FireChan
-
Posts
14,609 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by FireChan
-
-
Fitz said it himself, he has no killer instinct. His apologists claim he does "enough to win." Tom Brady throws TDs while up by 35, but Fitz manages not to throw an INT for 3 quarters and "he's done enough." Doesn't cut it.
Oh look it's the "we don't have Tom Brady and I won't be happy til we do" argument. Dose of realism here pal, odds are we won't next year either. This is this response I'd expect from a guy who has his hopes crushed when he loses the powerball and pouts all day.
To another poster who said we can agree Fitz isn't the answer. As lame as this sounds, that depends on the question. Do I think he's a hall of famer, like everyone who calls me a Fitz homer says? I don't. I think he's an average QB. Just average. I'd rather build a team around Fitz until we find a more solid QB to plug into our system. You can't build around a guy like Losman and Edwards. It doesn't work.
Fitz is exactly what a young team needs and in 2-3 years, he'll be replaced by our answer.
God help him if the new guy plays like crap though. We'll have everyone here singing songs about how much we miss Fitz, and his QB skills besides his arm.
Hindsight is 20/20.
-
The bigger question is: Can Fitz lead this offense to a decisive score when needed. The answer is clearly NO. I'm not pissing on Fitz. I'm just sick of bad QB play. It's so bad that when he's mediocre, people call it "outstanding".
:50 seconds with 1 time out is a tall order for a come back. Especially when they are getting to you within 2 seconds. Hard to complete meaningful passes when you only have a second to throw.
I personally believe 22-25 of the quarterbacks in this league wouldn't have gotten it done. Peyton, Rodgers, Brady, Eli, RG3 (maybe), Big Ben, Brees and few I can't think of might have done it. Rivers would throw a pick or fumble, same with Vick. Romo would choke, Flacco is questionable. Stafford isn't the most consistent either. It's too early to say what Luck would do. And the field goal was no sure thing in that weather anyway. If we kicked a 47 yard field goal and missed it on that drive, half of the posters on this board would blame our QB for not getting closer and throwing downfield more.
The lines of rational criticism and irrational hatred seem to blur on this board quite a bit. I can even understand where it comes from. Every year we play a couple well-coached, supreme QB-having teams, and we collectively sigh because we haven't had a QB like Brady ever.
The defenders of our QB compare ourselves to the average league teams just as much as the super-star teams, while the blind haters only compare us to the best of the best. I personally have no qualms with our QB. I think we have to play with what we got.
I think we put a lot of false dilemmas onto each other as well. I think that anyone guy who still supports our QB would rather have Rodgers. But we don't and likely won't have a guy like that. Especially with the way we draft. I still love this team and will watch every Sunday, and I hope the Bills do find the next best QB in the league. But it doesn't look like we will and I won't piss on our average QB because he isn't the hall of famer I would like him to be.
-
Last Time I saw Shitzpatrick was throwing the ball not Chan but Chan is Shitzy Yin To his Yang
Let me stop you right there. "Shitzpatrick" is probably the least funny and creative name I've ever seen. Because I have now seen you use it in a serious context, I will proceed to talk talk down to you as if you know nothing about football as I make my point.
Chan Gailey is the reason we were down. Chan Gailey not calling that field goal, is the sole reason. He's also the reason the offensive drive, before the Ram's game-winning drive, was stalled horribly. Now I understand a lot of Bill's fans believe there's a simple quick fix to start winning football games, i.e. you. But sadly, it's just not the case. Average QB's will always exist, as well as bad ones. I have a better chance winning two lottery tickets and buying the Bill's, then we do to find the next Manning, or Brady. Anyone else we bring in will leave us in the same hole.
If you can't understand that, well then, I don't know what to say. I'll let you get all worked up and scream for our QB's head, whilst wallowing in your knee-jerk reactions.
-
And he's not the issue because...?
Because Chan is? 25 for 32, 247 and 1TD should be enough for our QB to win games with the talent on our team. It's Chan's decision making, time-out wasting, tendencies that kill us every time. What happened to the non-conservative coach we all thought he'd be after Jauron?
-
7 carries for Spiller. 9 carries for Fred-Ex. 31 passes for Fitz.
This is the play calling of a delusional HC/Offensive Coordinator. Conditions were wet and sloppy in the 2nd half which was Chan’s reasoning for the run game last week against Jacksonville.
Is Chan trying to outsmart everybody? Does Chan know what he has in the run game with the Spiller/Fred-Ex combo? I don’t know. But it seems that Chan Gailey is the only person in the world who doesn’t realize that Spiller is a PLAYMAKER and that Fred-Ex might be the best 3rd down back to have in the league.
In fairness, our QB had an average game, he kept us in it. The field goal and clock management decisions murdered us.
-
I certainly hope Buddy Nix lives up to his promise of a franchise QB.
If you watched that game and think the QB is the issue, well then I'm sorry but you've missed the point entirely.
-
I am sure you were disappointed when they took your adolescent edits out of the page.
Actually, after I saw this topic, I searched him on wikipedia and saw that and laughed. I didn't make that edit.
Cool name calling though pal, you really got that whole condescension thing down,
On topic, Urlacher is too old for me be interested or be worth the exuberant contract we'd have to pay him to come here.
-
The Bills would be getting Alex Smith in the Prime of his career in my opinion.
2012 season stats, 1,731 yards 70% completion rating 13 touchdowns 5 INT 4 fumbles
Looks like more of the same, an average QB with a great defense and a great ground game. The Jets in 2009 and 2010 all over again. Look at Mark now.
And if you're going to bring up his QB rating this year, which is 104, keep in mind it's inflated by the Rams game when he got hurt after going 7-8 and a TD. And the awful Bill's game.
-
I was fine with Urlacher being a possible Bill until I read his wikipedia page...
"Long converted Urlacher into a "Homo-Back",[8] a cross between a linebacker and free safety, and placed him in a 3-3-5 defense scheme.[9] He spent significant time training with the team's catamite, Bronco Mendenhall, who helped Urlacher refine his skills as a homosexual.[5]"
Good defensive players don't need to take adolescent slaves.
-
Kaepernick just lost a game on a bumbling play an inexperienced QB would make
There's a bit of a difference between being benched and having an injury and your HC deciding to stay with the hot hand don't you think.
Besides, it wouldn't surprise me a bit If relations between Harbaugh and Smith have been a little rocky ever since Harbaugh made a play for Peyton after his signal caller just took them deep into the playoffs.
Alex Smith probably wants the hell out if Dodge yesterday, and the Bills should be taking advantage of the situation.
Alex Smith just seems like a waste of time, he's too little of an upgrade too late. He's more of a rehash than an upgrade.
-
Im curious...which of these QB's were Elite prospects coming out of college...Montana, Brady, Warner, etc.
Geezus, PTR you just do everything you can to find a way to not draft a QB and keep your beloved Fitz. I have news for you, the Bills will NEVER get a shot at an ELITE QB prospect (which is just a media and fan term because it means very little...see Ryan Leaf and a host of other ELITE prospects) unless they draft in the top 5 at the very min. ELITE QB prospects get drafted #1 overall and in the top 5. They dont fall to 15th in the draft. Great and Elite NFL players have fallen in the draft, but they were not ELITE status going into the draft like RG3 and Luck were.
But guess what...they do not have to be a QB graded to be an ELITE prospect to develop into a top NFL QB. And guess what else...if we drafted a QB who ended up being a good QB and not Elite, that would still be a large upgrade over Fitz who is not a good QB.
I forgot Brady was a top 5 pick. And I forgot Sanchez wasn't a first rounder.
Don't worry, you keep screaming about drafting an elite QB as you obviously know which ones will be elite. Shouldn't the Jacksonville Jaguars have emailed you a job offer because you obviously have the talent to pick out the best prospects?
I bet last year you would've picked Cam Newton and this year you wouldn't have, right?
-
Let's just change the name of the game from football to airball. Heck we already apply the foot to the ball less than a quarter of the plays. All the NFL wants to see is the ball in the air.
It's called football because the ball is 12 inches long.....
-
Yes it is easy. However you are not getting my point, obviously, which is that yes, the defense's job is to get off the field but the offense does play a part in a defense becoming gassed.
I don't know...I'm a head coach and offensive coordinator for a successful high school team. I see value in a sustained drive beyond yards and TDs. I see it as a chance to give my defense a rest as well, especially if they have been on the field a lot. That's been my position from day one.
Listen, I do understand that the defense needs time to rest, and letting them rest is important. However they are authors of their own fate, more than the offense in my opinion. Obviously there are going to be drives where the offense scores very quickly, or goes 3 and out very quickly. Our defense can not be gassed after that happens twice. That's unacceptable for this level of play.
Look at the Jets Cardinals game. It was 3 and out galore, but at least when Sanchez threw a pick, the Jets D got off the field by forcing another one.
