mabden Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 I say start him again.. If he actually has a gamplan this kis could be good. And shut up to all you Edwards fans that still think he is good. Fitzpatrick is better than Edwards. And those stats would be better if t.o wouldnt of dropped balls. and if they gave that completion to evans.. I call BS on this. TO drops balls EVERY game. The Bills won because the Jets SUCK, not because FP is better than TE.
MRW Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 This is a pretty bad thing to take away from this game. People are overreacting to the "badness". Changing Trent Edwards for Fitzpatrick doesn't make this team any better in the end. Focus on where the fault lies: Jim Overdorf Tom Modrak John Guy They need to go and then we can worry about if *one* position needs to be changed. OK, I'll get right on that. Wait, how do I do that, exactly? Does discussing other aspects of the game somehow reduce my complete inability to cause a change in the front office?
Red Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 you guys are idiots. trent was 5-5. he would have played well against a blitzing team like this. the difference was new plays - ie the slant. Trent also was throwing often to Lee and TO early before he got hurt. its the play calling and schemes changing. fitz is not nearly as accurate, though it was a good deep ball that got overturned... TE is not great, hes avg at best. but he's the best bet we have right now. its not fitz, its not jeff garcia, its not brady quinn... C'mon, man! Go back to Tampa, New Orleans, and Cleveland. Even today he overthrew his deep balls. Edwards has been tentative in all of his decisions, hence the moniker 'Captain Checkdown'. He is not seeing the field properly. Whether that is due to lingering effects of an injury (he is not the same QB post-concussion), or lack of confidence in the O-line, or whatever...his execution is clearly not there. He is slow in his deep reads, and too quick to dump it off. Now, again I must stress that if this coaching staff feels that Fitzpatrick is #2, then he obviously is not starter material. It is hard to say that he did better; as the differences were subtle. If he came in and threw for 400 yards and 4 touchdowns, it would be easier. But he hit Evans and Owens and Reed with enough diversity to probably be the best receiving game of the year. I can't back it up with stats, and Fitz is not the answer, but it was nice to finally see the receivers become part of the game. And that HAS been lacking with TE at QB thus far.
Giaimo25 Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 This is a pretty bad thing to take away from this game. People are overreacting to the "badness". Changing Trent Edwards for Fitzpatrick doesn't make this team any better in the end. Focus on where the fault lies: Jim Overdorf Tom Modrak John Guy They need to go and then we can worry about if *one* position needs to be changed. I agree, but how is getting rid of these guys now going to help us win next week, or the week after, it wont. we needed to see fitz come in. he wasnt great, but he wasnt terrible by any means. hopefully this concussion cancels out the last one and trent can get back to throwing the ball to the WRs again. BUT if edwards feels that he has to now compete more for his job i think he will do just that. at least one can hope
Bills Fan888 Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 This is a pretty bad thing to take away from this game. People are overreacting to the "badness". Changing Trent Edwards for Fitzpatrick doesn't make this team any better in the end. Focus on where the fault lies: Jim Overdorf Tom Modrak John Guy They need to go and then we can worry about if *one* position needs to be changed. I fail to see how this will change the way the Bills play.
Force_Majeur Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Lot of dropped balls that could have made much more of a difference (TO). We ran slants, and had a more effective running attack. The guy is straight off the bench, and no doubt rusty. The D was on the field a lot less, and made great plays. Oh yeah, and we won. We're a better team with Fitz, period.
Hanoverbills Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Fitz threw to his WR today. I didn't think we had any on the team when Trent was at QB.Also Fitz can get out of a sack, Trent just gets killed. On the NFL network , they showed the replay of Evans T.D. And Dion Sanders said Evans has been open all year. I thought that was funny, because thats what we all been saying all year except Edward diehards. We wouldn't won this game if Edwards was starting . He wouldn't thrown to the Evans ,instead he would've thrown it to the runningback for a 3 yd gain. Fritz wasn't great today, but he got it to the recievers.
Aplusfool Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 you guys are idiots. trent was 5-5. he would have played well against a blitzing team like this. Really Most of the time I see Trent, he fails to even recognize the blitz, let alone hit the hot read. I recall a play against NO where they had an overload to one side and Trent totally failed to read it. The announcer even mentioned that in order to be successful in the NFL you need to at least recognize this type of blitz. Most teams will blitz Trent on third downs, how is he again on 3rd down passing ? As far as slants, they have been called before in every game. The QB at the time chooses a different path for his throw. The fact that Fitz threw the ball further then check down zone made the Jets not crowed the short stuff. To bad he was not as accurate.
