Kelly the Dog Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 He had better #s than Palmer last year. While I didn't see all of the entire games, I just happened to watch a lot of Bengal games last year because of fantasy players and IMO he sucked. The only thing he did well was run, and it's not as though he was Mike Vick running either. Even in his improved games, he was not very good at all. If he has to start, I think we are screwed for the season.
Guest dog14787 Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 He pretty much sucked in those three games, too. I'll take your word for it, but he didn't suck bad enough to lose. (QB rating averaged above 90 in Fitz's last three wins)
bladiebla Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 But Hamdan can play. He was MVP of NFL Europa in like 2005 I think it was. That's my cue isn't it? You are correct however, Hamdan was 2005 NFL Europe MVP, despite playing only 7 games that year (broke his ankle and bruiised the other one) no QB's even got close to his yardage/td number. Kurt Warner and Brad Johnson also both were NFL Eruropa MVP and both went on to win Super Bowls. Not saying that Hamdan would too, but just saying that's not something that should be discounted too much. Plus, Hamdan owns the NFL Europe record book, passed for a perfect rating during one game, and more importantly looked a hell of a lot better then Warner, Shaun Hill and Jake Delhomme to name a few whilst playing for the Amsterdam Admirals. Personally he's my alltime Admirals quarterback and most if not all former Amsterdam Admirals fans feel that way. I'm hoping he gets some real playing time in pre season too when he can pass and not just hand off all the time. He was granted most of the playtime in the #4 pre-season game last year and looked solid. He was checking down a lot though, but was moving the ball consistently. They got into FG range once (missed I FG I believe) and were in scoring position at least 3 times (all three times the running back fumbled the ball and loss it). He was under heavy pressure throughout most of the game, and even got a safety against (the safety was whistled in, before he was actually touched, even so in the whistle he did dump off the ball for what would have been a major completion). Then late 3rd or early 4th he was sacked hard from his blindside and had to leave the game with a concussion. All in all I thought he was looking good, albleit a bit rusty but more importantly he was showing his vision and decission making quite well, he suffered from poor performances of 1 receiver (dropped about 6 out of 7 passes of which one was overthrown a little) and 1 runningback, still he was moving the ball. Some receivers seemed to struggle a bit to hold onto the ball (Hamdan throws extremly hard), Steve Johnson was great however. I could see the Hamdan I know, the scoreboard not sadly.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 I'll take your word for it, but he didn't suck bad enough to lose. True. Although I will say that if he played the way he did in those three games, we may be lucky to go 4-12.
bladiebla Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Absolutely no where (except right here right now) have I read that Hamden is looking good. In fact, there have been several writings to the effect of how well Fitzpatrick has looked. So... dream on. If Hamden is #2, then God help the Bills. At least Fitz has considerable NFL game experience. Hamden couldn't even beat out a certain UFL QB to be #2. Furthermore, the Bills staff thought so much of Hamden that they went out and spent a couple million bucks on Fitz. Now, that was really stupid, don't you think? In reality... until he proves otherwise, Edwards (aka "check down Charlie") is really good #2. So far, he hasn't been able to make me forget Kemp, Ferguson, or Kelly. Chris Brown has been reporting that Hamdan was doing well on more the one occassion during the otas and trainingcamp; also just watch the highlight vids and see Hamdan steal the play of the day more then once versus only once by Fitzpatrick. Buffalorumblings have been reporting very negatively on him but very positive on D. Bell whilst other sources are not that hot on D. Bell. In the end it's indeed in the eye of the beholder. Fitzpatrick has indeed been growing to a point where he looked good, his last couple of practises have been so so again though. Saying Hamdan couldnt beat out JP is bull sh--. Hamdan was promoted #2 over JP for the last couple of games of last season and would have started had Trent not returned. NFL is money and politics, no way Hamdan would have been #2 behind the former 1st round draft pick that still had the fans divided, no matter how good. Game experience is the reason they brought in Fitzpatrick, Hamdan is not without experience either though given his NFL Europe background, however that dates back to 2006 and Fitzpatrick was putting in time last year. For now I'm saying Hamdan is a really good #3 untill we've seen more on the real NFL level which I doubt will really happen. He does seem to fill an important role with the support in preperation and the scout team though.
dbringer Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 He pretty much sucked in those three games, too. I'll take three wins in three games any time. If I remember last year correctly, after the Seattle game we struggled against Jacksonville, Oakland (!), and St. Louis (!). Nobody was complaining too much, though.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 QB rating averaged over 90 in the last three.( not to shabby) Either side can use stats I guess to show what they want. To me, when I watched him, he was terrible. In what was probably his best game of the three, he had a 90 rating or so against the Redskins and it was almost all because he threw one swing pass to Cedric Benson that I could have made that Benson took 79 yards for a TD. The rest of the game he pretty much sucked outside of a a couple decent short throws and a couple nice scrambles (The other TD drive came after the recovered a fumble in Redskin territory, and he didnt throw one pass on it, but he had a nice 15 or so yard scramble). In another win, his rating was 110. In that game he threw for 55 yards total (including one TD) and Benson ran for 170+ and the Browns were shut out.
Guest dog14787 Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Either side can use stats I guess to show what they want. To me, when I watched him, he was terrible. In what was probably his best game of the three, he had a 90 rating or so against the Redskins and it was almost all because he threw one swing pass to Cedric Benson that I could have made that Benson took 79 yards for a TD. The rest of the game he pretty much sucked outside of a a couple decent short throws and a couple nice scrambles (The other TD drive came after the recovered a fumble in Redskin territory, and he didnt throw one pass on it, but he had a nice 15 or so yard scramble). In another win, his rating was 110. In that game he threw for 55 yards total (including one TD) and Benson ran for 170+ and the Browns were shut out. Considering our divisional opponents alone can crush our chances of reaching the playoffs I'm inclined to agree with you. Without TE for an extended period of time our playoff chances are probably slim to none.
C.Biscuit97 Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 While I didn't see all of the entire games, I just happened to watch a lot of Bengal games last year because of fantasy players and IMO he sucked. The only thing he did well was run, and it's not as though he was Mike Vick running either. Even in his improved games, he was not very good at all. If he has to start, I think we are screwed for the season. So the fact that Palmer sucked slightly worse than Fitz did means nothign to you? Because to me, it means a lot of the Bengals issues were deeper than QB. Their oline had a ton of injuries and was maybe the worst group in the NFL. The running bakcs got so injuried and ineffective they had to sign bust Benson drunk off his boat. Fitz isn't an NFL starter but he is a very solid backup and fill in for a few games.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 I'll take three wins in three games any time. If I remember last year correctly, after the Seattle game we struggled against Jacksonville, Oakland (!), and St. Louis (!). Nobody was complaining too much, though. So, what are you saying, that because his team won three games in a row he's a good quarterback after his team was 1-7-1 with him in the previous eight? Are you saying he's a good quarterback because his lousy play in those wins was actually good play? Are you saying you'll totally disregard the crappy play in games he lost but completely accept the crappy play in games he won, so he's actually a 3-0 kind of QB rather than a 1-7-1 kind of QB? Are you saying that the Bills can afford below average QB play because the rest of our team is dominant and we'll be able to beat the toughest schedule in the league like Fitz was at the helm against the Redskins, Browns, and Chiefs who were probably three of the four worst teams in the league at that point in the season? I'm not sure what you're saying outside of three wins are better than three losses, and given the choice, you'll take the three wins.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 So the fact that Palmer sucked slightly worse than Fitz did means nothign to you? Because to me, it means a lot of the Bengals issues were deeper than QB. Their oline had a ton of injuries and was maybe the worst group in the NFL. The running bakcs got so injuried and ineffective they had to sign bust Benson drunk off his boat. Fitz isn't an NFL starter but he is a very solid backup and fill in for a few games. Actually I am saying that I watched Palmer play with a crappy team and I watched Fitz play with a crappy team and Fitz's play resembled the team. I've seen Palmer play excellent on that crappy team as well as when they were decent. I think he is still hurt and gun shy and not really sure what's wrong with him, but he still looked like a starting NFL quarterback to me. Fitz looks like a guy you want on your bench to come in a play a series or a quarter or a half here or there and not lose the game for you, not a guy you can rely on for half a season if your starter goes down.
The Senator Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Still can't figure out why the Bills didn't pursue... Graham Harrell
angrygnome Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Still can't figure out why the Bills didn't pursue... Graham Harrell I'll help you out on this one Senator. "Boy, that kid sure looks coached-up real good..."
The Senator Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 I'll help you out on this one Senator. You're the best - thanks! "Boy, that kid sure looks coached-up real good..." That's 'cause his coach was... Mike Leach
Guest dog14787 Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Still can't figure out why the Bills didn't pursue... Graham Harrell I'm not sure why this fella isn't on an NFL roster , but he should be because the fella really seems to see the football field well and plays great under pressure from what I just watched. I realize its a highlight film of him, but come on, this guy can play.
Turn Down For Watkins Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 He's definitly better than JP, which is a improvement (Eventhough I could prob. play better than JP as well). I think that he is prob. a average #2 QB which is fine as long as Trent doesn't go down
berndogg Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 So the fact that Palmer sucked slightly worse than Fitz did means nothign to you? Because to me, it means a lot of the Bengals issues were deeper than QB. Their oline had a ton of injuries and was maybe the worst group in the NFL. The running bakcs got so injuried and ineffective they had to sign bust Benson drunk off his boat. Fitz isn't an NFL starter but he is a very solid backup and fill in for a few games. Fitzpatrick is terrible, I ended up watching several bengals games last year because they were important for gambling/fantasy purposes and the guy is a joke. You can show me every stat in the world and it won't change what my eyes saw, I'd rather have J.P. or Grossman. I'm not a pessimist as a bills fan, but honestly, if you asked me last year at the end of the season who the worst qb I saw play was it would have been orlovsky with fitzpatrick as a close second, those are the two guys that really stood out as not belonging in an NFL game. I'm petrified of Edwards getting injured this year. In football way more-so than any other sport stats can be manipulated in 1000 different ways, Palmer is good, fitzpatrick is not.
The Senator Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 I'm not sure why this fella isn't on an NFL roster , but he should be because the fella really seems to see the football field well and plays great under pressure from what I just watched. I realize its a highlight film of him, but come on, this guy can play. Ditto, dog. Beside Leach and Brandon Carter, he's the guy from TT I'd most like to see in Bills blue. Heisman candidate, led the NCAA in passing yardage, holds the NCAA record for touchdown passes. Got a strong arm, is pinpoint accurate, incredibly bright, reads the field well, gets rid of the ball in about 2 seconds, can take a hit. Can't for the life of me figure out why he wasn't drafted, or signed as a UDFA after Cleveland released him. I think he could be an elite QB in the NFL - hope he gets a chance.
Guest dog14787 Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Ditto, dog. Beside Leach and Brandon Carter, he's the guy from TT I'd most like to see in Bills blue. Heisman candidate, led the NCAA in passing yardage, holds the NCAA record for touchdown passes. Got a strong arm, is pinpoint accurate, incredibly bright, reads the field well, gets rid of the ball in about 2 seconds, can take a hit. Can't for the life of me figure out why he wasn't drafted, or signed as a UDFA after Cleveland released him. I think he could be an elite QB in the NFL - hope he gets a chance. Graham Harrell could easily take over the two spot here so I don't get it. Senator why don't you ask Tim Graham the same question on the Graham thread. Whats not to like about him, he even resembles Tom Brady, geeeesh
The Senator Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Graham Harrell could easily take over the two spot here so I don't get it. Senator why don't you ask Tim Graham the same question on the Graham thread. Whats not to like about him, he even resembles Tom Brady, geeeesh Actually, dog, I think he could easily take over the #1 spot here - plus he's got no Dakota Fanning crush. He may even be more talented than Brady* - whom he resembles in appearance only. (*Brady's an unctuous douchebag, while Harrell's a very like-able, modest kid.) I know he signed a 2-year deal up in Saskatchewan - it'll be interesting to see how he does in the CFL. I'm guessing he'll do well, what with the wider field and the greater emphasis on the passing game. They tend to 'spread' it and throw a lot up there - obviously things that Harrell does well. Since he signed with them so late, we probably won't see much of him until next season, but one thing's for sure - we'll find out if he can play in the cold! You think Tim Graham could shed some light on why the Bills completely passed him over? Maybe I'll ask him, then. I really thought the 'Ask Tim Graham' thread was for things like household tips - you know, like "Hey Tim - what's the best way to get acrylic paint off of metal siding?", or "Hey Tim - how do you get ink stains off a silk tie?"
Recommended Posts