To be quite honest, I don't even think the defense got tired in those games, I think they lost heart. Actually gave up on it. And I blame Wannstedt for that game and the 49ers game in their entirety. They may have been losses, but they didn't need to be blowouts if we had adjusted our scheme at all. He watched his defense collapse from the booth and froze in shock, like a bad horror movie.
-
Let's look at tha Patriots game, shall we?
Start of 3rd quarter:
We score, they score. Then: 3 and out, TD. 4 and out. TD. 2 plays. Fumble. TD. 3 plays. Int. TD.
Five straight scoring drives by the Pats* sandwiching 14 offensive plays by our offense. You are serious in saying the offense has no role in that onslaught?
BTW, our one kickoff return came after a long offensive drive for a TD, followed by the Red Sea parting for a CJ 83 yard TD on the first play after the kickoff. Our defense was not gassed. They just sucked.
Well I'll break this down, because my other champion of logic and comprehension has given up arguing with this logic.
A. The topic was about Ryan Fitzpatrick. He didn't fumble the ball, it was Fred. So blame him for the defensive stamina.
B. The interception was after we were down 21 points. I'd say that's a good time to take some risks throwing the ball. So I'm absolving Fitz of the blame there. Even if it wasn't picked off, and it was a 50 yard touchdown, the defense would still be "gassed." Obviously we shouldn't be trying to score because our defense is tired.
C. Has it ever occurred to you that had the defense held them to a three and out, or god forbid, gotten a takeaway like the two they dropped in the first quarter, they could've gotten off the field? Hold them on 3rd down and we don't have this problem. Momentum is a powerful thing, as well as field position. Picks and fumbles can set us up for scoring drives, allowing more time to rest.
So instead of allowing a 30 yard run every play because they are too "tired" after halftime doesn't equate to it being the offenses fault.
When you go from 28-7 to 35-52 and two 100 yard rushers in 20 minutes of play, it's pretty easy to point the finger.
-
So what? Nobody in the league would take Fitzpatrick over Kaepernick except Chan Gailey.
Kaepernick had 2 good games. Easy killer, he sucked last week.
-
No he's not...Smith is taller, better arm, better scrambler, more talented overall than Fitz by a good bit...He's a former #1 overall pick...
I'm not advocating going out and getting Smith either...But lets not make ridiculous statements here...Smith would most definitely be an upgrade to Fitz...
He just got benched for Kaepernick....
-
1. How would you categorize Fitz as a starting QB? Elite? Above-average? Average? Below-average?
Below Average- Bottom 5 Starter
2. What other current starting QBs is he comparable to?
Kevin Kolb, Matt Cassel, Christian Ponder
3. I honestly can say that the only qbs i wouldnt trade him for are Kolb and Cassel. I think he is just as bad as Sanchez.
This guy right here. This is either masterful trolling or he hasn't watched any games this year and just reads this board.
-
So, you're saying going from complete crap to mediocre in three season is where we need to go or should be happy with? While what you presented here is good and all - THE BILLS are still at the bottom of the NFL after 13 seasons. It took Chan/Fitz/Wanny three years to make us mediocre! GREAT!
STATS! Really? Stats? NOT WINS? Stats? Really?
This is a great reason for me to continue to spend my money to see them play?
Fitz doesn't have a lot of what Luck has ---- WINS! That's what matters most.
PLEASE see Chan's winning percent in three seasons. PLEASE!
Garbage is what this is!
It's called rebuilding. How many draft picks do we still have on our team since 2000. You call for everyone's head, and that's 3 more years of certain mediocrity where we will be bound to lose some of the talent we already amassed.
-
The formula for mediocrity
You heard it here first, whoever gets Te'o will suddenly be playoff caliber.
-
You're exactly right, Alphadawg7, I don't understand this. Furthermore I assert that for the most part, analysis of the facts doesn't support this theory.
There were some occasions (Jets game for example) where Fitz was a pick-o-matic. I will give the D a pass on those. They were put in lousy field position.
Barring INTs, though, the D always has its fate in its own hands, even if the O goes 3 and out. Time after time, our D has gotten 3rd and long - and allowed the other team to convert and keep them on the field, getting winded. If they stood tough, they just wouldn't be on the field that long. The Patriots games were classic examples of this.
If you score the games of winning teams, or even just look through the box scores, you'll see they all have multiple patches of 3-and-out. The difference is their D keeps handing them the ball back until they get something going. This was true of the K-gun offense also, by the way. They also would have repetitive 3 and outs, then finally get something going and fly down the field to score so quickly their D never got much rest.
