There is a falsehood running rampant on this board

[garbag3man]

Wow, "Simon"! First of all, you must have a LOT of time on your hands, which I don't. However, here's a feeling I have that may or may not be accurate......maybe you could look it up to see if it's true or a falsehood.

 

It SEEMS that Fitzpatrick throws to his wide receivers (i.e. Evans and Owens) more on average per game than Trent Edwards does. I also KNOW that Lee Evans has 2 touchdowns in 1-1/2 games with Fitzpatrick at QB. This SEEMS to be a better average per game than with TE. 2 touchdowns in 1.5 games roughly equates to 21 touchdowns over a full season, whereas 1 touchdown with TE over 4.5 games equals about 3.5 touchdowns for a 16 game season. It also seems that there isn't as much "checking down" with Fitzpatrick than there is with TE (see catches by running backs and tight ends). No, I don't think Fitzpatrick is the long-term answer at QB for the Bills, but I DO think that he gives the Bills a better chance to win week in and week out right now.

This is something that has been bugging me. If you actually look at the passes to WR objectively, I am willing to bet that this is a function of the team slowing the offense down and not going with the no huddle any more. In the five passes that Trent threw before Jenkins tried to pull his head off, Trent hit Lee on the same pass Fitz did later, and hit Nelson on a crossing route for a nice ten yard pickup.

 

If they decide to go with Fitz, well all pull for him, but I think Trent deserves a full game with the slowed down offense before we go ahead and say that we can compare any of this.

[BillsFan-4-Ever]

I don't know how many dozen times I've read how Fitzpatrick might be the better option right now because he was consistently willing to take shots downfield and get his WR's involved while Trent refuses to pull the trigger on any sort of long ball. It's been said so many times by so many different posters that's it's simply been accepted as a fact with no evidence to back it up. It didn't seem entirely accurate to me so I just went through the playbyplay of every Bills game this year to see whether or not this is true. And guess what, it isn't. The differential is so slight between the two that it is barely worth mentioning. According to their averages, Fitzpatrick throws downfield 0.3 times per game more than Edwards, which is just slightly above 1 more deep ball per month.

I made no attempts at subjectivity so I wouldn't be tempted to skew the numbers either way. These are purely objective numbers with no mitigating factors such as down/distance, field position, scoreboard or anything else taken into consideration. Just a simple average of how many times each guy goes downfield per game. And they are essentially the same.

Following is the number of down field shots they've each taken.

 

Trent Edwards:

Week #1 - 5 deep balls

Week #2 - 6 deep balls

Week #3 - 2 deep balls (the only anomaly for either guy)

Week #4 - 7 deep balls

Week #5 - 6 deep balls

This is 26 shots downfield in 5 games for an average of 5.2 attempts per game.

 

Ryan Fitzpatrick:

Week #6 - 5 deep balls

Week #7 - 6 deep balls

This is 11 shots downfield in 2 games for an average of 5.5 attempts per game.

 

The difference being a grand total of 0.3 deep balls per game or again, just slightly more than 1 deep ball per month.

 

Is it too much to ask that we stop spreading the inaccurate assumption that Fitzpatrick goes downfield more than Edwards? Can we possibly base our arguments in reality and maybe even move the debate forward by using truth as a basis for discussion? I'd say we're likely to come to more accurate conclusions if we can manage that.

 

And as always, this is a troll free thread.

Please send that to the local news sports reporter. maybe they they will stop writing about QB controversies.

[Mr. WEO]

I don't know how many dozen times I've read how Fitzpatrick might be the better option right now because he was consistently willing to take shots downfield and get his WR's involved while Trent refuses to pull the trigger on any sort of long ball. It's been said so many times by so many different posters that's it's simply been accepted as a fact with no evidence to back it up. It didn't seem entirely accurate to me so I just went through the playbyplay of every Bills game this year to see whether or not this is true. And guess what, it isn't. The differential is so slight between the two that it is barely worth mentioning. According to their averages, Fitzpatrick throws downfield 0.3 times per game more than Edwards, which is just slightly above 1 more deep ball per month.

I made no attempts at subjectivity so I wouldn't be tempted to skew the numbers either way. These are purely objective numbers with no mitigating factors such as down/distance, field position, scoreboard or anything else taken into consideration. Just a simple average of how many times each guy goes downfield per game. And they are essentially the same.

Following is the number of down field shots they've each taken.

