Kelly the Dog Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 It's true. It's also one of the biggest charades in all of the NFL. If coaches actually thought that, no rookie or young quarterback would hardly ever play, or would ever get better because there will almost always be a veteran back-up on your team who would give you a better chance to win that upcoming game. It's also one of the biggest falacies of the clusterfukk that was last season. As soon as they traded for Holcomb he gave them the best chance to win, simply because he'd played 8-9 years in the league and some of them as a starter. He gave them the best chance to win game one, and yet they started Losman. KH gave them the best chance in game two and three and four and yet they started Losman. Then they said we're starting Holcomb because he "gives us the best chance to win". That was always the case. In the same vein that the term "partly sunny" actually means "mostly cloudy", the "best chance to win" could also, more accurately, mean "the best chance to go nowhere". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 It's true. It's also one of the biggest charades in all of the NFL. If coaches actually thought that, no rookie or young quarterback would hardly ever play, or would ever get better because there will almost always be a veteran back-up on your team who would give you a better chance to win that upcoming game. It's also one of the biggest falacies of the clusterfukk that was last season. As soon as they traded for Holcomb he gave them the best chance to win, simply because he'd played 8-9 years in the league and some of them as a starter. He gave them the best chance to win game one, and yet they started Losman. KH gave them the best chance in game two and three and four and yet they started Losman. Then they said we're starting Holcomb because he "gives us the best chance to win". That was always the case. In the same vein that the term "partly sunny" actually means "mostly cloudy", the "best chance to win" could also, more accurately, mean "the best chance to go nowhere". 738404[/snapback] Well put, Kelly. I would say that "best chance to win" can also be translated "easiest option for a coach who is afraid to take a chance..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Kind of early in the day to be drinking my friend. What was the cause of this diatribe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JStranger76 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Wake me up when Holcomb retires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 It's not enough to say "Holcomb gives us our best chance to win" because it's like saying "Pushing, as opposed to pulling, our broken down car gives us the best chance to reach a service station." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Does anyone disagree outside of like 2 guys out of 50,000 members here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 8, 2006 Author Share Posted August 8, 2006 Does anyone disagree outside of like 2 guys out of 50,000 members here? 738419[/snapback] Disagree that both Holcomb "gives us the best chance to win" and that Losman "should be the starter"? I'm not really sure what you're agreeing or disagreeing with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Disagree that both Holcomb "gives us the best chance to win" and that Losman "should be the starter"? I'm not really sure what you're agreeing or disagreeing with. 738429[/snapback] I dont understand the thinking that states we have no chance of winning with Losman or we are relegated to being a 4-12 team with Losman as the starter. The guy has been in the league for more then 2 years. People need to stop with the excuses. I personally think Losman could have a decent year(somewhere in the vicinity of 3,000 yrds, 20tds/10 ints) & could lead this team anywhere from 7-11 wins. This team has talent, it is all about putting the talent in a position to make plays & win games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Disagree that both Holcomb "gives us the best chance to win" and that Losman "should be the starter"? I'm not really sure what you're agreeing or disagreeing with. 738429[/snapback] True, I was talking about the latter statement but I would say more people disagree with the former. I agree w/ you on both counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 8, 2006 Author Share Posted August 8, 2006 Kind of early in the day to be drinking my friend. What was the cause of this diatribe? 738414[/snapback] Whaddya mean, too early to drink? It's 5 a.m. somewhere! Besides, I'd be more worried if you agreed with me. If you disagree, I'm almost surely right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Well put, Kelly. I would say that "best chance to win" can also be translated "easiest option for a coach who is afraid to take a chance..." 738409[/snapback] ...or "easiest decision for a coach who would rather be buddy-buddy with the veterans on his roster." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 ...or "easiest decision for a coach who would rather be buddy-buddy with the veterans on his roster." 738463[/snapback] Nice. After all, acquiescing to the demands of a cranky player is much easier than, you know, being a coach and using your authority and stuff like that.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bflojohn Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 O.K., the point was forwarded about "putting the player in position to succeed". Well, if you were Steve Fairchild, what would you run to maximize J.P.'s potential into production? Well, first and foremost, the running game will likely key this attack. I don't think anyone can refute that.....however, the "big play capability" at WR dictates taking shots down the field to get the 8th man out of the box. That is, without a doubt, the most important factor in Willis' output, IMO. So the team must ante up with the QB starter who is most capable of providing big plays. It becomes obvious to me that Losman can deliver in this type of offense. The balance that the long ball will provide, whereby, the Bills can and will strike by way of the pass (both long and short) in a 50-50 mix (ideally!) simply means that the Bills offense has the weapons to score 21 to 24 points per game, on average. That type of output will be ample for this team to win 8 to 10 games this year, I believe!! P.S.- A nice mix of passes to a capable TE would help quite a bit too!