What do we need more??

[Johnny Coli]

Dude, that was Trent's second year. Nice try, though. When you compare Trent's second year to P. Manning's, um, there are a few differences. Still, you have to give Trent a chance to continue for another year or two. But the fact that he's right on track means he's wildly inconsistent and could become a Carr or a stronger-armed Pennington or anything in between. We just don't know yet, as you almost never do at this point in his development.

Agreed. But he needs competition to see if he can legitimately win the job. Also, they need to prepare for the possibility of him never getting any better than he is right now after two seasons of starting a majority of the team's games. How many inconsistent QBs suddenly become consistently good, and how many flame out and either leave the league after a few years or end up as career journeymen backups? Really, more often than not an inconsistent QB ends up on the wrong side of that equation. I can live with one more off-season of "Bill Walsh says he's gonna be great" nonsense, but they better get someone else in here in case he strings together another 2-6 run where he throws for 6TDs and 8 picks.

[Thurman#1]

Another Trent Hater!!

 

 

 

That's sarcasm, right? Nice!!!!!

[thebandit27]

Yup. Always take the 500 to one shot in the sixth round and expect a Brady. Or the 30 to one shot FA QB. Never the five to one shot of your QB who shows some signs of improvement and potential but will take another year or two to develop. Never do that. It's too risky.

 

Of course we need an FA QB, possibly one to compete with Trent. But largely to fill the #2 hole and help Trent develop. Young QBs in mediocre situations take a while to develop, they just do. If you don't give them a chance, you develop them into the next Losman, David Carr, Joey Harrington, etc.

 

First off, if you call regressing tremendously over the second half of the season "signs of improvement", we'll have to disagree on that point. Take a look at the games against Miami, the Jets, New England, Cleveland, and San Francisco (first half); Edwards seemed to get worse and worse. With the exception of the games against KC and Denver--two of the bottom 5 defenses in football--the guy was brutal in every game after the win against SD. I suppose if the Bills played against the worst 5 defenses in football every game, I guess would agree with that point.

 

Secondly, how long, precisely, should it take for a good QB to develop? I believe that a guy's either got it, or he doesn't. Let's take a look some other starters in this league, and see how long it took them to "develop" to the point where they started winning games for their team:

 

Brady: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Pennington: 1st season as starter (3rd in league)

Favre: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Flacco: Rookie year

Palmer: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Roethlisberger: Rookie year

Schaub: 1st season as starter (4th in league)

P. Manning: 2nd season as starter (2nd in league)

Garrard: 1st season as starter (3rd in league)

Cutler: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Rivers: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Romo: 1st season as starter (3rd in league)

E. Manning: 2nd season as starter (2nd in league)

McNabb: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Rodgers: 1st season as starter (4th in league)

Ryan: Rookie year

Delhomme: 1st season as starter (2nd in league--if you don't count NFLE)

Brees: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Garcia: 1st season as starter (2nd in league--if you don't count CFL)

Warner: 1st season as starter (2nd in league--if you don't count AFL or NFLE)

 

By contrast, there are plenty of players that were lousy in their first season, but received multiple chances to make it work because they "show signs of improvement" that most casual observers fail to see. These guys continue to prove that they're not capable. This list includes:

 

JP Losman, Travaris Jackson, Alex Smith, Kyle Boller, Joey Harrington, David Carr, Byron Leftwich, Jake Plummer, Brodie Croyle, Rex Grossman (whom I believe Dick Jauron will want to sign as a backup), Jon Kitna, Brian Griese and Matt Leinart. Now, I suppose it's objective as to whether or not a person believes these players ever showed true potential, but there's no question that there were significant warning signs that they'd never pan out.

 

I guess my real point is that the team should be about 99% sure that Edwards is or isn't their guy, and I'm pretty sure this staff has no clue.

[thebandit27]

I just don't see how anyone can write off Edwards just yet. There were times early this season when the team was having trouble running the football, and Edwards successfully carried the offense. I know some will argue that the opponents he faced during that 5-1 stretch were odious. However, he played a near perfect game against the Chargers, the same same Chargers team that did a pretty good job holding Peyton Manning in check in the Wild Card game a couple of weeks back. Edwards certainly hit a major speed bump after that in the divisional games and showed a weakness facing 3-4 defenses. The question will be whether or not he can adapt/adjust and continue to progress. The young man clearly has the smarts and (yes) the necessary physical tools to get the job done. If we don't see a positive progression by the end of the 2009 season, then perhaps we do need to look elsewhere. One thing that would help, I believe, is bringing in a smart veteran backup that can help him -- rather than the uncoachable likes of JP Losman.

 

I am also not sold on AVP at QB Coach either. True, he served as a rookie in that capacity and may get better with experience. The same goes for Turk. The key is that these guys need to get together and formulate a game plan that will allow them to best take advantage of the 3-4 defensive schemes that prevail in the division. After all, the way to get into the playoffs is to figure out a way to beat the teams in your division, right? Of course, some of that may involve changes in personnel, especially Center and TE.

 

Not correct, the Chargers team the Bills faced fired their DC (Ted Cotrell) after starting 4-8, and promoted Ron Riviera, who became a HC candidate for the turn-around job he did with their D.

[BillsObserver]

Another Trent Hater!!

 

On the flip side, someone could just as easily call you "Another Trent Apologist."

 

You seem to be sensitive about this issue. Instead of calling people haters, you should bring up facts that defend your case.

[Thurman#1]

Agreed. But he needs competition to see if he can legitimately win the job. Also, they need to prepare for the possibility of him never getting any better than he is right now after two seasons of starting a majority of the team's games. How many inconsistent QBs suddenly become consistently good, and how many flame out and either leave the league after a few years or end up as career journeymen backups? Really, more often than not an inconsistent QB ends up on the wrong side of that equation. I can live with one more off-season of "Bill Walsh says he's gonna be great" nonsense, but they better get someone else in here in case he strings together another 2-6 run where he throws for 6TDs and 8 picks.

 

 

 

Virtually every single QB with Trent's amount of inexperience and the surrounding personnel weaknesses is inconsistent. Flacco and Ryan had much better surrounding personnel, as did Big Ben in his first year. With our personnel and at his stage of development, there basically is no such thing as a consistent QB.

 

How many inconsistent QBs suddenly become consistently good? The good QBs in this league. That's your answer. They virtually all started as inconsistent. How many flame out? The bad QBs and the ones who never made it. They also started as inconsistent. And yes, there more flameouts than successes. But one more year, unfortunately, might not be enough to tell. Look at Eli, who took four years.

 

However, I agree with most of your post. Prepare for the possibility of failure? Yup. The Bill Walsh nonsense has an end date? Yup. Get veteran competition in? I don't disagree at all. The folks who say "anyone who can't see that Trent has IT knows nothing about football," well, they don't know much about football. QBs are mostly guesswork, faith, and putting them in good situations.

 

Nice post.

[bflobarry]

Finally someone who gets it! We need a franchise QB, have'nt had one since Kelly. And I suppose he did'nt play a huge part in our success back then, must have been the coaches. He's not in the Hall of Fame for nothing! Do you guys think Trents heading there??

"..someone who gets it"? We all "get it", dude. Where, exactly, are you gonna pick up this here "franchise QB"? They're not just laying around in the bargain bins. Jeez.........And yes, I DO think Trent is heading there, actually.....

[BuffaloBill]

Am I allowed to say both?

[bizell]

I'm just not all that impressed with a QB who failed to crack 200 yards in 5 of his last 6 games this season and who has thrown for multiple TDs all of 3 times in his 24 career games.

 

i'm going to save Bill the effort and do it for him:

 

"maybe after being forced to witness such horrific quarterbacking the past 5 years you're too stupid to notice a GREAT quarterback when you see one"

[Psaunders]

Who needs to go? Turk or Trent? I say its the players that make plays and win games 90%, coaching and play calling 10%. So...... I'll go with getting a new QB, since we can't call 1-800-quarterback we should go for a veteran free agent like Warner or Collins AND take another stab in the draft. You never know maybe we can luck out in the 6th round with the next Tom Brady!

