Gordio Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 I'm pretty sure that's why they've remained crappy for so long. They keep looking for the one position fix, the QB, when they needed to spend the money and draft picks on decent linemen! For example, you pick up a rookie QB who, over the course of his first nfl season, has less than 2 seconds to throw on every down due to virtually no blocking. He's not going to have very good numbers. It will lead to the defense not respecting the pass because receivers don't have time to get open. Which in turn can lead to defenses stopping the run by packing a bunch in the box as there is no pass offense. That sounds kind of familiar doesn't it? The entire offense seems to be in disarray, but the line is the problem! Poor QB play is a symptom of the bigger problem. But that is simply not true of the bills teams last year. Go actually watch the games. Our qbs in most of the games had plenty of time to throw the ball last year. The poor qb play last year & Dick Jauron where the 2 biggest reasons the bills did not get into the playoffs last year.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 So, by this theory Daunte Culpepper is the guy that held the Lions back to 0-16 but was also the guy that was good enough to lead the Vikings to a #1 seed in the salary cap era. Trent Dilfer was the guy that held the Bucs back but led the Ravens to a Super Bowl victory. Brett Favre won a Super Bowl in Green Bay but also held them back in seasons they stunk as he held back the Jets. Jeff Garcia has been to 4 Pro Bowls and led the 49ers to the playoffs as well as Tampa but held back 5 teams including the 49ers and Tampa. Rex Grossman dragged the Bears to a Super Bowl and has also held the Bears back ever since. Neal O'Donnell led the Steelers and held back the Jets. Bledsoe led the Patriots and held back 3 teams including the Patriots. Kurt Warner led the Rams and Cardinals to the Super Bowl but held the New York Giants back. I can go on... Football is a team game. The modern game is about coaching as much as it is about players. In the old NFL, teams lined up 11 on 11 and the better team prevailed. If you had Jim Brown, you had a guy that was physically dominant, you gave him the ball, he ran over everyone, and you won games and championships. Now, talent is much more evenly distributed and evolved. (If you don't believe it look at all the worst-to-firsts, late season runs, and teams that nobody predicts doing very well over the last few years -- indeed, the Bills are the anomaly in that they are one of the few dysfunctional organizations that seems to find a way to blow it each and every year.) Modern football is about match-ups, exploiting weaknesses, game planning, systems, play calling, sets, formations, packages, clock management, proper technique, keeping the team focused. And, guess what? The QB doesn't do any of that. That's why you see guys like Grossman, Johnson, Delhomme, Gannon, Dilfer, Collins, Chandler, McNair, Bledsoe, O'Donnell, and Humphries "drag their teams" all the way to the Super Bowl in the salary cap era. It's why winning teams and franchises that stay in the hunt invest in and pay for good front offices and coaches. Good job.
BillsCelticsAngelsBama Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 But that is simply not true of the bills teams last year. Go actually watch the games. Our qbs in most of the games had plenty of time to throw the ball last year. The poor qb play last year & Dick Jauron where the 2 biggest reasons the bills did not get into the playoffs last year. You are correct , However the receivers still need to get open. How many times have you seen the QB's looking, looking, and other than occasionally Josh Reed, the WR's are smothered. Whether that's talent or coaching (my opinion) you can't just throw the ball. Not to say your argument is false, just saying that maybe some clever coaching and we could see what our teams potential could be.
BillsVet Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 So, by this theory Daunte Culpepper is the guy that held the Lions back to 0-16 but was also the guy that was good enough to lead the Vikings to a #1 seed in the salary cap era. Trent Dilfer was the guy that held the Bucs back but led the Ravens to a Super Bowl victory. Brett Favre won a Super Bowl in Green Bay but also held them back in seasons they stunk as he held back the Jets. Jeff Garcia has been to 4 Pro Bowls and led the 49ers to the playoffs as well as Tampa but held back 5 teams including the 49ers and Tampa. Rex Grossman dragged the Bears to a Super Bowl and has also held the Bears back ever since. Neal O'Donnell led the Steelers and held back the Jets. Bledsoe led the Patriots and held back 3 teams including the Patriots. Kurt Warner led the Rams and Cardinals to the Super Bowl but held the New York Giants back. I can go on... Football is a team game. The modern game is about coaching as much as it is about players. In the old NFL, teams lined up 11 on 11 and the better team prevailed. If you had Jim Brown, you had a guy that was physically dominant, you gave him the ball, he ran over everyone, and you won games and championships. Now, talent is much more evenly distributed and evolved. (If you don't believe it look at all the worst-to-firsts, late season runs, and teams that nobody predicts doing very well over the last few years -- indeed, the Bills are the anomaly in that they are one of the few dysfunctional organizations that seems to find a way to blow it each and every year.) Modern football is about match-ups, exploiting weaknesses, game planning, systems, play calling, sets, formations, packages, clock management, proper technique, keeping the team focused. And, guess what? The QB doesn't do any of that. That's why you see guys like Grossman, Johnson, Delhomme, Gannon, Dilfer, Collins, Chandler, McNair, Bledsoe, O'Donnell, and Humphries "drag their teams" all the way to the Super Bowl in the salary cap era. It's why winning teams and franchises that stay in the hunt invest in and pay for good front offices and coaches. Excellent post...great assesment.