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 I think us getting the Ws necessary to make the playoffs requires: 1. The ST to perform as well as the last two years (this could happen and though I think unless we get a couple of nice bounces of the oddly shaped ball we will finish with a #3, #4, or #5 statistical ranking rather than the number 1 ST we've had the last couple of years, with Marv re-emphasizing strong ST player acquisition a top 5 ST finish should happen and that will be a good enough performance if the other parts of the team do their part. 2. The O needs to surprise folks and actually be a force to be reckoned with (I also think this can and may well happen as the #1 thing that needs to happen to make the apparent Fairchild O scheme work of have a deeo cire if speedy WRs with good ball concentration seems to be there. The #2 factor he needs is a better OL which I think we will have until the starters begin to suffer the usual nicks and then all bets are off as the back-ups need a lot of help, and the #3 factor of WM doing a reasonable imitation of Marshall Faulk can happen as well. All three of these factors look OK to start theseason and if they work then as long as the QB is adequate we will get some Ws. If these 3 do not work it does matter if the QB is very good we will still get Ls. 3. Finally, the D needs to be a force. This may happen and I am glad that Jauron has had past success in this area because I certainly do not see how this group is going to be a force. It may be, but I do not know enough about football to see how this will happen. As far as this thread, I think that KH actually is more likely to be an adequate QB than JP. However, I think JP is much more likely to be a very good QB than Holcomb as JP simply has more talent and upsiide. I think this pre-season will tell us a lot because we will be able to judge whether JP has gotten it yet do the game slows down for him a bit and he is able to be productive because he is not trying to win the game himself by making a great run or throw, but instead he is depending on his teamates to do their jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Anyone who watched the games last year could see Holcomb was hands down the better QB. The problem is that you have a young QB who may potentially be very good. Fans always say they are willing to wait and see the young guy "go through growing pains." Well are you? Remember JP was putrid for many games last year and the offense could not move the ball at all. I really want JP to beat out Holcomb during this camp, but if he can't then he really is not that good right now and Holcomb does give us the best chance to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 O.K., the point was forwarded about "putting the player in position to succeed". Well, if you were Steve Fairchild, what would you run to maximize J.P.'s potential into production? Well, first and foremost, the running game will likely key this attack. I don't think anyone can refute that.....however, the "big play capability" at WR dictates taking shots down the field to get the 8th man out of the box. That is, without a doubt, the most important factor in Willis' output, IMO. So the team must ante up with the QB starter who is most capable of providing big plays. It becomes obvious to me that Losman can deliver in this type of offense. The balance that the long ball will provide, whereby, the Bills can and will strike by way of the pass (both long and short) in a 50-50 mix (ideally!) simply means that the Bills offense has the weapons to score 21 to 24 points per game, on average. That type of output will be ample for this team to win 8 to 10 games this year, I believe!! P.S.- A nice mix of passes to a capable TE would help quite a bit too!! 738499[/snapback] Yeah, I've never been a West Coast guy, 1 penalty kills a drive easier. I've always been a fan of the Norv Turner style that features a power running game and vertical passing game. This would seem to suit JP's strengths well. Of course at some point you have to be able to complete the short/intermediate stuff on 3rd&5; JP just has to improve in that area. Also, he has to get some protection for those downfield throws. I'm not terribly optimistic about either of these things happening, but we'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 I really want JP to beat out Holcomb during this camp, but if he can't then he really is not that good right now and Holcomb does give us the best chance to win. 738508[/snapback] What it takes to beat out Holcomb in training camp is a very subjective thing and it is going to be entirely up to DJ as to what he thinks he wants with this team..... Even if JP does play better than KH, if DJ goes the route of having Jim Miller being his signal caller, I think he would rather lean towards KH than JP.... Considering that Juron mentioned that JP has a very good long ball, but needs to nail down his short passes indicates to me that he is willing to be patient with JP through the preaseason to get that right, but if not KH will be his QB.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayFinkle Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Too bad for us that our savior QB, going into this third year, can't beat out a 10 year vet who has been considered "average at best" by many here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 Too bad for us that our savior QB, going into this third year, can't beat out a 10 year vet who has been considered "average at best" by many here. 738525[/snapback] Can't? Has a decision been reached by the Bills that we don't know about? Has anyone seen Empty Podium lately? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generaLee83 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 It's true. It's also one of the biggest charades in all of the NFL. If coaches actually thought that, no rookie or young quarterback would hardly ever play, or would ever get better because there will almost always be a veteran back-up on your team who would give you a better chance to win that upcoming game. It's also one of the biggest falacies of the clusterfukk that was last season. As soon as they traded for Holcomb he gave them the best chance to win, simply because he'd played 8-9 years in the league and some of them as a starter. He gave them the best chance to win game one, and yet they started Losman. KH gave them the best chance in game two and three and four and yet they started Losman. Then they said we're starting Holcomb because he "gives us the best chance to win". That was always the case. In the same vein that the term "partly sunny" actually means "mostly cloudy", the "best chance to win" could also, more accurately, mean "the best chance to go nowhere". 738404[/snapback] Nicely written fair and balanced one known as Canine Kelly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts