Hanoverbills Posted April 13, 2009 Author Posted April 13, 2009 But he wasn't a first round pick. He was supposed to be developed slowly as we found out about Losman. Unfortunately, Losman got hurt and ultimately flopped and Edwards was threw into the fire. So for a 3rd round pick, he has be amazing. i really don't know many QBs that would succeed with our receiving core. Josh Reed is a great 33 receiver but a terrible #2 (one of the worst in the league). Robert Royal is a terrible starting TE and hurt the team more than he helped it. Year 3 is the year that most players make the jump or fall on their faces. I have to assume the Bills will get the line sorted out and we will be able to fully judge TE because he finally has weapons. Additionally, I think it is very important to get a tight end to be Trent's security blanket (I'm huge fan of trading down and getting Pettigrew). And if Trent decided to go to Cal, Michigan, or UCLA instead of Standford, he would have be a 1st rounder. http://www.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?Spo...amp;pr_key=1949 But because he was a moron and cared about more than just football, his growth was stunted because the Cardinal were miserbale. Before Tom Brady got Moss and Walker he didn't have great recievers .
Dawgg Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 BTW, the CENTER touches the ball the most, so maybe he should get the W-L record. Nice one. Anyone who knows football would agree that a QB's win loss record is "a" factor in evaluating his play. I'm having a deja vu moment... a few years ago, I was having a similar (drunken) argument with a "heavy-set" bearded man at Northstar... was that you???
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 Big Ben take alot of sacks and he has alot of turnovers Good point. But he is a rarity. He also makes alot of big plays. Additionally if he didn't play on a team with the #1 defense, he won't have sniffed the Super Bowl.
Mark Vader Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 You know if Trent had a vagina he'd be the first female QB in the NFL. Think about it. PTR
Dawgg Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 Wow. I'm agreeing with the Dawgg. But he's right. Some guys are better at making the plays that win games than others. When bledsoe got replace by Brady, Bledsoe was a far superior statistical QB than Brady. However, Brady managed the game and didn't take the negative plays (sacks/ turnovers) that DB did. And I apologize in advance for bringing him up, but that is the problem with Losman. He has all the tools but takes negative plays at the worst times. Edwards, while not possessing the athleticism of JP, is better at making the plays that win games. however, a valid concern of this is that Trent is too smart and careful. It may realize in him getting gun shy if he makes a mistake (the Cleveland game, though I was at the game and somehow missed every INT he threw). He needs to realize that making a bad paly happens and to have a short term memory. Hell just froze over. Well said.
thebug Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 Big Ben take alot of sacks and he has alot of turnovers You can say what you want about Big Ben, he can't hear you because his 2 SB rings are blocking his ears.
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 Before Tom Brady got Moss and Walker he didn't have great recievers . And he averaged less yards per pass attempt than Trent did this season. Brady won because of great decision-making and having a defensive mastermind as a coach. Of course as Brady got more talented, it showed him to be a hall of fame QB. Trent still has a long way to go.
Mark Vader Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 Nice one. Anyone who knows football would agree that a QB's win loss record is "a" factor in evaluating his play. I'm having a deja vu moment... a few years ago, I was having a similar (drunken) argument with a "heavy-set" bearded man at Northstar... was that you??? A heavy set bearded man? In San Francisco? That really narrows it down.
Hanoverbills Posted April 13, 2009 Author Posted April 13, 2009 Are you saying that Garcia is the one who has problems with Owens, and Owens has no ill feelings towards Garcia? I don't know everything that happened between these two guys, but considering the stupid things that Owens said about Garcia, I would'nt blame Garcia for hating Owens. I just quest that Garcia didn't like Owens, because of that. So there for he wouldn't want to play in Buffalo.
The Dean Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 Nice one. Anyone who knows football would agree that a QB's win loss record is "a" factor in evaluating his play. I'm having a deja vu moment... a few years ago, I was having a similar (drunken) argument a few years ago with a "heavy-set" bearded man at Northstar... was that you??? Anyone who really knows football would tell you QB's don't have W-L records. There's a good reason for that. But, if you want to argue that, in many cases, the TEAM'S W-L record is a reflection on the play of the QB, then I will agree. But, in many cases, it really isn't. Teams with great defenses, who run the ball more than they pass and do a great job of it, can win games despite the QB. Also, teams with poor coaching, average Ds, poor offensive line play, WRs who drop the ball, RBs that fumble...etc, can make a good QB look pretty bad. Archie Manning was a terrific QB who I don't think ever had a winning record. If you could judge the quality of a QB by the record of the team, you would be able to compare QBs across teams, quite easily. QB rating, completion percentage, passing yardage, etc, would all be unnecessary. Of course, you can't compare QBs' quality by their teams W-L record...can you? By that logic, Matt Cassal clearly a better QB than Carson Palmer, Philip Rivers, Drew Brees (to name a few) and so is Chad Pennington. And, of course I was that heavy set bearded man (or at least I probably was).
Hanoverbills Posted April 13, 2009 Author Posted April 13, 2009 You can say what you want about Big Ben, he can't hear you because his 2 SB rings are blocking his ears. I like big Ben. Not afraid to take chances.
The Dean Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 I like big Ben. Not afraid to take chances. I like Ben, too. He is the perfect QB for that system. I wish the Bills adopted a similar style, and had a QB like Ben. But, Ben isn't as good (relatively) as his rings and wins suggest, nor is he as mediocre as his stats suggest.