reddogblitz Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 You are correct , However the receivers still need to get open. How many times have you seen the QB's looking, looking, and other than occasionally Josh Reed, the WR's are smothered. Whether that's talent or coaching (my opinion) you can't just throw the ball. Not to say your argument is false, just saying that maybe some clever coaching and we could see what our teams potential could be. If you go to the games, you can watch the receivers down field and see if guys are open or not. I went to 2 games this year. Seattle and Cleveland. In the Seattle game guys were open and Trent was actually throwing to them and they were catching them and we won big. In the Cleveland game guys were open down field and in the end zone all night long and our QB chose to throw to RBs and other people behind the line of scrimmage and Cleveland defenders instead. Others at other games, one guy at the first Patsies game, said the same thing. It's not the WRs or the OLine. It's QB play that's hurting us the most. Bottom line. Would we have finished 7-9 if we had Big Ben or Jim Kelly in his prime as our QB?
Gordio Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 Excellent post...great assesment. The problem with this assessment is most of the examples he gives he is comparing the qbs in their prime to same guys in the tail end of the careers. Comparing a young healthy culpepper in Minn to the old has been gimp that played in detroit, a mid 90s brett favre to the washed up version who played in NY & a young Jeff garcia in SF to the Jeff Garcia that played in Tampa. Ask a Green Bay Packer fan who was the most important player on that Super Bowl team & ask a NYJ fan what was the single most thing that held the Jets back this year. I bet 9 out of 10 fans say Brett Favre in both scenerios.
Alphadawg7 Posted February 12, 2009 Author Posted February 12, 2009 So, by this theory Daunte Culpepper is the guy that held the Lions back to 0-16 but was also the guy that was good enough to lead the Vikings to a #1 seed in the salary cap era. Trent Dilfer was the guy that held the Bucs back but led the Ravens to a Super Bowl victory. Brett Favre won a Super Bowl in Green Bay but also held them back in seasons they stunk as he held back the Jets. Jeff Garcia has been to 4 Pro Bowls and led the 49ers to the playoffs as well as Tampa but held back 5 teams including the 49ers and Tampa. Rex Grossman dragged the Bears to a Super Bowl and has also held the Bears back ever since. Neal O'Donnell led the Steelers and held back the Jets. Bledsoe led the Patriots and held back 3 teams including the Patriots. Kurt Warner led the Rams and Cardinals to the Super Bowl but held the New York Giants back. I can go on... Football is a team game. The modern game is about coaching as much as it is about players. In the old NFL, teams lined up 11 on 11 and the better team prevailed. If you had Jim Brown, you had a guy that was physically dominant, you gave him the ball, he ran over everyone, and you won games and championships. Now, talent is much more evenly distributed and evolved. (If you don't believe it look at all the worst-to-firsts, late season runs, and teams that nobody predicts doing very well over the last few years -- indeed, the Bills are the anomaly in that they are one of the few dysfunctional organizations that seems to find a way to blow it each and every year.) Modern football is about match-ups, exploiting weaknesses, game planning, systems, play calling, sets, formations, packages, clock management, proper technique, keeping the team focused. And, guess what? The QB doesn't do any of that. That's why you see guys like Grossman, Johnson, Delhomme, Gannon, Dilfer, Collins, Chandler, McNair, Bledsoe, O'Donnell, and Humphries "drag their teams" all the way to the Super Bowl in the salary cap era. It's why winning teams and franchises that stay in the hunt invest in and pay for good front offices and coaches. This post doesnt even make sense... First off...St Louis and AZ were doormats in this league until um, who? Kurt Warner... Patriots were a doormat in this league until um, who? Bledsoe Green Bay had been a long time door mat to barely average team in the mordern era until um who? Farve Cowboys were one of the worst teams in the league until who? Aikman Miami has been terrible since the lost of who? Marino Indy