All that said, Chan's play calling on 3rd and short has been atrocious, just atrocious. And we've gone 3 and out far too much on O. But we've also failed to go 3 and out far too much on D, and sorry, that's independent of the O for the most part (barring turnovers)
It's not blasphemy, it's just incorrect. Why people can't understand that a D that stays on the field and gives up back to back to back length of the field drives because they can't get a stop on 3rd and long has no one but itself to blame, is a mystery to me - well I guess it's not, either never played football or not much depth to the knowledge of the game.
Our defense gets off the field on 3rd down a hell of a lot more in recent games then past. Or do you not remember almost every drive ending up a score in the Tennesee and Pats games? We didn't stay in the game against Tennesee because our defense was holding, it's cause our QB was carrying the team. Or maybe you also forgot the Patriots come from behind massacre. Our QB had one pick trying to keep up when the score changed from 21-7 to 21-35. But I guess that's his fault too, not 30 yards rushing every play for 200 total in the second half.
When the opposing teams only had to have possession to score, (Tennesse, NE, Jets, San Fran), we lose. If we don't get off the field on 3rd and 17, we lose.
That's a stat that actually matters if you watched the games and not the fantasy football scoreboard.
-
they are meaningless...unless you lose them then it's look at our record and we couldn't even beat a bad Jacksonville team etc.
A hundred times this. The game is meaningless when we win, if we lose "this team sux fire everyone i hate this team wah im never coming back to this board wah." Honestly, I thought this was Two Bills Drive, not Two B**** Drive.
-
How you don't understand that our D was getting blown up because Fitz kept turning the ball over and going 3 and out or failing to sustain drives is beyond me.
If you think our defense wasn't playing awful before the last two weeks, I don't know what to say. The Titans put up 35 and were stopped once in the first half. Not easy to run on 3rd and 8 when that's happening.
Don't misread me, I did not say you can't win games without an elite QB. There are only about 6 or so "elite" QB's. I just said the Bills are less likely to win when they pass more than teams with good QB's would be. They are more likely to win with a running game and well timed play action throws due to Fitz's weak, innacurate arm. More passing for the Bills = more losing. You have to play to your strengths.
I thought you disagreeing with me at first, I totally agree. Especially because the runs allow the pass to catch defenses cheating, where dropped balls and bad throws are a little less risky. But the fact remains, you do have to throw more when you're down or can't stop the opposing offense. That makes the difference between a shoot out and a blow out.
-
I think we have to trust in the Texans for that.
Except that when a team is down by 2 scores with an entire half to catch up, it doesn't seem necessary (or productive) to empty the backfield and rely on the pass as much as Chan does. Even from the clock management point of view, it makes little sense for the Bills - our yds per minute metric is only slightly better when we pass than when we run because we're a short-pass team and have a pretty strong yards per run attempt.
Yes, but Chan calls the 5 wide formations, not our QB.
1. There was no way Luck would be Russell. No one who saw the 2 play would ever have said that.
2. They decided on his own to not re-sign Manning. And he fired the staff anyway (GM, HC).
Ryan Leaf had no shot of being a bust either. Oh wait.
-
It's not a great point. The reality is Fitz is a below average passer of the football. Yes, we know a team passes more when they get behind. The Bills are often behind. Fitzpatrick rarely wins those games. Good QB's bring their teams from behind and lead them to wins. Calling this a "fallacy" doesn't disprove the mounting body of evidence that Fitz is mediocre. To the contrary, it just makes the cheese more binding. Unlike most teams, the Bills would be more likely to win if they run more, beacuse they have two talented RB's. They are something of a throwback. If they try to play todays style of NFL game (lots of passing, a few runs to keep 'em honest) they lose much more often than not.
No, see that's wrong. Stafford throws 40 times and they lose. 49ers run all the time and win games. Minnesota runs a lot, they could've won today. Seahawks run a lot and won against the Bears. To say you can't win games without an "elite" QB is downright ridiculous because obviously there aren't 7 teams that are 10-1 and every other team is 1-10. There are about 5 QB's in this league who can carry their entire team most of the time, but even they still lose games. Every other team in the league needs to execute at all positions to win.
Fitz was outstanding.. for all you haters
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Except most of them do. Actually I'd say you're one of the few posters I've seen just looking for an upgrade, which I can agree with. We should be trying to upgrade every position always. Look how many people on this board say we need to start looking for the next HoFer in over to win in this league.
It's not an over-dramatization when you're the only when that speaks with some sense, That just makes you the exception.
I think a lot of the "apologists," myself included, want to make sure such an upgrade isn't a retread. I have no issues with a new QB if he's undeniably better than our current one. I just worry about our last QB choices, and hope we make some smarter ones.