 

You know i get sick of fans like you. How many quaterbacks come out of the draft and really make an impact right away? Ok well lets See this year it was Matt Ryan and if you think about it the last one was Big Ben, quarterbacks dont really come as a ready to go position. And dont bring up Joe Flacco cuz he has an awsome defense and he didn;t do anything special this at all. The real homerun quarterback all take time to grow Tony Romo, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Jay Cutler, and Eli Manning all took time to become a good quarterback. The old system was you would draft a quarterback and then it would take 3 to 4 years of him on the bench and getting a few throws in a seaosn to get him to be a high quality player. now everyone wants it right now and that flat out barely happens. if you want a young quarterback to succeed surround him with talent and as of right now we dont have that many recieving talents on our team. We dont have a solid TE and we need another high quality reciever (someday hopefully will Stevie Johnson). You want production wait and you will get stop your complaining and just support your team. And yea coaching has a big part of winning You need a hard coach who will prepare them a DJ isn;t that guy. he gives days off and lets them practice indoors. I think you should learn a little more about football my friend.

[Magox]

On the flip side, someone could just as easily call you "Another Trent Apologist."

 

You seem to be sensitive about this issue. Instead of calling people haters, you should bring up facts that defend your case.

Oh, I don't apologize for Trent Having all the 4th quarter comeback from behind victories this year, I don't apologize for the game that he had against the Chargers that Losman could of only dreamt about having, I don't apologize for his pinpoint accuracy that we have so sorely lacked. I have seen your posts as well, attacking Trent, and that is fine, it is your opinion. Unfortunately we will have to wait another year for him to prove all the naysayers wrong including you.

 

No apologies, only gratitude!!

 

Go Bills!!!!!

[BillsObserver]

Oh, I don't apologize for Trent Having all the 4th quarter comeback from behind victories this year, I don't apologize for the game that he had against the Chargers that Losman could of only dreamt about having, I don't apologize for his pinpoint accuracy that we have so sorely lacked. I have seen your posts as well, attacking Trent, and that is fine, it is your opinion. Unfortunately we will have to wait another year for him to prove all the naysayers wrong including you.

 

No apologies, only gratitude!!

 

Go Bills!!!!!

 

Magox, are you high?

 

Review this thread. I haven't said anything negative about Trent. Nor have I have been on an anti-Trent tirade like some people on this board. To be fair, I've kept my opinion to myself about Trent. I have no idea if he's the answer. I'm really rooting for him because I'm a Bills fan, and you need a good quarterback to win in this league. I don't want to wait another 3 years watching another quarterback develop.

[thebandit27]

Oh, I don't apologize for Trent Having all the 4th quarter comeback from behind victories this year, I don't apologize for the game that he had against the Chargers that Losman could of only dreamt about having, I don't apologize for his pinpoint accuracy that we have so sorely lacked. I have seen your posts as well, attacking Trent, and that is fine, it is your opinion. Unfortunately we will have to wait another year for him to prove all the naysayers wrong including you.

 

No apologies, only gratitude!!

 

Go Bills!!!!!

 

what has that got to do with anything? by the way, I think you meant "could've", which is a compound word for "could have". "could of" doesn't really make sense.

 

by the way, where was trent's amazing 4th-quarter magic against Miami, the Jets, Cleveland, and New England (twice)?

 

Yes, I know, there will be a post about how I'm a Trent "hater". Whatever...call me what you like, but there's probably 15 QBs in the league right now I'd take over Trent, JP, or Gibran Hamdan

[Thurman#1]

First off, if you call regressing tremendously over the second half of the season "signs of improvement", we'll have to disagree on that point. Take a look at the games against Miami, the Jets, New England, Cleveland, and San Francisco (first half); Edwards seemed to get worse and worse. With the exception of the games against KC and Denver--two of the bottom 5 defenses in football--the guy was brutal in every game after the win against SD. I suppose if the Bills played against the worst 5 defenses in football every game, I guess would agree with that point.

