Mike in Syracuse Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Let's move the conversation away from Bledsoe for a second. Let's go back to a time with we were fighting the Flutie vs. Johnson battle. Johnson, who was athletically gifted didn't see the field well and took WAY too many sacks. Flutie, who couldn't see over his line, would come in and a startling metamorphosis would occur. Where the once wasn't a pocket a pocket would appear. Where there once wasn't time it seemed like there was an eternity. Answer that question and you will have solved the Bledsoe riddle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Bledose 6sacks/game JP 2 sacks/game Same OL Different result with more points scored. Hit a wide open receiver at the goal line, don't throw a pick that's run back for a TD and Bills get another win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Let's move the conversation away from Bledsoe for a second. Let's go back to a time with we were fighting the Flutie vs. Johnson battle. Johnson, who was athletically gifted didn't see the field well and took WAY too many sacks. Flutie, who couldn't see over his line, would come in and a startling metamorphosis would occur. Where the once wasn't a pocket a pocket would appear. Where there once wasn't time it seemed like there was an eternity. Answer that question and you will have solved the Bledsoe riddle. 84338[/snapback] Sorry, you are wrong. Flutie was at his best when the pocket collapsed. Most of his completions were after rolling out. Teams actually WANTED Flutie to be in the pocket. This would usually negate his running threat, and his passes were very often batted down because he was so short. His arm was also comparitively weak. Flutie WAS more effective than RJ mind you, but a football team is unlikely to win behind a crappy OL no matter who is qb. Flutie was a bandaid over the gaping wound of the Bills inability to block. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thailog80 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Nice avatar Mike.....lol Roberts Hicks, Ruben,Fina,Nails, Ostroski and Spriggs even looked ok when lil DF played.....amazingly they went to stevestojan when RJ took over....hmmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike in Syracuse Posted October 25, 2004 Author Share Posted October 25, 2004 Sorry, you are wrong. Flutie was at his best when the pocket collapsed. Most of his completions were after rolling out. Teams actually WANTED Flutie to be in the pocket. This would usually negate his running threat, and his passes were very often batted down because he was so short. His arm was also comparitively weak. Flutie WAS more effective than RJ mind you, but a football team is unlikely to win behind a crappy OL no matter who is qb. Flutie was a bandaid over the gaping wound of the Bills inability to block. 84359[/snapback] Well that's fine, so throwing on the run in the answer? If we had a guy that was bigger and faster than Flutie, we might have something...oh wait.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Sorry, you are wrong. Flutie was at his best when the pocket collapsed. Most of his completions were after rolling out. Teams actually WANTED Flutie to be in the pocket. This would usually negate his running threat, and his passes were very often batted down because he was so short. His arm was also comparitively weak. Flutie WAS more effective than RJ mind you, but a football team is unlikely to win behind a crappy OL no matter who is qb. Flutie was a bandaid over the gaping wound of the Bills inability to block. 84359[/snapback] Well said... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Let's move the conversation away from Bledsoe for a second. Let's go back to a time with we were fighting the Flutie vs. Johnson battle. Johnson, who was athletically gifted didn't see the field well and took WAY too many sacks. Flutie, who couldn't see over his line, would come in and a startling metamorphosis would occur. Where the once wasn't a pocket a pocket would appear. Where there once wasn't time it seemed like there was an eternity. Answer that question and you will have solved the Bledsoe riddle. 84338[/snapback] Yep, Mike. See my post, Bledsoe vs. Matthews, which is along the same line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeRay Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Answer that question and you will have solved the Bledsoe riddle. What riddle???? 1) Bledsoe sets up slow 2) He's only gonna be in one spot when he sets up (front 7 can tee off) 3) Makes pis poor decisions and does not think/process info quickly 4) throws beautiful passes down field. 5) has little to no touch on passes under 15 yards 6) pathetic in the red zone 7) no intangibles 8) not a leader by any stretch of the immagination 9) no passion for winning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiew Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 FINALLY! Someone mentions passion. Call me crazy, call me female (which I am), but CHEMISTRY is important. And there is no chemistry being felt when Drew is at the line. Some may even remember I made the same statement after the 2nd pre-season game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Let's move the conversation away from Bledsoe for a second. Let's go back to a time with we were fighting the Flutie vs. Johnson battle. Johnson, who was athletically gifted didn't see the field well and took WAY too many sacks. Flutie, who couldn't see over his line, would come in and a startling metamorphosis would occur. Where the once wasn't a pocket a pocket would appear. Where there once wasn't time it seemed like there was an eternity. Answer that question and you will have solved the Bledsoe riddle. 84338[/snapback] Easy explaination. #11. The CURSED #11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 I disagree with some of these points: What riddle???? 1) Bledsoe sets up slow- In general he does take and need a lot of time, but a slow set-up does not seem to be the issue in my mind. The Bills and Bledsoe have the same sack problems in the shotgun as when he is under centerand obviously in the shotgun he is back hree steps much quicker because he starts there. Many of the problems reflect the poor pass pro of the OL as having the rush on you in 3 seconds is having the rush on you in 3 seconds regardless of your set-up time. Instead of slowness in setting up it is slowness in completion that is Bledsoe's problem when he fails to get rid of the ball in 4 seonds when he goes into his trademark patpatpatsack. 2) He's only gonna be in one spot when he sets up (front 7 can tee off)- One thing which Bledsoe has demonstrated the last few weeks is that while no one would mistake him for a running threat, he does have the ability to sidestep and buy a little time (all that one needs often to get the pass off) for a throw. Some of the recent examples have resulted in a few completions during the 1/4 of games when the Bills effwectively moved the ball, the scramble run called back by a penalty last week, and ironically the play early in the game when he was flushed from the pocket and dove for a couple of yards gained and the announcer noted he should have hung in there a couple of seconds cause he had room to his right and might have gotten tghe pass off. It actually is relatively uncharacteristic of Bledsoe to dive forward for a yard or two rather than to hang in there too long and take the sack. I THINK FOLKS ARE WRONG TO DECLARE HIM A STATUE. CALLING HIM MOLASSES IS MORE ACCURATE. He is way too slow to run, but he can move short distances effectively and rather than standingthere (which the good QBs do) actually standing there and throwing the damn ball is what he fails to do. 3) Makes pis poor decisions and does not think/process info quickly GenerallY I agree that Bledsoe is not the brightest bulb in the pack. However, being a successful QB does not need a brain surgeon (Jim Kelly demonstrated that) and Bledsoe has made sme good decision along with the bad decisions in his career. The key for the Bills is to find ways which maxmize the things he does well and minimizes the things he does poorly. 4) throws beautiful passes down field. Sometimes 5) has little to no touch on passes under 15 yard- I think this is actually a big issue that has not gotten enough attention. One of the bigger issues I have with Bledsoe's game is that whether a pass is a 5, 13, or 25 yarder they all seem to be fired out by him with the same hard speed and pace. A pro receiver should catch anything that hits his hands (unlike a ball which went through Reed's hands and off his knees yesterday) so the receivers do no escape blame for missing balls Bledsoe gets to them, but a little touch by him would seem appriopriate. 6) pathetic in the red zone- simply removing Bledsoe will not address problems in the redzone the Bills have longhad since the Butch Rolle days. Bledsoe does not escape blame here, but Bledsoe's failing should not be used to allow the O scheme, the OL and the RB's desire and nose for the endzone to also escap scrutiny. 7) no intangibles- It seems fairly meaningless to claim he brings nothing to the game which can't be defined so I'm not sure what this claim even means. I think that Bledsoe does bring a lot of repuation to the game (whether he deserves the rep or not is another issue, but clearly he is respected by many DCs and his arm strength is an undeniable fact which many DCs worry about). Nevertheless, BB has demonstrated that any intangibles and also tangibles which Bledsoe brings to the table can be defeated by forcing him and the Bills O to do things they do not do well. One of my major complaints about MM and TC is that they have not yet found a good way to make use of the good rep and intangibles which Bledsoe brings to the table. I think you do this unfortunately by not asking him to be a John Elway pivotal leader (which he isn't) and instead use him like Parcells idid when Bledsoe QB'ed a team to the SB or like BB/Weis did when he played QB in the majority of a must win game for the Pats in their SB winning run. It has been done both early and late in Bledsoe's career to win with him at QB. 8) not a leader by any stretch of the immagination- I disagree with this as Bledsoe has clearly demonstrated that he is a true TEAM sacrificing player. Clear examples come from the negative as when Brady proved to be better than him he easily could have become a cancer and did not because of what was good for the team. It is not credible to deny that in the situation that Bledsoe found himself in when he played QB in the majority of a must win game for the Pats to get them to the SB in 2002, he did not advocate for him to remain the starter when almost all athletes would have done so. Bledsoe has publicly gianed the respect and friendship of many godd players and played a key role for the Bills attracting Milloy here when he was an FA. I think that the problem here is that the areas where he can lead have not been used well and they areas where he cannot provide leadership have not been addressed in other ways by the Bills braintrust. I think a lot of this is that folks want to view this incorrectly as all or nothing. He cannnot do it all (who can) but the idea he can do nothing as a leader is wrong as well. 9) no passion for winning- I don't know the man and have never been to bed with him so I can make few real judgments about his level of passion. maybe you can. 84380[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts