Best QBs available in FA: Rex Grossman and J.P. Losman

[BuffaloBill]

But what are the odds that the NFL will ever see that level of talent assembled on one team again?

 

The Bills are likely to match it again ... just as they have for the past nine years

[Mr. WEO]

Good Christ your little new england*-loving skull is awfully dense.

 

1. Since when does throwing few passing attempts equate to the coaching staff asking him to as little as possible? The Bills had big leads in both those games, so therefore had no need to pass the ball. And if the running game is working, which it was in both of those games, why continue passing? I dont give a crap who your QB is, if you have 3 score lead in the second half, you run the ball. Only your patriots* continually pass when they have a big lead.

 

2. Lets assume for a second that your asinine theory holds water (which in reality it doesn't). How is 200 yards and 3 TDs asking the QB to do as little as possible?

 

3. This discussion is about JP Losman in 2006, and has nothing to do with Trent Edwards. Edwards was still in college.

 

4. The fact remains that JP played well in the second half of 2006 (as evidenced by him being the NFLs 11th or 12th rated passer that season). He didn't follow up in 2007 or 2008 and looked very bad. But that does not take away that after 2006, there was a belief by a sizeable number of people, including many around the NFL, that JP had turned the corner and the light had turned on for him.

 

5. You simply repeating that JP had a bad 2006 doesn't magically make it true. The numbers don't lie. Those who watched the games don't lie either. But keep on thinking that "he finished bad" and that the team surrounding him played no role in going 2-3 over the last 5. (its actually 2-2, because the week 17 finale was a joke of a game after we'd been eliminated) And keep on ignoring that the Bills had gone 5-2 in the 7 games prior to the 2 game skid and pretending that had nothing to do with Losman's improved play (a direct result of the OL reshuffling).

 

6. You have shown an extreme propensity to defend anything and everything pats* related, including tom brady*, rodney harrison*, vince wilfork*, and bill belicheat*. That is what makes you a pats* fan.

 

Many here have clearly stated that if the coaches had only stuck to a plan that played to JPL's "strengths" he would still be around. They clearly meant his strengths as a passer--you know throwing the long ball, big air attack. I disagree that this was his strong suit. It is a myth created by guys here who were burned by this waste of a pick that many accurately recognized as such years ago.

 

Look, all I'm saying is that he didn't play well in December. If you want to ignore the 3 losses or explain them away with such solid, stat-based arguments as "bad calls" and (my favorite--you made a whole game disappear!) "Game 17 was a joke because they were already eliminated", well go rigth ahead. I understand why you need to do this.

 

Can you provide a link to the "many" people around the NFL who thought JP had "turned the corner"? Obviously none of them work at 1 Bills Drive. As soon as he was injured the next year, it was pretty much over, as far as they were concerned.

 

I "defended" Brady? From what? Harrison?? As for Bellichick, I didn't defend his breaking the rule against video taping opposing team's signals. I simply pointed out that stealing signals is cheating and has been done by teams since teams decided to broadcast their signals for all to see. Also, I pointed out that Bellichick didn't invent video taping and that it has been done for decades. I pointed out that the whole Matt Walsh saga was a big bust and that he has faded away after his 15 minutes of fame was up. I also mentioned the obvious--that after they stopped such cheating, they had a record setting year. I also pointed out that there was no cry of outrage by the owners of other teams who were cheated out of SB wins, so one can conclude they weren't that upset about the whole event.

 

You see, I didn't make any of this stuff up. It is all public knowledge. Yet you still can't believe it---and that therefore I must be a Pats fan for even mentioning these things. The world is not flat, Your Holiness. It's been in all the papers.

 

I went to my first Bills game 18 years ago, against the Bears, when I moved back upstate. I try to go when my job (7 days a week) allows. Those were good times as you recall. So the past ten years have been a major disappointment--maybe I was spoiled getting more into it back then. But I'm still here, just like you. But I don't feel the need to defend each questionable decision by the FO or support such moves long after they've proven foolish. I don't feel compelled to defend poor behavior by a Bills player just because he is (now) a Bills player. And I don't think pointing out something which is obvious about another team--even a rival-- makes me a bad Bills fan, nor do I think that calling another team or a player "gay" is really much of an intelligent argument.

 

That's how you and I are different.