 

Secondly, how long, precisely, should it take for a good QB to develop? I believe that a guy's either got it, or he doesn't. Let's take a look some other starters in this league, and see how long it took them to "develop" to the point where they started winning games for their team:

 

Brady: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Pennington: 1st season as starter (3rd in league)

Favre: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Flacco: Rookie year

Palmer: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Roethlisberger: Rookie year

Schaub: 1st season as starter (4th in league)

P. Manning: 2nd season as starter (2nd in league)

Garrard: 1st season as starter (3rd in league)

Cutler: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Rivers: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Romo: 1st season as starter (3rd in league)

E. Manning: 2nd season as starter (2nd in league)

McNabb: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Rodgers: 1st season as starter (4th in league)

Ryan: Rookie year

Delhomme: 1st season as starter (2nd in league--if you don't count NFLE)

Brees: 1st season as starter (2nd in league)

Garcia: 1st season as starter (2nd in league--if you don't count CFL)

Warner: 1st season as starter (2nd in league--if you don't count AFL or NFLE)

 

By contrast, there are plenty of players that were lousy in their first season, but received multiple chances to make it work because they "show signs of improvement" that most casual observers fail to see. These guys continue to prove that they're not capable. This list includes:

 

JP Losman, Travaris Jackson, Alex Smith, Kyle Boller, Joey Harrington, David Carr, Byron Leftwich, Jake Plummer, Brodie Croyle, Rex Grossman (whom I believe Dick Jauron will want to sign as a backup), Jon Kitna, Brian Griese and Matt Leinart. Now, I suppose it's objective as to whether or not a person believes these players ever showed true potential, but there's no question that there were significant warning signs that they'd never pan out.

 

I guess my real point is that the team should be about 99% sure that Edwards is or isn't their guy, and I'm pretty sure this staff has no clue.

 

 

 

Yes, improving. Improving year to year. Which he did.

 

If you look at my posts, I make it pretty clear that Trent was inconsistent. But less so than last year, there is no question of that.

 

When you say that guys started winning games for their team, you have lost the plot. QBs don't win games. Teams win games. And when you say that either a guy has it or he doesn't, well, you're just flat out wrong. Short of Marino, virtually every other QB not in a sensational Roethlisbergian situation has been questionable for several years.

 

In Brady's first year as a starter, he was in a fantastic situation. All he had to do was not make too many mistakes, which he did. But it wasn't him winning games. It was an absolutely terrific team. It's possible to do very well as a guy who doesn't make many mistakes in this league. Especially when your team is just better than most of your opponents. Hell, that's what happened with Trent the first 6 games of the year. He had lots of time to throw, the running game and special teams were working. The defense looked pretty good. Surprise, surprise, Trent looked fantastic and as you would say "Trent won some games for his team."

 

That's what happened with virtually every guy on your list. His team was superior to the other team, and so "he won some games for his team."

 

 

The key example is Brees, one of the to 3 or 4 QBs in the game. Nobody knew Brees was good enough. Even one of the top 3 GMs in football didn't. If as you say "you've got it or you don't," then what happened with Brees? That's what happens to QBs. Inconsistent QBs become less inconsistent when they have a terrific o-line in front of them. When they have a great defense and can win games by scoring 15 points a game. When defenses have to respect their running game. And as QBs get more experience and see more defenses and speed up in their reads and just generally play a lot, some of them make huge improvements. The "you've got it or you don't" thing is, frankly, nonsense. Brees showed those same "warning signs" you talk about. SO DOES EVERY YOUNG QB. It's easy to be brilliant in hindsight. But if it was so easy to see who has it and who doesn't, teams would NEVER waste time on guys who fail. And yet they do, year after year, guys who spend eight hours a day or much much more, trying to figure out who will be a failure and who won't. Guys who, no offense, know one hell of a lot more about football than you do. Or me, I freely admit. Why do they do it? Because you can't see who will make huge leaps. You can't always separate bad performance from bad situations, bad play calls, bad o-lines and bad recievers. Thinking you can only shows that you don't understand the difference between knowing and guessing.