Ray Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Keep in mind people who stated we ran slants today....we actually run them every game, the ball actually needs to be thrown. Trent is a real good guy and person, but he has shown he is not the long term answer at QB. Fitz isn't either but this was the best offensive performance in 4 weeks and probably not a surprise it was with Fitz. Fitz is a back up QB but the problem is that is what Edwards is too.
MRW Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Keep in mind people who stated we ran slants today....we actually run them every game, the ball actually needs to be thrown. Trent is a real good guy and person, but he has shown he is not the long term answer at QB. Fitz isn't either but this was the best offensive performance in 4 weeks and probably not a surprise it was with Fitz. Fitz is a back up QB but the problem is that is what Edwards is too. Unless Edwards can unlearn his bad habits, I don't give him much of a chance of making it as a backup either.
Robert Paulson Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Fitzpatrick is not a good QB, let's get that out of the way right at the start. He had some terrible throws when he was out there today, and he's certainly not any kind of answer to our offensive woes. But I saw enough to confirm for me that Edwards should get the hook. Fitzpatrick came up against his considerable physical limitations, but I saw more throws to Evans and Owens in just this game than I think I've seen all season. I'm completely done with Edwards. AGREED
silvermike Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Both quarterbacks are awful. Fitzpatrick was intercepted at midfield in overtime. He got bailed out by Sanchez being awful. But he gave the game away on an absymal pass and they got it back on another. Edwards is also awful. It's not an argument worth having. We need a real QB.
timba Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 If Edwards is the problem Fitz isn't the solution. He played his role and helped the team win. Still only had 16 points from the offense and that's from a six pick game from the defense. That was the difference in this game, the D.
EndZoneCrew Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 I wasn't watching the game Why do you care then?
Force_Majeur Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 If Edwards is the problem Fitz isn't the solution. He played his role and helped the team win. Still only had 16 points from the offense and that's from a six pick game from the defense. That was the difference in this game, the D. TOP = about 40 minutes. Our D was better rested, and made 5 pics today.
Bills Fan888 Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 If Edwards is the problem Fitz isn't the solution. He played his role and helped the team win. Still only had 16 points from the offense and that's from a six pick game from the defense. That was the difference in this game, the D. Exactly, Fitz is definitely not the solution. Once he starts throwing the ball on target I'll agree that Fitz is good but as of now he is an average QB. I'd say hes about equal with JP.
MRW Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Both quarterbacks are awful. Fitzpatrick was intercepted at midfield in overtime. He got bailed out by Sanchez being awful. But he gave the game away on an absymal pass and they got it back on another. Edwards is also awful. It's not an argument worth having. We need a real QB. I would argue that Fitzpatrick is awful in a different way than Edwards. Fitzpatrick is awful because he doesn't have an NFL arm and will have throws get away from him. Edwards is awful because he is unwilling to pull the trigger to get the ball to Evans or Owens and has lost whatever ability he once had to read defenses. When watching the game today, I felt like I was watching an NFL offense - a bad NFL offense, but an actual offense that featured gameplanning, throws to receivers, and everything. If the Bills had lost this game I would not have been embarrassed the way I was by the offensive showing last week. If I see anyone saying that Fitzpatrick is going to lead us to victory, I'll join you in laughing at them.
Bills Fan888 Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 I would argue that Fitzpatrick is awful in a different way than Edwards. Fitzpatrick is awful because he doesn't have an NFL arm and will have throws get away from him. Edwards is awful because he is unwilling to pull the trigger to get the ball to Evans or Owens and has lost whatever ability he once had to read defenses. When watching the game today, I felt like I was watching an NFL offense - a bad NFL offense, but an actual offense that featured gameplanning, throws to receivers, and everything. If the Bills had lost this game I would not have been embarrassed the way I was by the offensive showing last week. If I see anyone saying that Fitzpatrick is going to lead us to victory, I'll join you in laughing at them. Agreed, they're both bad but at least Edwards can still be good with a little confidence.
Flbillsfan#1 Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 if we only had three picks do we win this game? No, but all things being equal, if the defense plays as it did & Trent plays the entire game, I would bet the Bills lose the game.
MRW Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Agreed, they're both bad but at least Edwards can still be good with a little confidence. Well let me ask you, what do you make of Edwards's play this season? Putting my most charitable spin on it I see a guy who has had his confidence shaken to the point that he looks to check down unless there is a guy clearly getting open deep. If that's the case, then I don't think you do him any favors by trotting him back out there. Sit him on the bench for a while. Now me, I think at best he's damaged goods and will never amount to a thing in this league. But even if I'm wrong I don't see how you can send him back onto the field to continue to fail and lose more confidence. I also disagree with your statement earlier that Fitzpatrick is at best an average QB. At best he's a below average QB. But he was attempting all the things a QB has to do.
Recommended Posts