Albany,n.y. Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 Pick up Jay Fiedler for vet minimum. He knows the division & has starting experience. Tampa Bay cut him. Another Ivy leaguer to go with Jauron & Levy.
Wild Jay Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 Fiedler is still recovering from surgury he had in the offseason and hasn't seen much action at all in training camp. He is damaged goods, even for a 3rd stringer.
DanInSouthBuffalo Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 He's not a veteran, but I'm watching the 3rd QB battle with the Rams between Dave Ragone and Ryan Fitzpatrick. Ragone has a relationship with coach Linehan and Fitzpatrick has a relationship with our Steve Fairchild. I'd claim him if he's available. Backup QB's are a fairly hot commodity right now so there could be a market for Holcomb to Indy or the Chargers.
LabattBlue Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 What's wrong with having Nall as the veteran backup if Holcomb is traded or let go? Then like the previous poster mentioned, maybe grab a young guy like Ragone or Fitzpatrick if they are waived. If not them, maybe only go with two QB's on the active roster and sign another unknown for the practice squad.
RayFinkle Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 What's wrong with having Nall as the veteran backup if Holcomb is traded or let go? Then like the previous poster mentioned, maybe grab a young guy like Ragone or Fitzpatrick if they are waived. If not them, maybe only go with two QB's on the active roster and sign another unknown for the practice squad. 757012[/snapback] If you consider a vet clip board holder a vet, then yeah Nall has plently of experience. I would be shocked if Marv & Dick went into the season without a guy with some starting experience.
LabattBlue Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 If you consider a vet clip board holder a vet, then yeah Nall has plently of experience. I would be shocked if Marv & Dick went into the season without a guy with some starting experience. 757019[/snapback] We went with Travis Brown as a backup for several years and he certainly had less upside than Nall.
ricojes Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 We went with Travis Brown as a backup for several years and he certainly had less upside than Nall. 757030[/snapback] How'd that work out....yikes! Nall is a veteran of being on an NFL team, but he has little regular season game playing experience. If JP gets hurt late in a close game, I want someone with experience to replace him. Someone who has been in that position before. Not saying Holcomb is the ideal candidate, but he has the most experience on the current roster. And unless Holcomb complains about not starting, I think he makes a fine #2....
SACKMARINO Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 how bout Koy Detmer who got released by the Eagles??
The Senator Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 If you consider a vet clip board holder a vet, then yeah Nall has plently of experience. I would be shocked if Marv & Dick went into the season without a guy with some starting experience. 757019[/snapback] Prepare to be shocked. Holcomb's play in preseason pretty much demonstrated that, regardless of experience, there's no more 'upside' to him coming off the bench than Nall. BTW, in 2003 Nall did start all 10 games in NFL Europe and led the league in TD passing and efficiency. In the 5 games played in 2004 for Green Bay, he was 23/33 (69.7%) with 4 TDs, no INTs, 9.52 yards per attempt, 139.4 rating. JMHO, but Nall seems like the ideal backup - hopefully we find out tonite so we can cut KH , or - better yet - try to work out a trade for a late round pick. Then we can go sign a young 'project' with some potential future upside to 'hold the clipboard'. (Of course, if Nall looks like total 'crap' tonite, I take all of this back! )
LabattBlue Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 Prepare to be shocked. Holcomb's play in preseason pretty much demonstrated that, regardless of experience, there's no more 'upside' to him coming off the bench than Nall. BTW, in 2003 Nall did start all 10 games in NFL Europe and led the league in TD passing and efficiency. In the 5 games played in 2004 for Green Bay, he was 23/33 (69.7%) with 4 TDs, no INTs, 9.52 yards per attempt, 139.4 rating. JMHO, but Nall seems like the ideal backup - hopefully we find out tonite so we can cut KH , or - better yet - try to work out a trade for a late round pick. Then we can go sign a young 'project' with some potential future upside to 'hold the clipboard'. (Of course, if Nall looks like total 'crap' tonite, I take all of this back! ) 757094[/snapback] You mean you don't want that veteran experience(in this case defined as able to throw passes to the LoS but not beyond) off the bench. Hopefully Nall has shown the coaches enough to be the #2 and bring in a rookie to be #3 or on the PS. Trade Holcomb for whatever you can get. If not, send him packing.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 Nall was never really even the #2 in Green Bay, except for half of one season after the #2 Doug Pederson, who scares no one, went on IR.