 

Trent on the other hand is on a very mediocre team. Young QBs in that situation virtually without exception look inconsistent.

 

Trent "won some games for his team" as much as any of the guys on that list. But in real life, QBs don't win games for their team. Teams win games. And that certainly happened because every QB on your list (inconsistent though they were) was either on a good team or was on a team that was better than teams that they played that year.

 

It's all so easy in hindsight. But what happens with all the experts who know exactly who has it and who doesn't is that they predict that 10 guys will make it and three of them do, and the other seven are forgotten when you say "See, I knew that guy was a player." And the odds are much easier to be a genius when you're predicting failure. Simply because many more fail than succeed. So you predict that ten guys will fail and eight do, and suddenly you're a mega-genius because you somehow forget the two who made it.

 

There are moments when it becomes obvious a guy has figured it out. Eli in the post-season last year. But for four years before that, Giants fans have been screaming at each other in roughly equal numbers, all of them absolutely knowiing that he was a genius or a bum. The ones who guessed right say "see, I knew it." The ones who guessed wrong say "Wow, he sucked before but he really stepped up, who could have guessed that would happen?"

 

Nobody knows for sure until it happens. Including the experts. And certainly including you and me.

[Thurman#1]

The people who say "If you can't see that Trent has it, you're an idiot," are just as wrong as those who say "Trent will never be a winner, he is a career loser."

 

We can't be sure yet.

[pkwwjd]

good coaching wins you x number of games a year

bad coaching costs you x number of games a year

 

journeyman/cerebral/superstar QBs do blah blah blah for you ...

 

 

Everybody does know that 78.49% of all statistics are made up on the spot, right?

 

I appreciate the passion that this board brings to discussion about the Bills, but if all of us know so much about each player and what we need ... how come we're all on this side of the discussion, not in the warroom with Ralph on Draft Day? Seriously ... why the hate and venom for everyone who disagrees? State an opinion as an opinion, use REAL stats to back them up ... let others respond. It's not that difficult.

[thebandit27]

Yes, improving. Improving year to year. Which he did.

 

[a bunch of stuff]

 

Nobody knows for sure until it happens. Including the experts. And certainly including you and me.

 

1) Did you watch the Colts at all this year? Yes, QBs win games. I have watched football before, thus I realize it's a team game. Yes, a receiver has to catch a ball or it will fall to the turf. What most people realize is that a player at the most crucial position in the game that is playing at a very high level can make the difference between winning and losing. With that in mind, to deny that a QB can win a game for his team would be close-minded and ridiculous. Fundamentally, I should end my post here, since you do not agree on that point. However, for the fun of it, I will continue.

 

2) Pittsburgh's situation with Big Ben was not ideal, they were 0-2 when he took the reigns from Tommy Maddox. Same situation with Brady, New England was 0-2 in 2000 when he started against the Colts in Week 3. I don't know about you, but 0-2 on a team that was bad the year before does not strike me as fantastic. For the others, which you claim "virtually every one" started with a "superior" team around him, let's take a look:

 

Pennington: Jets coming off disappointing 7-9 season

Favre: Packers hadn't made playoffs in 7 years

Flacco: Ravens went 6-10 in 2007 and sorely lacked offensive punch

Palmer: Kitna got the team to 7-9, if that's ideal then you must be a happy Bills fan

Schaub: Houston never won more than 6 games until he arrived

P. Manning: Colts were 3-13 in 1997

Garrard: Jags finished 8-8 in 2007

Cutler: Broncos finished 8-8 in 2007

Rivers: Ok, here's one, came into a great situation taking over for Drew Brees

Romo: Took over a 0.500 team and had to try to please TO

E. Manning: Giants finished 4-12 and 6-10 in 2 years prior to his starting

McNabb: Eagles were 4-12 his rookie year

Rodgers: Ok, here's another, must be ideal taking over for Brett Favre in Green Bay, right?