struggled with relevancy until who? Manning Seattle was an inrrelevant doormat for years until who? Hasselbeck 49ers were doormats until they got who? Joe Montanna What did Miami do last year? Squeeked out 1 win...what happened this year? They brought in Pennington and won the division behind his solid play that saw him win comeback player of the year...we have more talent at WR than him, a lot more... How did Denver do after Elway retired? What about Buffalo, how have we done since Kelly left? We can go on and on about teams who were bottom feeders in the league until they developed a productive QB. The lengths people will go to validate Trents lack of production is astounding...even trying to down play the one position that touches the ball EVERY single snap when in the game. I mean come on, the way you down play the significance of a QB is mind boggling. Sure teams like the Ravens won a SB with Dilfer, but it wasnt because of Dilfer, they won in spite of Dilfer with one of the greatest D's of all time allowing the Ravens to pass a low amount of times and pound the ball with Jamal Lewis. Same goes for the Bucs who won with an slightly above average QB in Johnson and a sufficating D that dominated the SB and the NFL that year. Look at the last 20 years of SB winners...tell me how many of those teams didnt have good QB's that year. You will NOT win in the NFL with kind of production we have had...there is no denying that no matter how much you want to. Doesnt mean Trent doesnt make a big leap, this thread had NOTHING to do with what he may become...just what plagued us to a back to back 7-9 record, and it wasnt about just Trent, it was about the overall QB play from him and JP...
Gordio Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 This post doesnt even make sense... First off...St Louis and AZ were doormats in this league until um, who? Kurt Warner... Patriots were a doormat in this league until um, who? Bledsoe Green Bay had been a long time door mat to barely average team in the mordern era until um who? Farve Cowboys were one of the worst teams in the league until who? Aikman Miami has been terrible since the lost of who? Marino Indy struggled with relevancy until who? Manning Seattle was an inrrelevant doormat for years until who? Hasselbeck 49ers were doormats until they got who? Joe Montanna What did Miami do last year? Squeeked out 1 win...what happened this year? They brought in Pennington and won the division behind his solid play that saw him win comeback player of the year...we have more talent at WR than him, a lot more... How did Denver do after Elway retired? What about Buffalo, how have we done since Kelly left? We can go on and on about teams who were bottom feeders in the league until they developed a productive QB. The lengths people will go to validate Trents lack of production is astounding...even trying to down play the one position that touches the ball EVERY single snap when in the game. I mean come on, the way you down play the significance of a QB is mind boggling. Sure teams like the Ravens won a SB with Dilfer, but it wasnt because of Dilfer, they won in spite of Dilfer with one of the greatest D's of all time allowing the Ravens to pass a low amount of times and pound the ball with Jamal Lewis. Same goes for the Bucs who won with an slightly above average QB in Johnson and a sufficating D that dominated the SB and the NFL that year. Look at the last 20 years of SB winners...tell me how many of those teams didnt have good QB's that year. You will NOT win in the NFL with kind of production we have had...there is no denying that no matter how much you want to. Doesnt mean Trent doesnt make a big leap, this thread had NOTHING to do with what he may become...just what plagued us to a back to back 7-9 record, and it wasnt about just Trent, it was about the overall QB play from him and JP... I really think the problem is that we have been dealt such lousy qb play ever since Kelly retired that people have forgotten how much a franchise qb means to a team. I laugh when I hear people say "oh we just need a guy to manage a game". I do not want to settle for a game manager as my qb, I want a qb that will go into a hostile environment like Foxboro & make a play to win the game. Eventually, in the NFL you are going to need your qb to step up & win a game or two. You are kidding yourself if you do not think that.
