Cynical

Only partially correct. Professional football is entertainment. College football is do or die in the SE.

You are basing this statement on what exactly? Hope? Last year, the Bills were more competitive under Fitzpatrick than they were under Trent. And nobody really knows how Brohm will play.

Trent looked good last year during TC. That's right. Big difference. Let's see what happens when the pads go on, and the hitting starts happening for real.

Brohm is ineligible for the practice squad.

IIRC, Kelly did take a beating in the USFL. Furthermore, Kelly missed several games in 1985 due to an injury, but still managed to toss 4,623 yards and 39 TDs. Linky Feel free to check the video library of this site Mash here

Here's what you need to know about how Nix/Gailey feel about the present Bills QB: 1. Both have said they will rebuild through the draft, and it will take more than one year 2. Whoever is drafted in the first and second round is expected to start immediately 3. They will not over pay for players 4. The Bills were highly interested Bradford before the draft 5. After the draft, the Bills tried to acquire a viable starting veteran QB I conclude, based on their own actions and words, the Bills are not overly satisfied with the present QBs. They had no intentions of drafting a high profile college QB that needs additional development, because in the end, high profile or not, it still ends up meaning the same thing: a project QB. The Bills have enough "projects". Time to start finding out if the "projects" are worth squat or need to be sent packing.

Another equally relevant question: Why? Was it due to poor coaching? Or was it due to a coaching staff trying to conform an offense around a QB with limited capabilities?

Unless I am mistaken about number of people who partake of this board, but IMHO, I think the majority of the board has taken a wait and see attitude regarding Brohm. There is a small faction of BB supporters who seem to be quite visible (vocal), but they are not the majority of the board. Can't speak for everybody, but I have seen posts similar to mine. I am willing to buy into the BS the Brohm supporters are pushing, only because it's the only hope I have. Fitzpatrick is a back up at best (and should be retained as such). Trent has numerous issues, and I have serious doubts he will overcome all (or enough) of them to be a truly effective QB. If he does, fine. I will have no problem with it. In short, I want BB only because he's not Fitz or Edwards. Of course, I reserve the right change my mind as TC and preseason moves along.

1. So even though you admit to seeing and reading all the evidence and information regarding why Levy was hired, let's throw it out the window go with "Levy was hired because he was cheap." I stand by my position. "Ralph is cheap" is about the only level of logic you grasp. Ten years ago the Bills were battling salary cap issues. Three years ago, the Bills made Dockery one of the highest paid OG in the history of the NFL Do I need to bring up Kelsay and Schobel? But you are right. "Ralph is cheap". Let me guess. You were pissed off beyond belief the day the Falcons announced the hiring of Dimitroff. You just knew the Falcons scored big time with his signing. And when Dimitroff signed Mike Smith to be his new HC ... During the 2009 off-season, Dimitroff declared the Falcons were not going to be major players in FA. If Dimitroff made that statement as the Bills GM, you would have declared Wilson was meddling and the number of "Ralph is cheap" posts by you would have shot up. The fact you mention Polian is classic. How many times did you run around screaming "Ralph is cheap" when you heard of that promotion/hire? Who was team president prior to the one now?

I lost faith in Jauron AND red flagged Trent Edwards when Revis blitzed Edwards 29 consecutive times back in 2007. The only reason Revis stopped was Edwards got hurt, and Losman came in.

That might be great if the Bills were building "widgets", but given how NBC has handled the Tonight Show debacle, do we really want somebody from their entertainment division running the Bills? I would like to think the Bills are at least trying to get beyond "stupid".

What makes you think our run D will be better than our pass D?

The logic behind this is astoundingly retarded, and it completely ignores the facts and events that happened prior to Marv's hiring. But hey, let's go with Ralph's cheap, because that's about the only level of logic you seem to grasp, despite it being wrong. Can't wait for the new Bills GM to come from the depths of GM or GE.

Repeat after me: CONTINUITY Didn't want that new "franchise" QB Trentative Edwards to have to learn a whole new offense. Might screw up his development.

Who we picking for? Modrak? Nix? Gailey? Ralph? You did say OBD (a/k/a One Bills Drive) But as a TBD member, I would go: Jets Pats Dolphins Bills With the Bills giving Miami a run for their money for the third spot

Sounds like a present day Bills QB. Just say no. As a side note: WTF is it with Stanford QB's and their sisters? (at least with the last 2)

Stop being so pessimistic.

So, as usual, you have zero proof to back up a statement you tried to pass off as possibly being factual. Owens did exactly what I hoped he would do. He called out a weak link.

Either you are not old enough to have seen Kelly play in his younger years, or you are old enough but the ugliness from the past 10 years has clouded your memory. As DarthIce said, Kelly had "it" from day one.

Absolutely. I said it before in another thread. Fitz sets the baseline performance of a QB for this team. Edwards and Brohm need to be just as good and even better than Fitz to remain on this team.

I would rather keep Fitzpatrick as a back up. He's perfect for the job. You know exactly what you will get when he goes in.

FACT: Edwards was beaten out / out performed by Fitzpatrick, who played behind the same crappy OL, with the same crappy coaching, and the same crappy supporting cast. And Fitzpatrick, at best, is a back up.

Unfortunately, for you Edwards fans, you keep looking for the next "reason" to excuse Trent's poor play. And there always is one. "The" Concussion 'Phantom' concussions bad offensive coordinators (never mind each one was chosen with the concept of continuity in mind just so the team would NOT have to learn a completely new offense) bad offensive system in general bad OL bad WRs (nobody is getting open. Signed TO to help Lee and Edwards) players out to get him (TO was a cancer. was able to convince the "young" players such as Josh Reed that Trent needed to be benched) poor coaching overall bad front office And the guy has only been in the league for 3 years, and has less than 2 years of playing experience. I would hate to see that list in another 3 years! Playing experience would be a major plus if 1. All QB's were equal in regards to learning the new O and/or 2. If one had significantly more playing experience than the other. Trent does not have #2 IMHO. Trent has been in the league one more year than Brohm, and has less than 2 years playing experience.

Again, what part of "Brohm is more experienced in the 'new' offense than the other guys" don't you get? Serious question: Who would YOU feel more confident in leading this team of "inexperienced supporting cast and OL"? The guy who is familiar with the offense and thus would better prepared to deal with the inevitable breakdowns? Or the guy who has to "undo 3 years of bad coaching" and suddenly has to learn and adapt to a new offense? I get it. Inexperienced line, inexperienced supporting cast, new offense ... Until all those things are corrected, or settled, Trent will always need another "chance".

You misunderstood. Not everybody is a Clausen fan because not everybody is convinced he is a franchise QB. Therefore, the level of optimism really wouldn't be that much different. To clarify, that would be the same way regardless of who the Bills drafted as QB (i.e. Tebow, etc). The lone exception may have been (and let me emphasize the "may have been") Bradford. And that would be due to the fact he was the only guy the Bills FO liked as a potential immediate starter. I don't think the board (as a majority) would have slammed the guy, but I do think the majority of the board would have taken the attitude of "before we get excited, let's see him in action".