 

Trent Edwards:

Week #1 - 5 deep balls

Week #2 - 6 deep balls

Week #3 - 2 deep balls (the only anomaly for either guy)

Week #4 - 7 deep balls

Week #5 - 6 deep balls

This is 26 shots downfield in 5 games for an average of 5.2 attempts per game.

 

Ryan Fitzpatrick:

Week #6 - 5 deep balls

Week #7 - 6 deep balls

This is 11 shots downfield in 2 games for an average of 5.5 attempts per game.

 

The difference being a grand total of 0.3 deep balls per game or again, just slightly more than 1 deep ball per month.

 

Is it too much to ask that we stop spreading the inaccurate assumption that Fitzpatrick goes downfield more than Edwards? Can we possibly base our arguments in reality and maybe even move the debate forward by using truth as a basis for discussion? I'd say we're likely to come to more accurate conclusions if we can manage that.

 

And as always, this is a troll free thread.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not going to defend TE's bad play, but the Fitz legend is growing faster than that of JPL.

 

Look, in 2 games he's connected with his WRs 15 times. He's completed 45% of his passes. He's got one deep completion. TE has connected with his WRs 39 times, not great, but no worse than Fitz. TE completed 60% of his passes and has a higher YPA. Both have about 11 yard per catch avg.

 

 

Let's hold off on the "Fitz is making throws TE would never make" nonsense.

 

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2009092009/2...bills#tab:watch

 

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2009100408/2...phins#tab:watch

 

Covered this yesterday in response to all the mindless Fitz posts.

[FightClub]

can't tell if this is a joke.

So Fitzgerald checks down to Reed and handcuffs him with a bad ball short of the sticks on third down and Reed bails him out with a strong play to convert. And this is an example of Fitz making clutch plays? If Edwards had thrown that ball you'd be using it as an example of him checking down too much.

 

Let me help you. When the primary pattern on a play where 7 yards are needed is an 8 yard out and the QB actually executes on that play, it is NOT a checkdown. Reed didn't bail him out. The ball was thrown exactly where it needed to be for the catch to be made. Of course the DB is trying to push that route down to 7 yards; that's his job.

 

Checkdown = play is designed for pattern down field (e.g. past the 1st down markers on a 3rd down play) and the QB just doesn't "see" it (or..."they weren't giving it to us" aka "it's hard to win in the NFL"), so he checks down to a shorter pattern (usually to the RB) and asks that player to attempt to use their athleticism to pick up the first down himself. Which is exactly what the defense is waiting for, and usually stops it.

 

Bailing out = TE throws a 2 yard pass on 3rd and 8 to Freddie and he somehow dips and weaves to a first down, which has happened a few times this year. Most of the time, though, you'll notice that Freddie and Marshawn are stopped short on those plays because you play right into the D's hands when you do that.

[Beerball]

What a refreshing post. Someone actually took the time to look at objective criteria and made a conclusion based on that criteria. Wish there was more of it.

 

Too many posts like "It seems like Fitz throws more deep balls" or "I feel like we're doing a lot better with Fitz". Not enough follow through. Jesus, I might as well say "I feel like we play better when I pay a psychic gypsy to bless my bills cap, and I put it on when we need a first down". Nonsense.

 

The problem is, people are lazy or dumb. If we had to discuss issues based on facts, there would only be 5 posters left.

Watch the damn games. They both suck. BUT at this moment in time Fitzpatrick is the better option. That's all people are saying. If you don't understand that then I do understand your post. And don't knock the abilities of psychic gypsies until you've tried em.

 

Covered this yesterday in response to all the mindless Fitz posts.

Legend? Nice to see you still pulling words out of your ass for effect. I'll repeat what I said above. Watch the damn games.

 

Just watch the damn games.

[KD in CA]

CBS, like the official NFL gamebook, uses 15 yards as the cut-off for deep. I don't think that's what a lot of the board means when we say we want Trent to throw deep. So, while I respect the effort you put in and the objectiveness, I don't think it meaningfully settles any dispute.

 

Thanks for the clarification. And I don't think Simon is trying to settle the dispute. He's just trying to get people to not form the basis of their opinions in the dispute on false assumptions. We need more of that around here.

 

 

 

By the way....anyone else notice Brett Favre 'checking down' on every single play on the Vikings last drive Sunday?

[zow2]

This is something that has been bugging me. If you actually look at the passes to WR objectively, I am willing to bet that this is a function of the team slowing the offense down and not going with the no huddle any more. In the five passes that Trent threw before Jenkins tried to pull his head off, Trent hit Lee on the same pass Fitz did later, and hit Nelson on a crossing route for a nice ten yard pickup.

