Amen, Hallelujah, and all that stuff.... By the way, what exactly is a "badonkadonk"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 This from a guy who knows the Bills pretty decent and has never liked Losman: I'm having second thoughts about my opinion that Losman simply might not have what it takes to be an effective starter in the NFL. I'm not saying I have completely changed my mind or that I am even declaring Losman as the winner of the No. 1 spot. Visions of him making repeated poor decisions and melting down a year ago are still fresh in my mind. He still has to show me plenty in the preseason in order for me to be absolutely convinced that he can reach the promise that convinced the previous Bills regime to make him a first-round draft pick in 2004. But when you watch Losman in practice, there is something about his performance that offers encouragement that he is making some progress. It isn't just that a good number of his throws look sharp and crisp, and that he seems to be making the right decisions most of the time. It isn't just that he seems less quick to pull the ball down and run as he did in those many panicky moments he showed last summer and during the season. Losman just seems to be carrying himself more like a professional quarterback. When he performs well, he points out that he needs to do that practice after practice and game after game before it can be considered a trend. He's also showing -- dare I say it? -- a sense of leadership. Losman's biggest mistake to date was refusing to accept a leadership role. That isn't an option for a quarterback. Vic C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 4, 2006 Author Share Posted August 4, 2006 I'll yell louder next time. JP doesn't have 8 starts "in part" of anything other than the fact that the coaches panicked. It had nothing to do with JP being unable to keep Holcomb on the bench and had everything to do with coaches refusing to take their lumps. I want to see this guy play 16 consecutive games and then we'll talk. 734635[/snapback] I think there is some revisionist history based on hindsight going on here. The coaches last year didn't know that the season was going to be a wash. This was a team that just missed out on the playoffs the year before. They fully expected to win and make the playoffs last year. They weren't there to train JP, they were there to win. Its easy now to look back at the season and conclude that they weren't going anywhere anyway so we would have been better off giving JP all the starts and winning be damned. If you want to call it "panick", fine but they "panicked" because JP played very, very poorly. We lost three straight, a stretch where he threw zero TD passes, was sacked 9 times, picked off twice and had QB ratings of 51, 33 and 34. They wanted to win so they made a change and initially it worked. Going into the Oakland game, we had clawed back to 3-3 under Holcomb and were pretty optimistic about the rest of the year. I don't recall anyone complaining back then that the hook was too quick or that JP should be back under center so we could train him for the future. If we had known from day one we were going to go 5-11, fine, start him every game. But we didn't know that. What we did know was that 4 weeks in we were 1-4, JP was playing terribly and the season was lost if we didn't do something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 4, 2006 Author Share Posted August 4, 2006 This from a guy who knows the Bills pretty decent and has never liked Losman:Vic C. 735025[/snapback] I respect Carucci but this really the kind of thing I am tired of hearing: "...carrying himself more like a professional quarterback." and "...sense of leadership..." I want to hear concrete things like, "...he is completing his passes..." or "he is making plays against the blitz..." Carucci includes some of that when he talks about the passes being crisp and hanging the pocket longer. That is all music to my ears but that other stuff is just puffery. I really do want to believe that he has all the skills and certainly, we are going to learn that this year barring injury. Given the first two are on the road, he is going to have a real opportunity to start off right. Coming home in week 3 for the opener at 2-0 would do loads for his confidence and that of the rest of the team. Now that I would love to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 I think there is some revisionist history based on hindsight going on here. The coaches last year didn't know that the season was going to be a wash. This was a team that just missed out on the playoffs the year before. They fully expected to win and make the playoffs last year............If you want to call it "panick", fine but they "panicked" because JP played very, very poorly....... 735058[/snapback] It is either "panicked" or "total stupidity" from the outset. JP was given the starting job upon the release of DB. To not expect a lot of growing pains from a young QB who had only attempted 5 NFL passes previously was ridiculous. What were TD & MM doing at the start of last season? Hoping like hell with fingers crossed that despite what he showed in camp/pre-season, JP would come out and perform like a Rothlesberger? They benched him in the 4th game!!!...1 & 3.....rookie Starting QB... To put all of that starters preasure on him, expect him to perform at an unrealistic level & then bench him in the 4th game was MORONIC. Did you see how bad Eli Manning was in his first 4 starts? 101-39-450-1TD-6INT QBR 31.4 Compared to JP.... 94-45-433-1TD-2INT QBR 55.9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 4, 2006 Author Share Posted August 4, 2006 It is either "panicked" or "total stupidity" from the outset. JP was given the starting job upon the release of DB. To not expect a lot of growing pains from a young QB who had only attempted 5 NFL passes previously was ridiculous. What were TD & MM doing at the start of last season? Hoping like hell with fingers crossed that despite what he showed in camp/pre-season, JP would come out and perform like a Rothlesberger? They benched him in the 4th game!!!...1 & 3.....rookie Starting QB... To put all of that starters preasure on him, expect him to perform at an unrealistic level & then bench him in the 4th game was MORONIC. Did you see how bad Eli Manning was in his first 4 starts? 