Alphadawg7 Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 And if Trent decided to go to Cal, Michigan, or UCLA instead of Standford, he would have be a 1st rounder. http://www.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?Spo...amp;pr_key=1949 But because he was a moron and cared about more than just football, his growth was stunted because the Cardinal were miserbale. hahahahaha, come on C. Biscuit...he wasnt a first round pick because he DIDNT win a game his senior year and never had a single healthy season...it had nothing to do with Stanford... In fact, if he went to say UCLA or some other big football school and did NOT win a game like he did at Stanford his senior year, then he would not have even been drafted...the fact he played at Stanford which isnt known as a football power house allowed him to be not only be drafted but be drafted in the 3rd round... A goose egg at a football powerhouse and he would have said bye bye to the draft
The Dean Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 hahahahaha, come on C. Biscuit...he wasnt a first round pick because he DIDNT win a game his senior year and never had a single healthy season...it had nothing to do with Stanford... You are suggesting Edwards was the ONLY reason Stanford sucked? Seriously?
Guest dog14787 Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 Anyone who really knows football would tell you QB's don't have W-L records. There's a good reason for that. But, if you want to argue that, in many cases, the TEAM'S W-L record is a reflection on the play of the QB, then I will agree. But, in many cases, it really isn't. Teams with great defenses, who run the ball more than they pass and do a great job of it, can win games despite the QB. Also, teams with poor coaching, average Ds, poor offensive line play, WRs who drop the ball, RBs that fumble...etc, can make a good QB look pretty bad. Archie Manning was a terrific QB who I don't think ever had a winning record. If you could judge the quality of a QB by the record of the team, you would be able to compare QBs across teams, quite easily. QB rating, completion percentage, passing yardage, etc, would all be unnecessary. Of course, you can't compare QBs' quality by their teams W-L record...can you? By that logic, Matt Cassal clearly a better QB than Carson Palmer, Philip Rivers, Drew Brees (to name a few) and so is Chad Pennington. And, of course I was that heavy set bearded man (or at least I probably was). The teams that win the Superbowl or go deep into the playoffs more often then not are normally lead by the best QB's in the league. I will admit I've seen some Gibbs coached Redskin teams that seemed to buck the system and of course you have the Ray Lewis lead defense of the Ravens. Its hard to do anything without a good starting QB in my opinion and Buffalo has done a pretty good job proving that over the last few years. If you had to pick one position that was the most important to the teams success who are you going to pick? Myself personally, its hard to convince me that good QB play doesn't make a huge difference if you want to go up against the Brady's or the Manning's of the NFL or to even have much success for that matter. Defenses help equalize one teams advantage over another when facing a superior offense which is directly related to the QB position.
H2o Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 All I can say is that Edwards is working out better for us right now than the selection of John Beck for the Dolphins
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 hahahahaha, come on C. Biscuit...he wasnt a first round pick because he DIDNT win a game his senior year and never had a single healthy season...it had nothing to do with Stanford... In fact, if he went to say UCLA or some other big football school and did NOT win a game like he did at Stanford his senior year, then he would not have even been drafted...the fact he played at Stanford which isnt known as a football power house allowed him to be not only be drafted but be drafted in the 3rd round... A goose egg at a football powerhouse and he would have said bye bye to the draft Yeah, this doesn't make sense to me. And if he went to UCLa or Michigan, they would have won games because he would have played with players who were actually drafted in the NFL.
lets_go_bills Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 If Trent Edwards was a first rd draft choice would you consider him to be a bust? I know people say that he has a winning record. Did you ever check the win and lost record of the teams that he won againts. He has a 12 and 11 record as a starter , but the teams that he won againts the last two years have a win and lost record of 57 wins and 135 lost. I'm glad he won those games, but he should've won those games. The way he played after that great start, scares me. I would feel better about our QB position if Leftwich would sign with us. Its a shame that Garcia hates Owens because he would've been the best QB for this team. QBs don't have WL records, teams do, so do coaches. Check it out in the stats section of NFL.com I'm with Dean on this. You win as a team, you lose as a team. Good football teams find ways to win, whether it's orchestrating a game winning drive, running out the clock, nailing a last second field goal, making a big stop on defense, or forcing a turnover. Don't believe me? Just ask Jay Cutler. He threw for 4,500 yards. He had a great O-Line and great receivers but no defense to rely on. Naturally, they finished 8-8. Mind you, having a good QB helps. A lot. But a QB needs a decent run game to counter balance the pass attack, he needs an O-Line to keep him on his feet and give him time to throw and he needs reliable receivers to run good routes, get open and make catches. Trent has only played two seasons of football, with only one full offseason and one full regular season as a starter. He's gonna get better and be the answer at QB. When we were 5-1 everyone was saying "he's the guy, he's the guy," and "we've found our QB," etc. He showed flashes, now if he can be more consistent, utilize his new weapons and have a reliable O-Line he will succeed.
PushthePile Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 Yeah, this doesn't make sense to me. And if he went to UCLa or Michigan, they would have won games because he would have played with players who were actually drafted in the NFL. ... or he doesn't play and you never know who he is.
bizell Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 All I can say is that Edwards is working out better for us right now than the selection of John Beck for the Dolphins i heartily agree.
Recommended Posts