 

If they decide to go with Fitz, well all pull for him, but I think Trent deserves a full game with the slowed down offense before we go ahead and say that we can compare any of this.

 

more excuses and denial, sorry. Trent has had many starts in the huddled up offense and still regressed. He had that horrible, mental slump last year (Cle, SF and Miami?) where he had no confidence. He was in the crux of another slump when he got injured in NY. Good QB's don't go into these horrible mini slumps like Trent is having a habit of doing. In Football, you don't have the luxury of having 4-5 bad and unproductive games in a row since that's a Qtr or one third of your season down the tubes.

[LongLiveRalph]

Ryan Fitzpatrick was drafted by the Saint Louis Rams in the decade of the 00's. What does that say about him?

 

It says he was drafted (in the 7th round!!!) with the hope that he could evolve from non-scholarship Ivy League QB into "heady" and prepared backup. Which is exactly what he is. He wasn't brought here to be a starter, he was brought here SPECIFICALLY because he is a backup, so as to not ruffle Trent's starter feathers.

 

I only cited Trent's status as a Bills draft pick of the last decade because, well, the record speaks for itself, and suggests that he is a marginal NFL player, like the majority of their other picks. The fact that Jairus Byrd appears to be a ball hawk, after the front office said "We like him because he's a ball hawk" is one of the most shocking events of the season. They may have actually pegged somebody correctly.

 

Let's face it, both QBs stink, and border on unwatchable. But I will say, I would rather watch incomplete 16-yard passes to Evans rather than 3-yard completions to Derek Schouman. Either way, come on out Brian Moorman!!!

[Mr. WEO]

Watch the damn games. They both suck. BUT at this moment in time Fitzpatrick is the better option. That's all people are saying. If you don't understand that then I do understand your post. And don't knock the abilities of psychic gypsies until you've tried em.

 

 

Legend? Nice to see you still pulling words out of your ass for effect. I'll repeat what I said above. Watch the damn games.

 

Just watch the damn games.

We've all watched the games. That's why some of us aren't saying things like "Trent never would have made that throw" or "Fitz is much more willing to go downfield".

 

I'm not propping up TE, I'm just pointing out how easily silly statements are disproved. Repeating them endlessly shouldn't alter what you have actually seen.

[garbag3man]

more excuses and denial, sorry. Trent has had many starts in the huddled up offense and still regressed. He had that horrible, mental slump last year (Cle, SF and Miami?) where he had no confidence. He was in the crux of another slump when he got injured in NY. Good QB's don't go into these horrible mini slumps like Trent is having a habit of doing. In Football, you don't have the luxury of having 4-5 bad and unproductive games in a row since that's a Qtr or one third of your season down the tubes.

 

First off, not making any excuses, and I agree with what you are saying about his regression. The only reason I say any of this is that I am tired of the revolving door of QB's and the willingness of fans to get on to the next QB and start the new controversy.

 

I preface this with the disclaimer that I am in no way saying Trent is a great or even solid QB, and that I am in no way saying he is anyway the same kind of QB as Drew Brees.

 

That said I think that it is time we pick a QB and stick with it. There are going to be a few bad years while developing a QB, Brees was fairly awful his first two years before he worked it all out and developed into a great QB. Lets be realistic, not every young QB, or even many at all, will be Matt Ryan or Joe Flacco. Most young second year starting QB's suck, its just a fact. It takes a while to get used to the game.

 

I am not saying Trent is our guy, and I am not saying Fitz is our guy, I just wanna see the team win. But I also realize that at some point the team has to pick a QB and stick with it, and develop the guy.

[Guest dog14787]

First off, not making any excuses, and I agree with what you are saying about his regression. The only reason I say any of this is that I am tired of the revolving door of QB's and the willingness of fans to get on to the next QB and start the new controversy.

 

I preface this with the disclaimer that I am in no way saying Trent is a great or even solid QB, and that I am in no way saying he is anyway the same kind of QB as Drew Brees.

 

That said I think that it is time we pick a QB and stick with it. There are going to be a few bad years while developing a QB, Brees was fairly awful his first two years before he worked it all out and developed into a great QB. Lets be realistic, not every young QB, or even many at all, will be Matt Ryan or Joe Flacco. Most young second year starting QB's suck, its just a fact. It takes a while to get used to the game.

