Malazan

because fans feel the need to cut players to make themselves feel better even when all reason goes against it

What leads you to believe the Bills need to cut those players to sign those players? Again, cutting players because you don't like them does not improve the talent level of the team.

You can re-read my previous posts. I literally post a link that shows him as average. I'm aware of Fitz's issues and as I have previously stated, the Bills need to upgrade that position, but I'm not sure that going with Ftiz and focusing on defense was the wrong way to go.

I agree Chan Gailey was exposed. I will have to disagree that the idea that getting by with an average QB and building your defense was exposed. In fact, the 49ers had a fantastic defense and top tier running game while their passing game didn't fare as well. These numbers fairly blatantly point out that there needs to be better play from the passing offense/QB or the Defense and that while Fitz didn't do as well as the Qbs in the Super Bowl and Wilson, he wasn't out of their ballpark. I reiterate, there has to be better play from the QB or Defense. I disagree in your assertion that going the route of upgrading the defense first was the wrong decision. Of course, if you see that Ravens/49ers as having gone the route of upgrading the QB first before their defense, I'd appreciate you pointing that out to me. I am not incredibly well versed on their histories.

Flacco is actually pretty mobile. He moved around in the pocket and ran outside the pocket a number of times. Just because a guy doesn't run for gains like a running back, doesn't mean he isn't mobile.

I'm curious what you're basing this on beyond a feeling of 'Fitz Sucks'. I'm very interested in the specifics.

The 49ers were 2nd overall defensively and the Ravens were 12th. I'm not sure how that shows they were outdated. Keep in mind, the 49ers were 'winning' with Alex Smith whose stats were very similar to Fitzpatrick. Let's just take a look at the teams in the playoffs and their defensive ranks in terms on points. I didn't like just points, so I added yds/Good Morning, for the second number: Seahawks: #1 | #4 49ers: #2 | #3 Broncos: #4 | #2 Falcons: #5 | #24 Bengals: #8 | #6 Texans: #9 | #7 Patriots: #9 |#25 Packers: #11 | #11 Ravens: #12 | #17 Vikings: #14 | #16 Colts: #21 | #26 Redskins: #22 | #28 Bills: #26 | #22 This shows that two teams had 'bad' or bottom third defenses. The Colt and Redskins. These are the only two teams whose defense wasn't in the top half of the league in the playoffs. They both had pretty magical years and their QBs are generational talents. So a great QB can makeup for a bad defense, but it is the exception, not the norm. So let's look at the other side of the ball. The Offense. Again, Points / yds per game: Patriots: #1 | #1 Broncos: #2 | #4 Redskins: #4 | #5 Packers: #5 | #12 Falcons: #7 | #8 Texans: #8 | #7 Seahawks: #9 | #17 Ravens: #10 | #16 49ers: #11 | #11 Bengals: #12 | #22 Vikings: #14 | #20 Colts: #18 | #10 Bills: #21 | #19 This defnitely lends credence that Offense is important. No team except for the Colts were out of the top half of teams and none were in the bottom third. It also seems to indicate that red zone efficency is incredibly important. Let's look into the offense further: Rush yard per game / passing yards per game Redskins: #1 / #20 Vikings: #2 / #31 Seahawks: #3 / #27 49ers: #4 / #23 Patriots: #7 / #4 Texans: #8 / #11 Ravens: #11 / #15 Broncos: #16 / #5 Bengals: #18 / #17 Packers: #20 / #9 Colts: #22 / #7 Falcons: #29 / #6 Bills: #6 / #25 I think this shows the Bills running game was good enough. They need to improve in the passing game, but some of the teams that were worse than them in the air, were better at rushing. So the question that we're looking at is the QB. Let's use the awesome NFL tool at http://www.nfl.com/s...ayer4=WIL777781 So Fitzpatrick isn't out of the ballpark. Where does he lose? Rushing and interceptions. We know Fitz has an interception problem and tries to force the ball and doesn't have the arm to back it up. We also know, he'll never be a rushing a QB. I don't this is a surprise to anyone. The question is, given how bad the Bills defense is, was upgrading QB the priority or the defense and rushing? Would the Bills be better if they drafted a QB and had a worse rushing game, offensive line and defense? I look at these ranking and think it bores out the point that the Bills could win with Fitzpatrick given their defense performs int he top 15. It also seems that improved QB play could help with some minor defensive improvement. It's really hard to say their plan was 'exposed' when the two teams in the Superbowl followed the blueprint of improving the defense and then getting a QB (albeit in the Ravens case, the defense was pretty good already). I look it as more of a situation of, "The tire is falling off my car, but I'm almost out of gas. Well, I can probably make it home with the gas that's left, but the tire has got be replaced." You may run out of gas and not make it, but filling up the tank with only three tires doesn't get you anywhere.

I've seen nothing to believe anything beyond they thought they could win games with Fitz. Given the offense's ranking and the way the Defense performed. It seems they were right that they Defense is an issue and games could have been won with Fitz at QB. Don't get me wrong, I get it. People want a dynamic QB and Buddy should be criticized for not addressing the position more aggressively, but the fan on this forum have changed the narrative that they thought they could win with Fitzpatrick with improved performance from other areas to "They believed Fitzpatrick was a long lost Manning brother". The results seem to indicate had the defense improved (another area for criticism), they would have been ok with Fitz at QB.

WHIIIIIIIITNEEER!!!

They have big issues at receiver as well, but their secondary struggled last night. You put Reed, Byrd or Revis in that secondary and they win.

Jauron playing the role of Jim Harbaugh when upset about a play

I'll just say this...I would put a ring on it.

I'm not sure of this story that is purported that Buddy was 'sold' on Fitz. He prioritized other areas of the team and while there's certainly plenty to criticize him there. I've seen nothing beyond they thought they could win games with Fitzpatrick while upgrading other areas of the team. Given the state of our Defense and where our offense was ranked, I'd say they were right. That the Defense was a bigger problem than QB was. Everyone wants to go Al Davis on this team.

There's a lot of chatter on their forums about cutting whitner and culliver.

That is the entire premise of this board.

He had major impact. They targeted him early. The first drive he gave up a huge play and was not in good position on the touchdown catch.

Do you want the kids to get off your lawn too? I thought it was pretty bad too, but a lot of people like her.

I think he just yelled, "I'm Rich, B word!" Ravens better lock that up quick or the price will be astronomical. He's going to the highest paid QB.

I'd be ultra pissed if I was the Ravens.

This. It's not luck. He believes his receivers will beat the coverage and get the ball.

Wow. Amazing play.

That was an interesting call. Aggressive.

They're definitely spreading it out and targeting whitner. I would not want to meet the Ravens in a dark alley. I hope the Bills get some of that edge.

Ok, That last one was just embarrassing. I wonder what the 49ers will do if he keeps getting picked on.

I can't blame Whitner. He shouldn't be in that position. He's terrible in coverage and the Ravens are spreading them out to get the mismatch. Wow, Whitner again..