Neuf Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 Ok, I am just so baffled by those who claim QB is not the problem and blame everything on DJ, Ralph, Peters, or DE...So I am going to spell it out for you right here in black and white...QB PRODUCTION...of should I say LACK of production has been the biggest factor to our losing seasons the last 2 years. Not saying, DE isnt a major need, or that DJ didnt make mistakes, but no other factor has held this club back as much as QB production... Seriously look at these stats. These are the combined stats of JP and Trent for the last 2 seasons where all the blame is being put on DJ...Once you see these stats, ask yourself "How can a coach win in the NFL with this little producton and insane amount of turnovers from his QB's, the most important position on the field?" Not to mention, this is with our staff being incredibly cautious with our QB's and limiting the risks they take, yet they still turn the ball over an embarrasing amount of times... 2007: Yards: 2834 = 177 yards per game TD's: 11 INT's 14 TD:INT ratio: .79:1 Sacks: 26 2008: Yards: 3283 = 205 yards per game TD's: 13 INT's: 15 TD:INT ratio: .87:1 Sacks: 38 Summary, in 32 games our QB's have passed for only 24 TD's total (unbelievably pathetic), 29 INT's (awful), have a TD:INT ratio less than 1:1 at .83:1, average ONLY 191.16 yards per game (incredibly pathetic) and have been sacked 64 times (or twice a game, not terrible, but not very good). Also, during that span, Trent has 5 LOST fumbles and JP has 6 LOST fumbles for another 11 turnovers...so TD to turnover ratio plummets to .60:1 when you factor that in...(horrendous) How is DJ supposed to win when in the last 32 games his QB's passed pathetically for: 1. ONLY 24 TD's 2. ONLY 191 yards per game 3. Turned the ball over 40 times with 29 INT's 4. Have TD:INT ratio of a pathetic .83:1 5. Have been sacked 64 times Seriously? How? I know someone is going to argue that the coaching scheme was too predicatable and simple...well what the h*ll do you expect them to do with the passing scheme when the QB's are performing so poorly? Make it more complicated? Everytime they start showing confidence in the QB's and expand, they let the staff down and regress...therefore the scheme stays simple... So, please expalin to me how that HORRIBLE production is less of a factor than our sack total or our coaching staff... The fact we won 7 games both years is a MIRACLE when you also factor in the massive injuries in 2007 and the critical losses of Crowell and Schobel this year as well as the injuries to other players...Even if we had no injuries, winning 7 games either year with this pathetic QB production is still a miracle. Now for you Trent supporters...read carefully...THIS IS NOT A DISCUSSION OF WHAT TRENT WILL BE ONE DAY, ITS A DISCUSSION OF WHAT OUR BIGGEST PROBLEM WAS IN 2007 AND 2008. Potential has ZERO relevance when analyzing actual play on the field as potential is based on something that HAS NOT HAPPENED YET...and this discussion is on what has already happened.
Sisyphean Bills Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 This post doesnt even make sense... First off...St Louis and AZ were doormats in this league until um, who? Kurt Warner... Dick Vermeil came in and turned the organization inside out.Patriots were a doormat in this league until um, who? Bledsoe Bill Parcells came to town, new ownership, and they got Bill Belichick to come back.Green Bay had been a long time door mat to barely average team in the mordern era until um who? Farve Mike Holmgren and Ron Wolf came to town. Holmgren taught Favre how to be a QB and to play in the WCO.What did Miami do last year? Squeeked out 1 win...what happened this year? They brought in Pennington and won the division behind his solid play that saw him win comeback player of the year.Are you serious? The only reason Miami won last year was Pennington?! So, football is an individual sport where success is defined simply by who is under center. Good. Drew Brees is a great QB, and how's that working out for ya? Yes, having a good QB is a good thing. But there are numerous counterexamples of teams that did very well with less than exceptional QBing and teams that failed in spite of great QBing (like Marino and Kelly), so your correlation has vanished before you started say nothing of your previously disproven causality.
Gordio Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 Dick Vermeil came in and turned the organization inside out.Bill Parcells came to town, new ownership, and they got Bill Belichick to come back.Mike Holmgren and Ron Wolf came to town. Holmgren taught Favre how to be a QB and to play in the WCO.Are you serious? The only reason Miami won last year was Pennington?! So, football is an individual sport where success is defined simply by who is under center. Good. Drew Brees is a great QB, and how's that working out for ya? It might not be an individual sport, but the QB position is a hell of alot more important then you & a few other posters on this board would like to have everybody believe. BTW, Dree Brees did lead the Saints to their only appearance in the NFC championship game a few years back.
