JP=PU

[KOKBILLS]

Does anyone really think the Bills would have won the game if Trent had stayed healthy? Anyone?

 

Yes...I do...

 

At least I think they would have had a MUCH better chance...In the end the Bills turned the Ball over 4 times, and JP had a hand in 3 of them...That is putting a tremendous amount of pressure on a Defense...Especially a Defense on the Road...I simply don't believe Trent would make those kind of mistakes in bunches very often...And the Bills were still only 7 points back in the 3rd Quarter with JP...There was PLENTY of time left at that point even if the D gave up another long scoring drive...That's when good QB's step up and make a difference on the Road...Instead JP turned into old JP...He held on to one too long and coughed it up, then a few more sacks, an INT, and The Cards ran away with it...

 

I think there are MANY on this Board who simply don't understand what it does to a Teams overall Play when You have a quality Starting QB that the whole Team believes in 100%...The whole Team plays better because they know they have a REAL good young leader thus they have a chance to Win every Game...That Game would have been different if Trent stayed in...I'm not saying The Bills would have won the Game for certain...I'm just saying it would have been a completely different Game..

[Captain Quint]

My view: JP was soooooooo JP yesterday. He showed why he's still in the league, and why he'll probably parlay his considerable athletic talent into a 10+ year NFL career. He can occasionally lead a team to a score, and if you give him a good deep threat, he can burn a D. But it's the little things -- the brief possessions, the numerous sacks resulting from the always-hoping-to-hit-Evans-on-a-deep-strike mentality, the lack of awareness about the play clock winding down (huge, because he doesn't have time to change plays, like Edwards does), and the general sense that the offense under him is sailing in stormy seas. In offense, the offense doesn't seem to possess either a rhthym or an overall strategy when he's leading it. And while it's not his fault entirely, when down in the fourth quarter the whole offense looked panicked and raggedy -- no poise. I just don't think he's the sort of QB that get a team to ten wins.

 

The long TD pass and the two straight sacks define JP's play so far in his career. For every positive thing he does, there's 2 negative ones coming down the pipe right behind it. Good QB's find ways to minimize the number of negative plays in a game.

[Jack Straw]

They should have given Van Pelt a temporary 1 game contract and threw him in there.

[Orton's Arm]

Then I have to assume that Trent deserves his share of responsibility as well for those blind-side hits he's taken and lost the ball when Peters or someone else got beat, right?

There were times when Trent could have done a better job of sensing pressure and moving around in the pocket. Overall though, he's much better at that sort of thing than JP.

 

As for that one sack Losman took, I ascribed part of the blame to Peters for getting beat. I also felt part of the blame was on Losman for moving backward--which didn't seem like the right direction to move in, to me--as well as holding onto the ball too long. On that particular play, it looked like Losman could have done more to have avoided the sack, than what he did. Regardless of who the QB is, I think it's important to look at each sack individually, to see how much of the blame should go on the line, and how much should go on the QB. In this case they both messed up.

 

And of course, one could argue that Trent played his usual game, in our previous three games, which was not to get a whole lot done until the last drive or two and then pulled it out of his ass. And he was able to do that because at least in his games, the defense kept it close enough to make that even possible.

 

I blame those slow starts almost entirely on the offensive line. In the first half of the Rams game, for example, the offensive line had more penalty yards (at least 20) than the Bills had rushing yards (18). Throw in four sacks allowed in the first half, and numerous knock-downs and hurries of Trent, and you have an absolutely pitiful offensive line performance, even by the standards of post-2000 Bills teams. I don't care who you are, no quarterback is going to be productive when his line is playing like that. I also feel that poor offensive line play was a contributing factor to the Bills' lack of success against the Cards.

 

The reality is, Trent has not had to play a game yet this year where the defense was so atrocious that he had to literally score every time down the field or we were screwed. If all of our games had been like this one, we would be 2-3 at best right now and there wouldn't be all this talk about how Trent's the next great thing comin' down the pike.

 

If you're going to ask the QB to score every time he touches the ball, the offensive line has to give you at least a decent level of play for a full 60 minutes. Our line hasn't done that--or even come close--in any of Trent's comeback games, or in the Arizona game. The combination of poor offensive line play + defense that didn't defend doomed us in the Cards game, regardless of who we had at QB.

 

Now of course, my point is not to bash Trent. I like the kid and I think he's done OK.

 

You seemed to imply the Bills' offensive struggles in the first halves of games were largely his fault. If that's where you were going, I think you're being too hard on him. In the first half of the Oakland game, the Bills' offensive supporting cast, as a whole, was dominated by the Oakland defense as a whole. No pass protection, no run blocking, receivers who got dominated by the Oakland secondary. In the first half of the Rams game, the offensive line turned in another practice squad style performance.

 

Expecting your QB to look like Joe Montana when his supporting cast is being dominated like that is not realistic. Unless of course you're referring to the way Joe Montana looked in the AFC Championship Game, a game in which the Bills' defense completely dominated the Chiefs' offensive supporting cast. Montana was mostly ineffective that game. He led the Chiefs to just two FGs in the first half, after which he was knocked out by some Bills defender.