 

I am not saying Trent is our guy, and I am not saying Fitz is our guy, I just wanna see the team win. But I also realize that at some point the team has to pick a QB and stick with it, and develop the guy.

 

 

The Bills have no clue on how to develop a QB properly.

[garbag3man]

The Bills have no clue on how to develop a QB properly.

 

No argument there. Maybe its time to get a real QB coach.

[LongLiveRalph]

The Bills have no clue on how to develop a QB properly.

 

Mike Mularkey is Atlanta's OC and got a ton of credit for Matt Ryan's performance last year. Don't you think he tried many of the same things with Losman? It's not just the Bills. Some guys, (even high draft picks like Joey Harrington, David Carr, JaMarcus Russell) you can develop until you're blue in the face, and they just don't have the goods.

 

It's a win-now league. Why would a coach hitch his wagon (and his job) to a QB who he doesn't truly believe will get it done anytime soon? That's why you have to give the guy McDaniels some credit in Denver. He wasn't in love with Cutler and wanted someone familiar in Cassell. That blew up in his face, to the point that he had to trade Cutler. The Redskins swooped in and were slobbering all over Cutler, and even offered a more lucrative trade than Chicago. But McDaniels didn't want to hitch his wagon to Jason Campbell, either. He felt Orton was good enough to do the things he wanted to do on offense. He had a vision, at least.

 

From the O-line debacle, to the TO signing, to Trent's "development," to the no-huddle scheme, it just seems there's no vision on the Bills offense. 18-hour workdays my ass.

[Beerball]

We've all watched the games. That's why some of us aren't saying things like "Trent never would have made that throw" or "Fitz is much more willing to go downfield".

 

I'm not propping up TE, I'm just pointing out how easily silly statements are disproved. Repeating them endlessly shouldn't alter what you have actually seen.

If you've watched the games and have not come away with the belief that Fitzpatrick is the better of two bad options then you really haven't watched the games.

 

It's really simple...this guy gives us some chance vs. we don't stand a snowball's chance in hell with that guy. Really don't know how I can make it any more basic.

[Clippers of Nfl]

The fact of the mater is neither are a good option, Ryan is just the greater of two lesser players. There are probably a dozen or more second string QBs better than both of these guys as well as a few third stringers.

 

neither are good.....

 

1 qb stepped in AS A BACK UP and won 1st game.

1 qb won his first official start.

 

dont understand how we are dogging my boy fitz.

 

how can we expect hall of fame #s from a guy who has been practicing with the 2nd team all year?????

 

lets give fitz a break. please.

 

dont get me wrong, i will talk smack about fitz once he starts losing multiple games like trent. but since he is actually delivering the strikes needed for a win, i'm a fan!

[Clippers of Nfl]

This is something that has been bugging me. If you actually look at the passes to WR objectively, I am willing to bet that this is a function of the team slowing the offense down and not going with the no huddle any more. In the five passes that Trent threw before Jenkins tried to pull his head off, Trent hit Lee on the same pass Fitz did later, and hit Nelson on a crossing route for a nice ten yard pickup.

 

If they decide to go with Fitz, well all pull for him, but I think Trent deserves a full game with the slowed down offense before we go ahead and say that we can compare any of this.

 

hasnt he had enough losses for you yet???

[tennesseeboy]

interesting post. Note that Trent played his games with a brand new offensive line with transitions at the tackle positions while the line Fitzpatrick is playing with has been playing together for five games and are moving from awful to bad to approaching mediocre (okay..to high bad on the verge of mediocre). Neither qb has been all that impressive but we'll just have to see how it plays out in the next few weeks.

[Realist]

Basically, Fitzpatrick won two games where the opposing QB was actually worse than he was. Does anyone really think Schaub is going to throw the game like Sanchez and Delhomme did?

 

Fitzpatrick is going to have to have a much better game this Sunday than he did the previous two week, (or Byrd must keep his INT streak going).

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

It's really simple...this guy gives us some chance vs. we don't stand a snowball's chance in hell with that guy. Really don't know how I can make it any more basic.

 

Beersphere for the win.....

[BillsWatch]

Is it too much to ask that we stop spreading the inaccurate assumption that Fitzpatrick goes downfield more than Edwards? Can we possibly base our arguments in reality and maybe even move the debate forward by using truth as a basis for discussion? I'd say we're likely to come to more accurate conclusions if we can manage that.

 

And as always, this is a troll free thread.

 

I thought that was the purpose of the wall, to swear, to throw crap on the wall and when crap does not exist was to make it up?