The Dean

I think you are right. He was flagged a bit.

I am love corn. Yes, Big gun, Small brain. Shoot what you don't understand. I doubt he's stashing drugs. He could be ditching paraphernalia like works and such. I'm thinking he's desperately hiding from someone in a place he feels is safe.

With this teams' tight ends? I think the mismatch would favor the defense, frankly. Sage, nice to see you posting. I heard you were missing. We have to remember Whaley has been trying to sign Orton for some time (months). Orton hasn't been willing because of: a. considering retirement b. waiting for another team to make an offer c. preferred to skip training camp---likely a combination. When it turned out Thad wasn't the guy the coaches thought he was, I suspect the Bills upped the ante a bit. Also, with the season about to start and with Orton still unemployed and unretired, the deal was made. I doubt Orton was going to play for too much less that what the Bill are giving him. I wonder what other QBs Whaley had been targeting offseason.

Chandler is OK. Last year he dropped a few big passes, if I recall correctly, but he has usually been reliable. I believe he is a serviceable blocker and just above that in the passing game. The Bills have certainly been in worse shape there. Lee Smith is a solid, if unspectacular, blocker. He actually seems to have good hands, and I don't recall him dropping passes. But he's a slow lumbering guy and when he's in the game the D typically doesn't have to pay all that much attention to him in the passing game. But these guys have been getting dinged-up in preseason, and I'm concerned the Bills will need to use another TE more than they would care to. I'd love to see a guy who can block and pass. Doesn't have to have great speed, but should be comfortable in the passing game and at least a good a blocker as Smith..

I have no particular connection to either school. But I believe UC Davis turns out a lot of top flight winemakers. So I'm going with Davis!

I love that he kicks for the coffin corner. For some reason that seems to be lost art. If he can kickoff and put I will be thrilled. Hell if he can simply punt effectively I'll be thrilled.

Agreed.

....thinking....thinking.... Oh, yes. I think I remember a few.

I made an edit to that post. Doesn't change things much but you may want to rebut something I added.

If you followed the entire discussion, I'm not arguing that completion percentage tells the entire story,. No stat does. But stats are also not to be completely ignored as The-Dude would have it. On their own they don't tell you too much, they can tell you something when matched with the play of the QB. I was simply rebutting his one example of where stats don't matter--and in this case the wins supported the better stats. One thing I think that is hard to overcome, though, is when a QB doesn't complete a reasonable percentage of his passes. That's not to say a check-down type is better because he has a higher completion percentage. But rather a QB that can't even complete 50% of his passes (Tebow for example) is a drain in the offense. It is hard to sustain drives at that level. I expect a starting QB to complete around 60% in the modern game. A couple percentages here or there are fine, if he's sticking some big throws. Now, there was a time when it was bombs away, and then QBs had low completion percentage. But that doesn't come into play for any of the QBs being discussed.

No, it isn't. You compared two QBs whose completion % wasn't all that different. One had talent, but played scared. The other played with courage, but had limited talent. Neither guy was a mad bomber, though Fitz took more chances. In the one year But even then the stats support my point. Trent actually completed a reasonable percentage of his passes (2008, where he completed 65.5% of his passes and started most of the games) the Bills were actually 7-7 in those starts accounting for all the Bills wins that year. The next year, when both QBs were under 60% passing, the team went 6-10,. The following season (2010), both QBs completion percentage dipped again, this time Fitz was two points higher than Trent, but all miserable (57.8 to 55.8) the Bills won 4 games. Fitz's complettion percentage increased to 62% in 2011 and the team won 6 games, 2 more than when both QBs completed less than 58% of their passes. Try again.

Pretty much sums it up.

I'll take it as a misstep. An accepted colloquial perhaps, but a misstep none the less. I believe "mental wherewithal" makes the intention abundantly clear--mental currency. Now that I have accepted your language rebuttal, please do better in your football rebuttal.

My experience was on the farm team, BKwik.

SlamnSam. Always bringing that sunshine.