101-39-450-1TD-6INT QBR 31.4 Compared to JP.... 94-45-433-1TD-2INT QBR 55.9 735063[/snapback] I think they did expect growing pains which is why they brought in Holcomb. A willingness to weather growing pains is one thing, throwing in the towel on the season is quite another. They didn't exactly bench him at the frist sign of trouble, they did it after three disastrous performances, the losses to Tampa, Atlanta and New Orleans. I don't recall anyone back then labeling the coaches a bunch of morons for giving Holcomb a shot. They had no idea Holcomb was going to then quarterback the team to two straight wins. Imagine the reaction back then if, after JP's awful start and Holcomb's two wins, the coaches had benched Holcomb to give JP another shot. I am willing to bet that those who are now declaring the coaches to have been morons for not starting him every game last year regardless of results would have been up in arms if they had benched Holcomb after those two wins and reinserted JP. Do a search of posts on the board for the week before the Oakland game and tell me how many you see stridently arguing to put JP back in. To be fair, I am sure that if Holcomb had not been hurt in the KC game and we had lost that game so that Holcomb had then lost three in a row just as JP had, they would have benched Holcomb. As it happened, JP played very well that game so they stuck with him for the next four games, all of them losses. That is when they went back to Holcomb. It seems to me that the QBs were rotated based on performance on the field and were not benched because of one bad play or one bad game but because of a series of bad games. Really, the only argument that does make sense in terms of the starts JP had last year is over the last three games. The season was over by then so at that point, there really was no reason to play Holcomb instead of JP. That was certainly a mistake by the coaches. Even so, that only cost JP 3 games of experience. Yeah, I wish he had those games under his belt but the fact that he doesn't isn't exactly a catastrophe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 I don't recall anyone back then labeling the coaches a bunch of morons for giving Holcomb a shot. 735119[/snapback] Are you kidding me? The board was loaded with people that were pissed off and thought it was a boneheaded move (I was one of them). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 They didn't exactly bench him at the frist sign of trouble, they did it after three disastrous performances, the losses to Tampa, Atlanta and New Orleans. I don't recall anyone back then labeling the coaches a bunch of morons for giving Holcomb a shot. 735119[/snapback] I agree Mickey. As for the Eli comparison, he played every game against sick defenses in '04 - Redskins, Ravens, Eagles, etc. And besides Eli wasn't that good last year, so who cares about him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 If you want to call it "panick", fine but they "panicked" because JP played very, very poorly. We lost three straight, a stretch where he threw zero TD passes, was sacked 9 times, picked off twice and had QB ratings of 51, 33 and 34. They wanted to win so they made a change and initially it worked. Going into the Oakland game, we had clawed back to 3-3 under Holcomb and were pretty optimistic about the rest of the year. I don't recall anyone complaining back then that the hook was too quick or that JP should be back under center so we could train him for the future. If we had known from day one we were going to go 5-11, fine, start him every game. But we didn't know that. What we did know was that 4 weeks in we were 1-4, JP was playing terribly and the season was lost if we didn't do something. 735058[/snapback] That is kind of unfair on JP....The games that KH won were TWO HOME games against two Bad teams (at least at that point of the season) Miami and NYJets. JP would have had a good shot at winning those games as he had did against the Texans.... The games he lost were two roaad games, one at Tampa Bay and another at New Orleans and then had a home game against the Atlanta Falcons who had just the previous year beat the Packers in Green Bay in the playoffs.... The problem was the final 4 games...when we were out of the playoffs.. MM gave the bogus excuse of JP being injured and continued to start KH which was utterly futile..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 I want to hear concrete things like, "...he is completing his passes..." or "he is making plays against the blitz..." Carucci includes some of that when he talks about the passes being crisp and hanging the pocket longer. That is all music to my ears but that other stuff is just puffery. I really do want to believe that he has all the skills and certainly, we are going to learn that this year barring injury. 735060[/snapback] He is the anti-Pat Kirwan.....May be Carucci said to JP, go get that starting job Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 4, 2006 Author Share Posted August 4, 2006 Are you kidding me? The board was loaded with people that were pissed off and thought it was a boneheaded move (I was one of them). 735131[/snapback] Really, you were calling for Holcomb to be benched during the week before the Oakland game after we were 1-3 with JP and 2-0 with Holcomb? Had you already decided to sacrifice the season as simply a 16 week extension of training camp for JP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 4, 2006 Author Share Posted August 4, 2006 That is kind of unfair on JP....The games that KH won were TWO HOME gamesagainst two Bad teams (at least at that point of the season) Miami and NYJets. JP would have had a good shot at winning those games as he had did against the Texans.... The games he lost were two roaad games, one at Tampa Bay and another at New Orleans and then had a home game against the Atlanta Falcons who had just the previous year beat the Packers in Green Bay in the playoffs.... The problem was the final 4 games...when we were out of the playoffs.. MM gave the bogus excuse of JP being injured and continued to start KH which was utterly futile..... 735232[/snapback] That is exactly what I wrote, that the real argument against the coaches for not starting JP is over those last games when the season was in the dumper anyway. We agree there. Early on though, with the team dropping three straight and JP struggling, I don't think its fair to declare the coaches a drooling pack of cretinous morons for giving Holcomb a shot and then, after winning two straight, how in the world do you justify benching him? Certainly people can disagree over whether they should have given JP another start, especially since, as you point out, we had two home games coming up. I would not find that an unreasonable position to take. By the same token, what they did in giving Holcomb a try, given the situation, was a reasonable move as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts