Ramius Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Not only that, but when he HAD to throw in the 4th quarter against the Pats in Week 17 INTO the wind, I actually thought he displayed some pretty decent arm strength. I really do NOT know where all of this concern about his arm strength comes from. He has demonstrated that he can throw every NFL pass, including the deep out which REQUIRES the most arm strength. He does have a tendency to check down, but I think part of that is because of the nature of the offense -- and part of it is his comfort level in taking the more sure thing rather than gambling for a big play. 1. His deep ball is horrific. Not the short and intermediate passes, but a few times a game, you need to take some shots 30+ yards down the field. Sure he can get the ball there, but the passes are often underthrown, forcing the WR to stop his pattern and come back to the ball. 2. He never throws the deep ball. He rarely throws any pass over 10 yards. Arm or not, you need to attempt those passes, if nothing more than to get the safeties off the line. Trent is hesitant at best and afraid at worst to throw anything other than a dumpoff/checkdown or a short pattern.
GG Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Low percentage of completions of passes beyond 7 yards would do it wouldn't it? 7.2 per completion, but those we threw longer (raising the YPA) were rarely completed. Seriously, are you taking turns as crayonz? The numerator = Passing Yards, is the same The denominator = attempts/completions, is different. Unless it's Canadian rules, attempts will never be less than completions.
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Trents problem like every Bills qb post Kelly is the same. The Bills have no weapons to attack different areas of the field. Outside of Josh Reed who's working the middle of the field? Where's the guy to take pressure off of Evans. Just cause the deep ball is sexy to watch on television, doesn't make it a prudent move, when you're forcing it into double coverage. I'd rather the quarterback take the safe route short-intermediate level throw. The Pats lived off this stuff for years. Then they went out and got Ben Watson, who with his speed, and athletic ability had to be respected as a threat down the seem. You can't just go "Well we have Evans and Parrish where's the deep ball? When all safeties have to do is shadow over the top and drop lb's into the short area zones to neutralize Josh Reed. It doesn't matter who the quarterback is. Every good offense in the nfl today, has a receiving threat at the tight end position. The Bills have a bunch of trash. We'll continue to see the same safe check down display, with no big play potential until a threat at te is brought in.
Beerball Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Seriously, are you taking turns as crayonz? The numerator = Passing Yards, is the same The denominator = attempts/completions, is different. Unless it's Canadian rules, attempts will never be less than completions. OK, I'm stuupid now thoroughly embarassed. But...the 7.2 appears to be YPA, too if this is correct. The figures I was looking at were for the team, not Edwards specifically. So, I'm screwed up more than once.
Bill from NYC Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Amazing all this Trent Bashing!!! I think he had a good year considering it was his first full year, and the weapons he had at his disposal. His durability is definitely a concern, but the guy can play, and I have a lot of faith in what he can do for our organization. Don't be amazed. The JP knob polishing fanboys have been sidetracked by the news about keeping Jauron, and their darling is gone, on to pollute some other team. Hopefully, some of the fanboys will go with him.
GG Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 OK, I'm stuupid now thoroughly embarassed. But...the 7.2 appears to be YPA, too ifthis is correct. The figures I was looking at were for the team, not Edwards specifically. So, I'm screwed up more than once. Makes a lot more sense, and YPA is more widely used, especially since it also subtracts sack yds from the total (No love for Losman from that stat.)
Ramius Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Don't be amazed. The JP knob polishing fanboys have been sidetracked by the news about keeping Jauron, and thier darling is gone, on to pollute some other team. Hopefully, some of the fanboys will go with him. Ok, the 67 of you guys that guessed BillfromNYC would be the first to bring JP trash into this trent edwards thread will have to split the cash for the winner. The rest of you that picked "thebug" will have to wait until the next thread.
Bmwolf21 Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Don't be amazed. The JP knob polishing fanboys have been sidetracked by the news about keeping Jauron, and thier darling is gone, on to pollute some other team. Hopefully, some of the fanboys will go with him. Wow, you have a serious hard-on for JP and his "fanboys." Criticism of the almighty Trent's arm strength and durability =/= being a JP fanboy.
ieatcrayonz Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Don't be amazed. The JP knob polishing fanboys have been sidetracked by the news about keeping Jauron, and thier darling is gone, on to pollute some other team. Hopefully, some of the fanboys will go with him. Dude, say what you want about JP but at least try to be fair. He simply does not pollute. As a matter of fact he cleans up.
Beerball Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Makes a lot more sense, and YPA is more widely used, especially since it also subtracts sack yds from the total (No love for Losman from that stat.) For what it's worth(less) I figured yards per completion. Of the top 20 QBs in YPA Trent's 11.02 YPC ranks 18. Of the 32 players listed he would rank #25 which would indicate that he doesn't stretch the field much. Funny that this hasn't been recognized. OK, did I screw that up too?
HurlyBurly51 Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Don't be amazed. The JP knob polishing fanboys have been sidetracked by the news about keeping Jauron, and thier darling is gone, on to pollute some other team. Hopefully, some of the fanboys will go with him. The one nice thing about the RJ/Flutie days are that the Flakes all left with him when little Dougie departed.
GG Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 For what it's worth(less) I figured yards per completion. Of the top 20 QBs in YPA Trent's 11.02 YPC ranks 18. Of the 32 players listed he would rank #25 which would indicate that he doesn't stretch the field much. Funny that this hasn't been recognized. OK, did I screw that up too? Sounds about right. Edwards' YPA is high because he has a high completion percentage and low sacks. But his YPC is low because the passes he does complete are short yardage ones. "Funny that this hasn't been recognized." - Not on fan forums. But definitely in opponents' film rooms.