[Ramius]

Many here have clearly stated that if the coaches had only stuck to a plan that played to JPL's "strengths" he would still be around. They clearly meant his strengths as a passer--you know throwing the long ball, big air attack. I disagree that this was his strong suit. It is a myth created by guys here who were burned by this waste of a pick that many accurately recognized as such years ago.

 

Look, all I'm saying is that he didn't play well in December. If you want to ignore the 3 losses or explain them away with such solid, stat-based arguments as "bad calls" and (my favorite--you made a whole game disappear!) "Game 17 was a joke because they were already eliminated", well go rigth ahead. I understand why you need to do this.

 

Can you provide a link to the "many" people around the NFL who thought JP had "turned the corner"? Obviously none of them work at 1 Bills Drive. As soon as he was injured the next year, it was pretty much over, as far as they were concerned.

 

I "defended" Brady? From what? Harrison?? As for Bellichick, I didn't defend his breaking the rule against video taping opposing team's signals. I simply pointed out that stealing signals is cheating and has been done by teams since teams decided to broadcast their signals for all to see. Also, I pointed out that Bellichick didn't invent video taping and that it has been done for decades. I pointed out that the whole Matt Walsh saga was a big bust and that he has faded away after his 15 minutes of fame was up. I also mentioned the obvious--that after they stopped such cheating, they had a record setting year. I also pointed out that there was no cry of outrage by the owners of other teams who were cheated out of SB wins, so one can conclude they weren't that upset about the whole event.

 

You see, I didn't make any of this stuff up. It is all public knowledge. Yet you still can't believe it---and that therefore I must be a Pats fan for even mentioning these things. The world is not flat, Your Holiness. It's been in all the papers.

 

I went to my first Bills game 18 years ago, against the Bears, when I moved back upstate. I try to go when my job (7 days a week) allows. Those were good times as you recall. So the past ten years have been a major disappointment--maybe I was spoiled getting more into it back then. But I'm still here, just like you. But I don't feel the need to defend each questionable decision by the FO or support such moves long after they've proven foolish. I don't feel compelled to defend poor behavior by a Bills player just because he is (now) a Bills player. And I don't think pointing out something which is obvious about another team--even a rival-- makes me a bad Bills fan, nor do I think that calling another team or a player "gay" is really much of an intelligent argument.

 

That's how you and I are different.

 

Losman had a good second half of 2006. A bad game here and there doesn't spoil the overall production from him.

 

He did not finish bad. He won 2 of the final 4 games, and played good in both of those games. My point was that just like the wins aren't all because of him, neither are the losses (as you are making it out to be).

 

Going into 2007, lots thought the light had started to go on for Losman, due to his much improved performance in the second half of 2006.

 

The Bills did not play to Losman's strengths in 2007. That was a factor in his failures (not the only one).

 

The pats* cheated, and no, other teams do not cheat like the pats* have for 7-8 years. If they had they'd have been punished. Filming a super bowl walkthrough also qualifies as cheating, no matter how much the commish tries to sweep everything under the rug.

 

tom brady likes to sleep with men. Sure i may be a 5 year old for saying it, but the only people who get defensive about it are pats* fans.

 

i dont care when your first game was. you've been on the board for only a few months and have shown an extreme propensity to defend everything patriots* related. That sends up red flags in anyone's book.

 

You've also shown a propensity to twist and distort facts (lynch). there should no longer be a question of why you have no credibility.

[Bill from NYC]

Losman had a good second half of 2006. A bad game here and there doesn't spoil the overall production from him.

 

He did not finish bad. He won 2 of the final 4 games, and played good in both of those games. My point was that just like the wins aren't all because of him, neither are the losses (as you are making it out to be).

 

Going into 2007, lots thought the light had started to go on for Losman, due to his much improved performance in the second half of 2006.

 

The Bills did not play to Losman's strengths in 2007. That was a factor in his failures (not the only one).

 

The pats* cheated, and no, other teams do not cheat like the pats* have for 7-8 years. If they had they'd have been punished. Filming a super bowl walkthrough also qualifies as cheating, no matter how much the commish tries to sweep everything under the rug.

 

tom brady likes to sleep with men. Sure i may be a 5 year old for saying it, but the only people who get defensive about it are pats* fans.