 

My point is only that this was a completely different game from the past three, because our defense kept those other games close enough to pull out in the end. There's a big difference between a game like those, and one like yesterday where the defense KNOWS you can't stop their offense so they can tee off on every damn play. Oh, and let's not forget that they literally ran over twice the plays we did.

 

I agree that this would have been a loss, no matter who we had playing QB. The defense flat-out stank, and I strongly disagree with the decision to give the Cards' receivers such big cushions. You'd think Fewell was running a furniture store or something with the way he handed out cushions. But as much blame as the defense deserves for the TOP differential--which is quite a lot--Losman was also part of that problem. He does not see multiple options nearly as well as Edwards, and he doesn't get rid of the ball quickly/put it in the right place, as well as Edwards can. Losman typically goes to his #1 read, or to a check-down behind the line of scrimmage. Edwards sees more of his options than Losman does, and thus can put together many play, death by a thousand small cuts kinds of drives. He's a lot better at avoiding negative plays than Losman. The time of possession differential was thus caused by three factors: 1) our defense's poor play, 2a) our poor offensive line play, and 2b) the downgrade at the QB position.

 

Trent's taken his fair share of sacks over the first four games, and has fumbled on a number of them. Of course, you never hear anything about it on this board that maybe HE held the ball too long, or that maybe HE should have felt the blind-side pressure.

 

If memory serves, most of the sacks Trent has taken have been because of a guy coming in practically unblocked. Consider the four sacks he took in the first half of the Rams game. One of them was Peters getting clearly, flat-out beaten. Another was because Fowler barely touched the guy he was supposed to block. And a third was because Walker wiffed on his man. I don't remember how the fourth sack happened. But at least with those three sacks, they were clearly, flat-out, 100% the fault of poor offensive line play.

 

But if JP does it (even for only 3 seconds), he's just playing that crappy game he always plays.

I felt that both bad offensive line play and bad QB play were significant contributing factors to Losman's sacks. Had Trent not gotten hurt, he still would have taken sacks, but probably not as many sacks as Losman. Also, it's likely Trent would have lost fewer sack yards than Losman lost.

 

I didn't say he played that great, but I think under the circumstances he did pretty well until our lack of defense made it a lost cause. And he sure didn't get a lot of help from the team along the way, especially up front.

I agree that he got almost no help whatsoever from the defense, and very little help from the guys who were supposed to be blocking. But if you look at the body of work he put together in the Cards game, you can see why he was drafted and given so many chances, as well as why he will never be a successful starting QB in the NFL. He'll give you the occasional big play, especially when his primary target is open. But he does not have the mental acuity or information processing speed to be a big time QB.

 

I guarantee you Trent's typical game would not have made this one any better.

Trent's typical game would still have resulted in a loss, because we weren't a quarterback away from winning that game. But getting better play from the QB position--which Trent would have provided--would have made it a closer loss.

[Ramius]

Yes...I do...

 

At least I think they would have had a MUCH better chance...In the end the Bills turned the Ball over 4 times, and JP had a hand in 3 of them...That is putting a tremendous amount of pressure on a Defense...Especially a Defense on the Road...I simply don't believe Trent would make those kind of mistakes in bunches very often...And the Bills were still only 7 points back in the 3rd Quarter with JP...There was PLENTY of time left at that point even if the D gave up another long scoring drive...That's when good QB's step up and make a difference on the Road...Instead JP turned into old JP...He held on to one too long and coughed it up, then a few more sacks, an INT, and The Cards ran away with it...

 

I think there are MANY on this Board who simply don't understand what it does to a Teams overall Play when You have a quality Starting QB that the whole Team believes in 100%...The whole Team plays better because they know they have a REAL good young leader thus they have a chance to Win every Game...That Game would have been different if Trent stayed in...I'm not saying The Bills would have won the Game for certain...I'm just saying it would have been a completely different Game..

 

Not to interject your little fantasy land rant with some facts, but here they are:

 

The Bills were down 24-17 after the 3rd quarter FG.

The defense then allowed a long TD drive by the cards, making the score 31-17.

Robert Royal fumbles (i know, i know, with trent in there, his poise would have let Royal hang onto the ball, damn JP)

The cards get a FG, making it 34-17.

 

JP then fumbled, and threw a pick on the next drive. So you are saying that JP's fumble when we were down by 17 and INT when we were down by 24 are what cost us the game. I call bull sh--. Check your facts. JP didn't self-destruct with turnovers until the game was already over.

[julian]

JP sucks, Fowler sucks, Schobel is getting worse. McKelvin needs work not only in the back field but also in the return game. Like every other team in this league the Bills have thier share of warts, but they go into the bye at 4-1 and get some players back.

listen...it does not matter what anybody thinks of JP's play, hes the backup because the Bills found a starter in the 3rd round. JP will be gone next year(thank god) not only because i dont like him as a QB but these JP vs Trent rants are retarded. If your a fan of JP, then great, you'll have fun watching him play elsewhere. End of story. I'm not loyal to the person behind the mask, only to the player on the field. If Trent ends up being chit like JP then i wont want him around either.