Ryan: Falcons were 4-12 in 2007

Delhomme: Panthers finished in last place in 2002

Brees: Flutie got San Diego to an 8-8 record prior to Brees taking over

Garcia: When Steve Young got knocked out of his final game, the 49ers went 6-10 that season

Warner: Won 5 games in 1998

 

Could it be, considering this information, that the teams became "superior" because the QB play brought them to another level? Or is elevating the level of play of their teammates similar to winning games-something a QB can't do? Never mind; don't answer that, we'll move on...

 

3) As you've seen this year, not "EVERY YOUNG QB" shows the warning signs I indicated. There are plenty that do not. For a moment, forget Flacco and Ryan, do you ever remember seeing Big Ben, Favre, Pennington, Palmer, the Mannings, Cutler, Rivers, Rodgers, and Warner have the apparent physical limitations or decision-making problems that Edwards does? Be honest...

 

4) You completely misread my comment. What I said was-in my opinion-once a guy has played a season at the NFL level, a good organization can tell if he's got it or he doesn't. So who are the best organizations in football? I say they're the ones with the most recent long-term success. That would be New England, Indianapolis, NY Giants, Tennessee, Philadelphia, and to a lesser extent Baltimore. What do they have in common? All have been successful at identifying a franchise QB at some point. Some (Baltimore and Tennessee) have even gone so far as to jettison a first-round pick in favor of a traveled veteran (McNair and Collins, respectively) when they knew it was the right move to make.

 

5) Last but not least, never once, in my entire 2 (very long...sorry) posts, did I say that I knew whether or not Trent "has it". So there is no need to call into question my football intelligence.

 

I'm out like Rebecca Lobo in a beauty pageant.

[Jerry Jabber]

Who needs to go? Turk or Trent? I say its the players that make plays and win games 90%, coaching and play calling 10%. So...... I'll go with getting a new QB, since we can't call 1-800-quarterback we should go for a veteran free agent like Warner or Collins AND take another stab in the draft. You never know maybe we can luck out in the 6th round with the next Tom Brady!

 

Enough about firing the QB. No QB will be successful in Buffalo with the current receiving corps we have. Until we have legitimate #1 and #2 WR's, and a legitimate #1 TE, our QB's will struggle. When those scenarios are filled, then we can discuss who is the problem.

[Alphadawg7]

Who needs to go? Turk or Trent? I say its the players that make plays and win games 90%, coaching and play calling 10%. So...... I'll go with getting a new QB, since we can't call 1-800-quarterback we should go for a veteran free agent like Warner or Collins AND take another stab in the draft. You never know maybe we can luck out in the 6th round with the next Tom Brady!

 

We need a new Qb! That new QB can be either someone new all together, or a new Trent Edwards. If we get the Trent that has been here last year, then we are screwed. He has proven countless times he can not make reads fast enough to find his open recievers, and now has become gunshy often looking for the checkdown because he cant progress through his second and third options fast enough. He often looks lost and confused and all you have to do to beat him is put pressure on him.

 

Dont believe me, go watch the Ram and Raider game last year again...he was totally ineffective as he was under pressure all day. It wasnt until the 4th qtr when both teams stopped bringing the pressure (I was shocked and still dont know why the did this) that Trent was able to finally start moving the ball. Talking with friends in the NFL, they all said the same thing, if you can hurry the kid you will beat the kid by simply taking away his first option.

 

The film shows him locking in on one target then checking down to a RB or FB when that option is taken away often missing downfield plays open on the other side of the field. Often they tempt him to check down to someone near the line of scrimmage by giving them a cushion there as they know his tendency to do so and rather give up 2 yards on a 2nd and long or 3rd and long than have him make a pass for a frist down...this is part of the gameplan teams are using against him now, and he keeps biting on it.

 

So either we get a new QB, or we get a Trent that has finally shaken these cob webs and got some nerve and patience back. Until then, we wont win many games...

[DieHardBillsFan]

A new owner...