 

i dont care when your first game was. you've been on the board for only a few months and have shown an extreme propensity to defend everything patriots* related. That sends up red flags in anyone's book.

 

You've also shown a propensity to twist and distort facts (lynch). there should no longer be a question of why you have no credibility.

 

At some point it is no accident that the Bills lost games that Losman started. He had plenty of coaches and plenty of time, but he kept losing.

[Ramius]

At some point it is no accident that the Bills lost games that Losman started. He had plenty of coaches and plenty of time, but he kept losing.

 

I'm not excusing his piss poor play in '07 and '08 bill. I'm talking about 2006, when he did play well.

 

With Losman, being put in a position to succeed and the ability to succeed aren't mutually exclusive. He can both suck and not have been developed properly. I'm not saying that if he was put in a position to succeed that he necessarily would have.

[Mr. WEO]

Going into 2007, lots thought the light had started to go on for Losman, due to his much improved performance in the second half of 2006.

 

Yes, you said this already. Show me "lots". Again, his coaching staff obviously didn't think so. And as even you would have to concede (if you were honest with yourself) that they were right.

 

The Bills did not play to Losman's strengths in 2007. That was a factor in his failures (not the only one).

 

What are his strengths?

 

The pats* cheated, and no, other teams do not cheat like the pats* have for 7-8 years. If they had they'd have been punished. Filming a super bowl walkthrough also qualifies as cheating, no matter how much the commish tries to sweep everything under the rug.

 

I don't know who else, other than JJ (and perhaps those he implicated), did what the Pats did over the past years under BB. Unless you believe that the guilty always get caught (even you can't really go with that one, can you?).... The League did send a memo to all teams in offseason before 2007 season. Why didn't they just pull the Pats aside and warn them? Oh, that's right, your whole theory rests on the premise that the Commish (who wasn't the commish when the Pats won 3 SBs and when rumors of foul play already existed) favors the Pats for reasons that you cannot explain.

 

You say I have a credibility problem, and then you say something like "the Pats filmed the SB walkthrough of the Rams". There was no film. Matt Walsh admitted this. The story in the Herald was retracted by the paper in shame. It never happened and you know this. Yet you still say it anyway. But me pointing this out makes me a "pats fan".

 

Why would you do this to yourself?

 

Or this?:

tom brady likes to sleep with men. Sure i may be a 5 year old for saying it, but the only people who get defensive about it are pats* fans.

 

I don't get defensive about what you say about Brady. What do I care? The guy throws away beautiful women for more beautiful women. And marries a super wealthy super model. It is just a stupid thing to say and I'm curious as to what benefit you get from saying something so idiotic? Does it help you feel better about yourself? I'm fascinated by this.

 

 

i dont care when your first game was. you've been on the board for only a few months and have shown an extreme propensity to defend everything patriots* related. That sends up red flags in anyone's book.

 

I already responded to this in my above post (you ignored it). I know some TSW lifers get uppity about posters who haven't been here too long (is this the kind of informed exchange we've been missing ??). Do you think if I had been here for a few years, I would find your responses any less impressive?

[Flbillsfan#1]

Yes, you said this already. Show me "lots". Again, his coaching staff obviously didn't think so. And as even you would have to concede (if you were honest with yourself) that they were right.

 

 

 

What are his strengths?

 

 

 

I don't know who else, other than JJ (and perhaps those he implicated), did what the Pats did over the past years under BB. Unless you believe that the guilty always get caught (even you can't really go with that one, can you?).... The League did send a memo to all teams in offseason before 2007 season. Why didn't they just pull the Pats aside and warn them? Oh, that's right, your whole theory rests on the premise that the Commish (who wasn't the commish when the Pats won 3 SBs and when rumors of foul play already existed) favors the Pats for reasons that you cannot explain.

 

You say I have a credibility problem, and then you say something like "the Pats filmed the SB walkthrough of the Rams". There was no film. Matt Walsh admitted this. The story in the Herald was retracted by the paper in shame. It never happened and you know this. Yet you still say it anyway. But me pointing this out makes me a "pats fan".

 

Why would you do this to yourself?

 

Or this?:

 

 

I don't get defensive about what you say about Brady. What do I care? The guy throws away beautiful women for more beautiful women. And marries a super wealthy super model. It is just a stupid thing to say and I'm curious as to what benefit you get from saying something so idiotic? Does it help you feel better about yourself? I'm fascinated by this.