I can't say I'm in, or not in. But I think the guy deserves the chance you give any 1st round pick who has been thrown in the fire in his first year. I'm not a fan of that, but I'm certainly not a fan of prematurely pulling a guy from a team that has gone out of the way to surround the guy with talent. I just hope the OL holds up their end so he gets a realistic chance to show what he can do. The micro-analysis of his play on this forum, by people probably better suited to...well I'd hate to insult anyone by naming a particular profession---let's just say many here who are his biggest critics provide the least intelligent analysis of his play. There are a few exceptions, but very few. I'm all in for giving the guy the chance he deserves. At this point, we really have no option, And anyone rooting against him (one scumbag poster wants him to be injured) isn't really a Bill's fan. The best case scenario fo this team is that EJ succeed. Root for him to show progress. Allow yourself to actually see the positive, should it occur.

It was noted in an earlier thread, of course. The poster was roundly chastised. Perhaps a bit unfairly I think as I saw it as a (weak) attempt at humor. But you are now an unwitting copycat of that. So I'm not giving you the same break.

Liquid, available assets, of only the people in the bidding group. Not "the family". Try again.

Really? That's your rebuttal. OK then. I guess you don't really have the mental wherewithal (that better?) to be of much use to me on the forum.

Got me on wherewithal apparently. Been using it wrong for years. Good catch. Learn something new every day You've managed to demonstrate you understand English. You still haven't really shared anything that suggests you know football. Not back to the football discussion. Surely my misuse of one word can't be your entire rebuttal,. Discuss, refute, agree with the facts and conclusions. That's typically how intelligent disagreements are settled, no?

Well said.

Yes, it's real, I wasn't sure you even had the wherewithal to address the issue. You surprised me by attempting. Good job. So I feel your attempt deserves a response. Stats, in a vacuum, typically don't tell the entire story. Combine with performance, however, they can be illuminating. Using just state to evaluate is stupid, but so is disregarding them entirely, IMO,. Completion % (far more than passing yardage) is an indication of the ability to sustain drives. Guys that can't manage to complete a reasonable percentage of their attempts are typically the victims of many 3-and-outs. That puts a ton of pressure on the defense. If Orton played his career with one team, who lived by the long pass, then I might be inclined to cut him a bit of slack, percentage-wise. That simply hasn't been the case with Orton. He does not have a particularly strong arm and has never been called The Mad Bomber" or anything like it. He is, at his best, a game manager. That simply isn't what you want in a game manager. Now, it would be irresponsible to note Orton has spent much of his time as a backup. That can have a negative impact on stats, particularly things like completion percentage. But he has been a starter in most every game in which he has played and his percentage remains well below 60%---as low as 51.6 in one year (his first) when he started 15 games, and once in his career he actually managed to top 60% with a 62.1% with 15 starts. Unfortunately that was in 2009. He has thrown more TDs than INTs (83-59) in his career---not too bad. Unfortunately that ratio has been declining since 2009. The stats, and his play, suggest his skills are declining. So we have a guy who has rarely been able to complete passes at a high enough percentage to be a considered a great game manager---who seems to be in decline. But I will admit, the last few years he has been at a disadvantage, playing few games as a backup. So what we have here, IMO of course, is the dictionary picture of "Backup Quarterback:. Plenty of experience, but never good enough to hold the starting job for long. On the other hand we have an athletic 2nd year, 1st round pick (with only 10 games of NFL experience) and a strong arm. Since we know what Orton can bring to the table---which is average, but proven to be not quite good enough for an NFL team, why not let our 1st round pick play a bit and attempt to show what he actually can do with some talent around him? What makes you think McCown wasn't approached? And if he had the choice between TB (with a new HC not tied to Glennon) and a HC and GM committed to their #1 pick from a year ago, what team do you think he would have picked? Remember we now know Whaley has been trying to sign Orton for months. Who else might have he tried to sign?

Not really what happened. Tebow was given the job by the guy who drafted him. Both men consequently lost their jobs.