ricojes Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 You mean you don't want that veteran experience(in this case defined as able to throw passes to the LoS but not beyond) off the bench. Hopefully Nall has shown the coaches enough to be the #2 and bring in a rookie to be #3 or on the PS. Trade Holcomb for whatever you can get. If not, send him packing. 757103[/snapback] What is the harm in keeping Holcomb as a #3? We have him signed, he seems to be a team player who doesn't complain much, he has experience. Why must he be traded or cut?
apuszczalowski Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 What is the harm in keeping Holcomb as a #3? We have him signed, he seems to be a team player who doesn't complain much, he has experience. Why must he be traded or cut? 757197[/snapback] I think everyone is just assuming that Holcomb believes he can still start/be the #2 guy somewhere else and asks for his release, or the Bills see him as being able to play somewhere else so they grant him his release to hopefully catch on with another team. But it is true, if he is willing to do it, I don't see a problem with him as a #3 on the roster especially since it would cost the Bills more to release him then keep him as a #3 Personnally, I would work for 1/10th of what he is being payed to be a #3. I have excellent clipboard skills, look good in a visor, and would love to have a seat on the bench where I could watch the game with slim chances of ever playing but still being payed.
billieve2006 Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 If Fitzpatrick gets cut, I agree with previous posts...sign him and trade Holcomb to Colts or Chargers. Fitzpatrick is a solid prospect! More upside than having Holcomb as #3 on our depth chart!
ans4e64 Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 Also, the whole point in having a veteran backup is that if you have a good team that is actually capable of doing some damage and the QB goes down, you want someone to be able to step in and not lose a game for you and keep your season alive. We are no where near a team that is going into the playoffs and has a shot at the superbowl, so why does it matter if we have a "veteran backup" when we dont have a chance with our starter in the first place. Let some young kid on the roster like Fitzpatrick or Smoker.
apuszczalowski Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 Does it really matter? We are talking about a 3rd stringer here, someone in the stadium who has only a slightly higher chance of playing as the thousands of people who bought tickets to the game. Thats why the 3rd spot is typically taken up by a veteran who has already passed the downside of his career physically and is there to act as an extra coach to another young QB on the team, or a young prospect that could become the QB of the future for the team. Plus, trading Holcomb may be easier said then done, remember we need another team looking to deal also. There are alot of QB's that could be picked up through FA/waivers rather then having to deal away someone to get a guy who will spend most of the games on the sidelines. I can't see a team making a trade for KH, if he isn't a Bill this year, it will be through a release, not a trade.
chinabox Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 If we're in a situation where it matters who we have as the third stringer, it won't make a difference who the third stringer is.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 Also, the whole point in having a veteran backup is that if you have a good team that is actually capable of doing some damage and the QB goes down, you want someone to be able to step in and not lose a game for you and keep your season alive. We are no where near a team that is going into the playoffs and has a shot at the superbowl, so why does it matter if we have a "veteran backup" when we dont have a chance with our starter in the first place. Let some young kid on the roster like Fitzpatrick or Smoker. 757259[/snapback] We already have basically two young guys in Losman and Nall. The season may be lost but we also need to see the OL gel and the offense take hold and the team start to learn how to play and win together. The entire team benefits in the short and long run under an experienced back-up than it does playing a third young guy with little chance of being the eventual starter.
ricojes Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 If we're in a situation where it matters who we have as the third stringer, it won't make a difference who the third stringer is. 757268[/snapback] Actually if the Bills are in a situation where they need a 3rd stringer, it would be nice to have Holcomb.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted August 31, 2006 Posted August 31, 2006 how about bill volek? he's asking for a trade now: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2567498
Recommended Posts