Oneonta Buffalo Fan 2 Posted January 6, 2009 Author Posted January 6, 2009 Was Dean Russin from the Oneonta Press the source? Please tell me you know Dean Russin.....sports writer in Oneonta... Name sounds familiar but sorry man, I don't know him.
ieatcrayonz Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Was Dean Russin from the Oneonta Press the source? Please tell me you know Dean Russin.....sports writer in Oneonta... Isn't being a sports writer in Oneonta like being a Science editor in Canada?
MRW Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Don't be amazed. The JP knob polishing fanboys have been sidetracked by the news about keeping Jauron, and thier darling is gone, on to pollute some other team. Hopefully, some of the fanboys will go with him. Wow. I'm left wondering if you will ever have anything worthwhile to contribute to a QB discussion or if this will be your MO for the next 5 years.
Johnny Coli Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 For what it's worth(less) I figured yards per completion. Of the top 20 QBs in YPA Trent's 11.02 YPC ranks 18. Of the 32 players listed he would rank #25 which would indicate that he doesn't stretch the field much. Funny that this hasn't been recognized. OK, did I screw that up too? You could also look at who is getting the receptions. Looking back at the 2006 through 2008 seasons and taking the top eight team leaders in receptions, the breakdown is as follows: 2006 team receptions by position (using the top eight players): WR 188 TE 30 RB 40 The top eight went (1 = leader in receptions): 1-4 WR 5 TE 6-7 RB 8 TE 2007 team receptions by position (using the top eight players): WR 141 TE 50 RB 55 The top eight went (1 = leader in receptions): 1-3 WR 4-5 TE 6-8 RB 2008 team receptions by position (using the top eight players): WR 153 TE 48 RB 84 The top eight went (1 = leader in receptions): 1-2 WR 3-4 RB 5 TE 6 WR 7 TE 8 WR Receptions by the WRs declined 2006 to 2007/2008. However, receptions to RBs in 2008 shot up 152%, where the 3rd and 4th highest reception totals on the team were by the two RBs. By coaching design or by player aversion to take a shot down the field, Edwards has been dumping it off to the RBs at a fairly high rate and at the expense of the WRs.
Arkady Renko Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 You could also look at who is getting the receptions. Looking back at the 2006 through 2008 seasons and taking the top eight team leaders in receptions, the breakdown is as follows: 2006 team receptions by position (using the top eight players): WR 188 TE 30 RB 40 The top eight went (1 = leader in receptions): 1-4 WR 5 TE 6-7 RB 8 TE 2007 team receptions by position (using the top eight players): WR 141 TE 50 RB 55 The top eight went (1 = leader in receptions): 1-3 WR 4-5 TE 6-8 RB 2008 team receptions by position (using the top eight players): WR 153 TE 48 RB 84 The top eight went (1 = leader in receptions): 1-2 WR 3-4 RB 5 TE 6 WR 7 TE 8 WR Receptions by the WRs declined 2006 to 2007/2008. However, receptions to RBs in 2008 shot up 152%, where the 3rd and 4th highest reception totals on the team were by the two RBs. By coaching design or by player aversion to take a shot down the field, Edwards has been dumping it off to the RBs at a fairly high rate and at the expense of the WRs. As if getting the ball to the RBs and involving them in the offense is automatically "dumping it off" and a bad thing. New England's offense is built on screens to RBs, WRs and others, as well as quick slants. Getting the ball to playmakers quickly and with space is not a bad thing.
ieatcrayonz Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 As if getting the ball to the RBs and involving them in the offense is automatically "dumping it off" and a bad thing. New England's offense is built on screens to RBs, WRs and others, as well as quick slants. Getting the ball to playmakers quickly and with space is not a bad thing. Good point. Many cornerbacks are playmakers.
Steve In Atlanta 2008 Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Wow. I'm left wondering if you will ever have anything worthwhile to contribute to a QB discussion or if this will be your MO for the next 5 years. I dont know what the heck yall are talking about but given that our beloved Jim Kellys lifetime YPC average is 7.4 and Trents this year was 7.2 says allot
Steve In Atlanta 2008 Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 You could also look at who is getting the receptions. Looking back at the 2006 through 2008 seasons and taking the top eight team leaders in receptions, the breakdown is as follows: 2006 team receptions by position (using the top eight players): WR 188 TE 30 RB 40 The top eight went (1 = leader in receptions): 1-4 WR 5 TE 6-7 RB 8 TE 2007 team receptions by position (using the top eight players): WR 141 TE 50 RB 55 The top eight went (1 = leader in receptions): 1-3 WR 4-5 TE 6-8 RB 2008 team receptions by position (using the top eight players): WR 153 TE 48 RB 84 The top eight went (1 = leader in receptions): 1-2 WR 3-4 RB 5 TE 6 WR 7 TE 8 WR Receptions by the WRs declined 2006 to 2007/2008. However, receptions to RBs in 2008 shot up 152%, where the 3rd and 4th highest reception totals on the team were by the two RBs. By coaching design or by player aversion to take a shot down the field, Edwards has been dumping it off to the RBs at a fairly high rate and at the expense of the WRs. wow its nice that other people are supporting their statements with facts!
Recommended Posts