meazza Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 Name me a good offense that didn't / doesn't have a good-great offensive line. 834267[/snapback] Define good. KC lost 2 of their best OL and yet Damon Huard is playing half decent.
/dev/null Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 Is there the possibility that the O-Line will play better for a better QB? Why is it other teams can plug in players and manage to get a decent passing game while we require the top 5 OL in the league before our passing/running game can be consistent? 834272[/snapback] Gawdammit, stop making sense. I find it disturbing that I have to keep agreeing with you
Wraith Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 So you are saying that he is a game manager? Only one game manager in NFL history has won a Super Bowl and Trent Dilfer happened to have the best defense in the NFL when he did it. You can point to stats, but I don't think that you will find it there. There is a huge difference between having a QB that can win football games, and QBs that "don't lose" football games. Doing just enough doesn't cut it when it is your job to make big plays. 834252[/snapback] Where did I say he is a game manager? I said he was average. He's made his share of big plays and mistakes but overall he is neither winning nor losing games for the Bills.
PNW_Bills_Fan Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 Yet he scored touchdowns on no long drives. What's to argue with? The Bills made him go the length of the field, and four separate times he made drive killing mistakes. He put up big yards last week, too. 834270[/snapback] Hall of Fame veteran with a decent line a veteran RB and a couple good WR
meazza Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 Where did I say he is a game manager? I said he was average. He's made his share of big plays and mistakes but overall he is neither winning nor losing games for the Bills. 834277[/snapback] Which is the problem. How many teams won a superbowl let alone were consistent without a QB winning them games. Not everyone could build a defence like the Ravens or the Bears.
Patience Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 Is there the possibility that the O-Line will play better for a better QB? Why is it other teams can plug in players and manage to get a decent passing game while we require the top 5 OL in the league before our passing/running game can be consistent? 834272[/snapback] I didn't say make it top 5. I said fix it, which means make it better than what it is now. Another problem I have with it...only 2 of the 5 starters on the line are draftees, and one is an undrafted free agent. Isn't that a bit unsettling??
ACor58 Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 Is there the possibility that the O-Line will play better for a better QB? Why is it other teams can plug in players and manage to get a decent passing game while we require the top 5 OL in the league before our passing/running game can be consistent? 834272[/snapback] Kind of like how the Dallas Cowboys offensive line got better when they changed QBs. Forget it, it is a lost cause. So many people are holding out hope because if JP is not the answer, we will be screwed for at least another 3-5 years. Desperation has a funny way of clouding peoples judgement. Any JP apologists should ask themselves one question. Would they bet their houses on JP turning out to be a good NFL QB. My guess is that most would say no.
CoachChuckDickerson Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 Yet he scored touchdowns on no long drives. What's to argue with? The Bills made him go the length of the field, and four separate times he made drive killing mistakes. He put up big yards last week, too. 834270[/snapback] On their second TD Favre started at his own 3 yard line, a 97 yard drive. Don't let facts slow you down, you're on a roll!
Dibs Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 Is there the possibility that the O-Line will play better for a better QB? Why is it other teams can plug in players and manage to get a decent passing game while we require the top 5 OL in the league before our passing/running game can be consistent? 834272[/snapback] I don't know.... What I do know is that just because some teams can do something....or have success doing something....it does not mean that all can do it or have success with it. You could just as easily say..... "Teams that have total garbage for an OL don't ever seem to be able to do anything consistant in either passing or running games regardless of who they put in.".....i.e. Raiders, Cardinals, Bills, Browns, etc
ACor58 Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 Where did I say he is a game manager? I said he was average. He's made his share of big plays and mistakes but overall he is neither winning nor losing games for the Bills. 834277[/snapback] You just did. Average QBs that don't win or lose games are called game managers.
Wraith Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 On their second TD Favre started at his own 3 yard line, a 97 yard drive. Don't let facts slow you down, you're on a roll! 834286[/snapback] That drive had 3 plays. 82 of those yards came on a slant to Donald Driver who took it the rest of the way. Nice, half-assed attempt.
CoachChuckDickerson Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 That drive had 3 plays. 82 of those yards came on a slant to Donald Driver who took it the rest of the way. Nice, half-assed attempt. 834295[/snapback] Ohhhh, so that wasn't a Farve led drive? My bad.
meazza Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 I didn't say make it top 5. I said fix it, which means make it better than what it is now. Another problem I have with it...only 2 of the 5 starters on the line are draftees, and one is an undrafted free agent. Isn't that a bit unsettling?? 834281[/snapback] Yes it is unsettling, but I would be willing to bet that you put one of the NFL's elite QB's behind this line and they would get better production out of this offence. Of course I can't prove it, I'm willing to think that the OL would play better in front of QB that doesn't look like he's a frightened child when he's holding on to the ball.
meazza Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 I don't know....What I do know is that just because some teams can do something....or have success doing something....it does not mean that all can do it or have success with it. You could just as easily say..... "Teams that have total garbage for an OL don't ever seem to be able to do anything consistant in either passing or running games regardless of who they put in.".....i.e. Raiders, Cardinals, Bills, Browns, etc 834287[/snapback] Well, correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the Browns go get a couple of decent OL this year. Like I said, I'm no Head Coach, there are many things you must analyze when you look at the performance of a QB but something tells me that JP is not the answer, and I was hoping by this point, that I would have been proven wrong. But there is still time, ... who knows?
Wraith Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 Ohhhh, so that wasn't a Farve led drive? My bad. 834299[/snapback] I was saying, and still am saying this: "Absolutely not, it was because Brett Favre has proven that when you force him to drive the length of the field and string together 12 - 14 plays he will often make a mistake and turn the ball over." You still have not shown that Favre put together a 12 - 14 play drive and still score a TD.
Cripes Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 Again I state that most JP supporters are simply saying that assessing him is very difficult due to the negative factors around him. Anyone who actually believes he is 'good' at this point is obviously deluded. 834256[/snapback] And what better way to assess JP's shortcomings then try Craig Nall the next few weeks to see if he also can only throw under 100 yards a game in the same laboratory?
meazza Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 And what better way to assess JP's shortcomings then try Craig Nall the next few weeks to see if he also can only throw under 100 yards a game in the same laboratory? 834319[/snapback] I find it hard to believe that a half decent QB would be our 3rd string backup. Seriously, I doubt the solution lies in our reserves.
ACor58 Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 I find it hard to believe that a half decent QB would be our 3rd string backup. Seriously, I doubt the solution lies in our reserves. 834328[/snapback] Exactly. If he can't beat out Holcomb then he probably is not the answer.
tjwbills Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 It's the OL and the playcalling thats killing this team. 833895[/snapback] Yup, you got it. Let the kid throw downfield. Was that a TE blocking Freeney on that 3rd down that cost us the game? ugh.
Dibs Posted November 12, 2006 Posted November 12, 2006 And what better way to assess JP's shortcomings then try Craig Nall the next few weeks to see if he also can only throw under 100 yards a game in the same laboratory? 834319[/snapback] This isn't a democratic thing. Just because you don't see how good/bad Nall is in practice & think "golly, we can't do much worse" does not mean that the coaches don't see how he is in practice. Nall is not even 2nd string. How do you think he has looks in practice if he can't even surplant Holcomb?
Recommended Posts