 

 

 

 

I already responded to this in my above post (you ignored it). I know some TSW lifers get uppity about posters who haven't been here too long (is this the kind of informed exchange we've been missing ??). Do you think if I had been here for a few years, I would find your responses any less impressive?

I can respect fans from other teams that identify themselves as such that come to our board to chat. I have NO RESPECT for a DIPSPIT that comes here trying to pass himself off as one of us when he is OBVIOUSLY a fan of the Pats* It would not surprise me if you were a Bills fan in 1990, most Pats* fans are just like you, BANDWAGON fans.

[SABURZFAN]

Sabz's reliability is same range as SKOOBY's - low to none except when he is parroting someone else.

 

 

 

go stick your head back in your ass and take two deep breaths. your feet are getting wrinkled from your saliva.

[SABURZFAN]

Can't get through. Is this a joke?

 

 

not at all. but i see you're behind in the times over here.

 

http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showtopic=90530

[Mr. WEO]

I can respect fans from other teams that identify themselves as such that come to our board to chat. I have NO RESPECT for a DIPSPIT that comes here trying to pass himself off as one of us when he is OBVIOUSLY a fan of the Pats* It would not surprise me if you were a Bills fan in 1990, most Pats* fans are just like you, BANDWAGON fans.

 

Reread the above, son. You can continue to flail away with the pats fan stuff, too.

 

You , JPFan#1, are a bit of a joke here. Your boy set us back 3 years and yet you STILL pine for him.

 

You take cheap shots at Edwards any chance you can. You're no Bills fan.

[Flbillsfan#1]

Reread the above, son. You can continue to flail away with the pats fan stuff, too.

 

You , JPFan#1, are a bit of a joke here. Your boy set us back 3 years and yet you STILL pine for him.

 

You take cheap shots at Edwards any chance you can. You're no Bills fan.

Just go back to your Pats* board idiot.

[Mr. WEO]

Just go back to your Pats* board idiot.

You at the peak of your powers.

 

So sad.

[Flbillsfan#1]

You at the peak of your powers.

 

So sad.

It is sad to see a BANDWAGON Pats* fan TRY to pass himself off as a Bills fan.

[Ramius]

It is sad to see a BANDWAGON Pats* fan TRY to pass himself off as a Bills fan.

 

What will be funnier is watching him try to explain how a QB with an 86.0 rating is "awesome" and a QB with an 84.9 rating "sucks and had a bad year."

[Albany,n.y.]

What will be funnier is watching him try to explain how a QB with an 86.0 rating is "awesome" and a QB with an 84.9 rating "sucks and had a bad year."

The way QB ratings are made, not including key pocket awareness things like sacks, it is quite possible for a QB with a rating of 86.0 to have a great season while a QB with an 84.9 rating could truly suck.

Lets look at 3 QBs from the 1986 season:

 

JP Losman had the 84.9 rating was sacked 47 times and lost 7 fumbles (13 total), the Bills were 7-9 & one season later he was the backup, 3 years later he's out of the NFL, headed for a league with 4 teams that has never played a game yet.

 

David Carr had an 82.1 rating, got sacked 41 times and lost 7 fumbles (12 total), the Texans were 6-10 & Carr GOT WAIVED after the season. 3 years later the guy is a career backup and was let go 2 times in 2 years (after 1986 & 1987)

 

Tom Brady had an 87.9 rating, got sacked 26 times and lost 4 fumbles (12 total), the Patriots were 12-4, came within one half of going to the Super Bowl & the next season Brady went 16-0 & was the league's MVP. 3 years later, he's a sure 1st ballot Hall of Famer and is the starting QB on one of the teams picked to go all the way.

 

So, 3 QBs with ratings within 5.8 points from top to bottom in the same season had very different seasons & very different careers. The guy with the 87.9 rating is a Hall of Famer-who was in the prime of his career when he was only 3 points higher than JP Losman a guy who lost his starting job in the next season & is now a signature away from exile in the UFL. The guy 2.8 points lower than Losman has been cut twice, including after the featured season and is viewed as nothing more than a backup.

 

QB RATINGS ARE GARBAGE! Fans who rely on QB ratings to judge anything are living in that trash pile.