Alphadawg7 Posted February 12, 2009 Author Posted February 12, 2009 It might not be an individual sport, but the QB position is a hell of alot more important then you & a few other posters on this board would like to have everybody believe. BTW, Dree Brees did lead the Saints to their only appearance in the NFC championship game a few years back. Exactly...funny thing was if JP had QB'd most of those games instead of Trent, they would all be trying to hang JP and blaming the QB as everyone did, even though JP's 2006 season is better than anything Trent has done thus far...
Alphadawg7 Posted February 12, 2009 Author Posted February 12, 2009 Dick Vermeil came in and turned the organization inside out.Bill Parcells came to town, new ownership, and they got Bill Belichick to come back.Mike Holmgren and Ron Wolf came to town. Holmgren taught Favre how to be a QB and to play in the WCO.Are you serious? The only reason Miami won last year was Pennington?! So, football is an individual sport where success is defined simply by who is under center. Good. Drew Brees is a great QB, and how's that working out for ya? Yes, having a good QB is a good thing. But there are numerous counterexamples of teams that did very well with less than exceptional QBing and teams that failed in spite of great QBing (like Marino and Kelly), so your correlation has vanished before you started say nothing of your previously disproven causality. LMAO...ok, so Farve would have stunk without Holmgren...and Vermiel is why the rams won...lol... geezus...this is just getting hysterically bizarre... Is that you Joaquin Phoenix?
Magox Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 LMAO...ok, so Farve would have stunk without Holmgren...and Vermiel is why the rams won...lol... geezus...this is just getting hysterically bizarre... Is that you Joaquin Phoenix? You are combative, argumentative and you believe that you have to prove your point that your right every single time and if people don't agree with you, then you pout and argue some more. I think your popularity rating in here is just as impressive as G.W Bush
The Senator Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 You are combative, argumentative and you believe that you have to prove your point that your right every single time and if people don't agree with you, then you pout and argue some more. I think your popularity rating in here is just as impressive as G.W Bush that's 'cause he's 12. good post, though...LMAO...hahaha
Heels20X6 Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 LMAO...ok, so Farve would have stunk without Holmgren...and Vermiel is why the rams won...lol... geezus...this is just getting hysterically bizarre... Is that you Joaquin Phoenix? The sheer idiocy of everything you post would make a much better documentary than the one they are doing about Joaquin... We can call it: "The Moron Who Spends His Entire Day on a Message Board Trying to Convince People That There Is Only One Legitimate Factor in a Football Game - QB Play. Too bad Everyone Stopped Listening to him after Post# 3" The title is a little long, but it seems to be testing well with our intended demographic.
thebug Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 Exactly...funny thing was if JP had QB'd most of those games instead of Trent, they would all be trying to hang JP and blaming the QB as everyone did, even though JP's 2006 season is better than anything Trent has done thus far... So the truth finally comes out.
timba Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 But that is simply not true of the bills teams last year. Go actually watch the games. Our qbs in most of the games had plenty of time to throw the ball last year. The poor qb play last year & Dick Jauron where the 2 biggest reasons the bills did not get into the playoffs last year. I did watch the games, and it was the lack of consistency that killed us. That includes the O-Line, it was anybody's guess who would miss a block on the next play. They did have their stretches where they looked solid, but most of the games? who are you trying to fool? Our 'pro bowl' tackle gave up something like 11 sacks this year and he's supposed to be our best lineman. I'm not trying to defend the QB play and say there is no fault on them, the Cleveland game gave us all plenty evidence there is work to be done. I am saying that if there were some guys that the QB could actually rely on, we could really see what we've got. That is the very reason that the loss of Josh Reed was so big - Trent lost the guy he could rely on.
BillsVet Posted February 12, 2009 Posted February 12, 2009 The problem with this assessment is most of the examples he gives he is comparing the qbs in their prime to same guys in the tail end of the careers. Comparing a young healthy culpepper in Minn to the old has been gimp that played in detroit, a mid 90s brett favre to the washed up version who played in NY & a young Jeff garcia in SF to the Jeff Garcia that played in Tampa. Ask a Green Bay Packer fan who was the most important player on that Super Bowl team & ask a NYJ fan what was the single most thing that held the Jets back this year. I bet 9 out of 10 fans say Brett Favre in both scenerios. Great post...excellent assessment.
Recommended Posts