[fakeeyed]

Not to interject your little fantasy land rant with some facts, but here they are:

 

The Bills were down 24-17 after the 3rd quarter FG.

The defense then allowed a long TD drive by the cards, making the score 31-17.

Robert Royal fumbles (i know, i know, with trent in there, his poise would have let Royal hang onto the ball, damn JP)

The cards get a FG, making it 34-17.

 

JP then fumbled, and threw a pick on the next drive. So you are saying that JP's fumble when we were down by 17 and INT when we were down by 24 are what cost us the game. I call bull sh--. Check your facts. JP didn't self-destruct with turnovers until the game was already over.

 

i have no idea why people are so blinded by hate that they can't see the facts. this board's reaction to jp is absolutely !@#$ing ridiculous. he only looked bad when we were down by a ton, and he'd have to pull out something crazy (or a bunch of something crazy's) to win the game.

 

the god damn defense made 2 stops the entire game. fowler is at fault for a fumble, royal fumbled like a moron, the oc calls 3 straight runs after we're already moving the ball, jenkins lines up in the neutral zone and turns a cardinals field goal into a touchdown....but jp plays bad once the game is already out of hand and we should B word about him.

 

want to B word about the offense? B word about royal, because screwing up another scoring drive (which would have been 4 consecutive scoring drives if i'm not mistaken) on a routine catch completely killed any momentum that we were starting to build.

[Ramius]

i have no idea why people are so blinded by hate that they can't see the facts. this board's reaction to jp is absolutely !@#$ing ridiculous. he only looked bad when we were down by a ton, and he'd have to pull out something crazy (or a bunch of something crazy's) to win the game.

 

the god damn defense made 2 stops the entire game. fowler is at fault for a fumble, royal fumbled like a moron, the oc calls 3 straight runs after we're already moving the ball, jenkins lines up in the neutral zone and turns a cardinals field goal into a touchdown....but jp plays bad once the game is already out of hand and we should B word about him.

 

want to B word about the offense? B word about royal, because screwing up another scoring drive (which would have been 4 consecutive scoring drives if i'm not mistaken) on a routine catch completely killed any momentum that we were starting to build.

 

The offense must love it when Trent gets hurt. When Trent is in there, nothing is his fault, and its the fault of everyone else on the offense. When JP got back there, the offense knows they can screw up and all of the blame will be placed at the feet of JP.

 

JP played decent yesterday until the game was out of hand. The people who are harping on JP as if he was a major factor in the outcome have a personal agenda and aren't objectively looking at the game. And some of our DB-hating, OL loving posters here just spew venom at JP any chance they can get because they've hated him since the day he was drafted. Its sad really, but i bet a lot of posters on here were more than happy to see us lose yesterday just so they could trash JP today.

[truth on hold]

sad to say it was biz as usual for jp:

 

- hit evans deep and raise expectations

- evans gets double or tripled

- some ineffective screens

- turn to running game which gets taken away

- offense gets stagnant

- bills lose

[C.Biscuit97]

The offense must love it when Trent gets hurt. When Trent is in there, nothing is his fault, and its the fault of everyone else on the offense. When JP got back there, the offense knows they can screw up and all of the blame will be placed at the feet of JP.

 

JP played decent yesterday until the game was out of hand. The people who are harping on JP as if he was a major factor in the outcome have a personal agenda and aren't objectively looking at the game. And some of our DB-hating, OL loving posters here just spew venom at JP any chance they can get because they've hated him since the day he was drafted. Its sad really, but i bet a lot of posters on here were more than happy to see us lose yesterday just so they could trash JP today.

 

 

I agree it's 100% retarded to blame Losman. But the fact remains, whatever the reason, the team sucks with him under center. From Holcomb to Edwards, when there is a new QB, the team gets magically better. The oline sucked balls yesterday but Losman makes them look a million times worse. To be clear again, the defense lost this game and Losman played a good half. But bottomline, does anyone think a team could be playoff caliber with JP playing a bunch of games? Unless you are a family member or delusional, I don't think you can say that with a straight face.

[Orton's Arm]

sad to say it was biz as usual for jp:

 

- hit evans deep and raise expectations

- evans gets double or tripled

- some ineffective screens

- turn to running game which gets taken away

- offense gets stagnant

- bills lose

That's one of the best encapsulations of Losman's play I've seen.

[Catholic Guilt]

That's one of the best encapsulations of Losman's play I've seen.

Agreed. You nailed it.

[bizell]

sad to say it was biz as usual for jp:

 

- hit evans deep and raise expectations

- evans gets double or tripled

- some ineffective screens

- turn to running game which gets taken away

- offense gets stagnant

- bills lose

 

don't forget "defense still hasn't stopped arizona... oops, they scored again"

[truth on hold]

That's one of the best encapsulations of Losman's play I've seen.

could have also inserted "on critical 3rd down, get run down by defensive end a couple yards short of 1st down marker"