jad1

Of course they were playing against a high-school QB today. Take a look at the last two weeks, where they were gashed on the ground for 400 yards. To have a game manager as a QB, the defense needs to stop the running game, get off the field on 3rd downs, and turn the ball over. The Bills defense cannot do this for four quarters. They're built too small.

They'd have to dump the Tampa-2 and play an attacking defense to make that work, not that's it's working now.

You mean Bruce Smith and Pat Williams, right?

Really? Peyton Manning owes his success to Jim Mora? Jim Kelly owes his to Hank Bullough? Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco made the playoffs as rookies playing under the stable leadership of rookie coaches? Same thing swith Mark Sanchez. Rex Ryan's experienced staff has developed him into a franchise-caliber QB in all of 4 NFL games? I'd love to see your list of QBs who came out of college with the talent and ability of a Kelly, Marino, Elway, or even Flacco or Ryan, who were broken by poor coaching. Either a QB has the ability to be a franchise QB or he doesn't. The key isn't in the development, it's in identifying those players in the draft.

What's even more maddening is watching Brandon Marshall contribute to Denver's 5-0 start. The same Marshall that threw a hissy fit over his contract that put the one that Peters' supposedly threw to shame. Yet, the Denver brain-trust was able to handle it without trading away one of their most talented players. The Bills, not so good in the player-management arena. Remember when Polian could go toe-to-toe with a player and his agent during a contract negotiation, but resolved each dispute without hurting the product on the field? Yeah, those were the days, when NFL professionals actually worked in Ralph's front office.

Yeah, like he did with Drew Bledsoe? Development of a QB is overrated. There is no such thing as breaking a QB who has the quality to be a NFL starter (like Kelly, Manning, Marino, Aiken, or Elway) by playing him too soon. These guys might struggle, but even when that happens they still show the potential to be NFL franchise QBs. If a QB has a true NFL mentality, like Rothlisberger or Rogers have, no amount of punishment will knock it out of him. You only get this "development" nonsense when a QB without the mentality to be an NFL starter fails. Losman and Edwards are not NFL starters, just like Todd Collins was not a starter, no matter how much coddling the coaching staff gives them.

Okay, so if they were trying to save face with the LT position by putting less talent on the field, why not bolster the DT position, or the LB position? We all realize that the Bills used the 11th pick in the draft on a back-up for Chris Kelsay, right? Would that pick be put to better use to replace Ellison?

I get that he needs time. That was a given when he was drafted. The question is, though, considering how the offensive tackle situation is a mess (and a predictable one at that), and the difficulty that the Bills have had stopping the run (predictable based on the size of their DTs), and the lack of depth at LB, was drafting a guy at #11 who might someday develop into the next Schobel the best use of the pick? I don't think it was.

Well they fixed that error by replacing Walker with a 7th round pick who never played a snap in the NFL.

So are you guys going to delete your accounts, or what?

I agree with that; kind of like Bryce Paup.

That too.

I think that the FO deserves criticism for believing that Walker was the answer. Most NFL observers would agree that he wasn't cut out to be a LT. And unlike Maybin, I think that Freeny and Dumervil have shown that they have a strong series of pass rushing moves, aside from just having speed off the edge.

So far he has shown absolutely nothing to indicate that he can play either DE or LB in the NFL. He lacks the size and bulk to play the first two downs as a DE. He lacks the necessary moves to play a pass rush DE. His size, speed, and limited pass rushing moves suggest that he should be playing in space, however he lacks the experience to play LB. He's a classic tweener, which makes him a project, which means the Bills, in their current state, shouldn't have even considered drafting this guy in the first round.

His skill set matches better with the linebacker position. Of all the top DEs in the draft, it was well-known that Maybin was considered the biggest project. I guess the Bills braintrust decided that they could take on a project in the first round.

Exactly. NFL QBs have to make plays, and when they don't or can't, they're replaceable.

Well except for Rothlisberger and Rogers, right? Those two guys aren't protected any better than Edwards, but they make plays all over the field. Even with a bad line, Edwards should be able to make a play here and there that makes you say, 'that's our QB of the future.' Name a play in Trent's carerr where he showed franchise QB potential. He's completed a couple of long passes, but he's missed on way more bombs than he's hit. Most of the big gainers the Bills make are dump-offs to RBs who pile up the YAC. The guy just doesn't have it. If he's better than Fitzgerald, let him finish out the year, but the Bills should be open to any opportunity in the offseason to replace him with a true QB that the team can be built around.

Last season: Orton 18 TDS, 12 Ints; Edwards: 11 TDs 10 Ints. Edwards has never looked better than Orton. Orton also looked way better than Edwards did in college.

Not to mention that he made some bold moves over the offseason and was eviscerated for them. That was a well-earned celebration.

Cinci is doing some nice things. Palmer is returning to form.

He has no downfield accuracy, which is a non-negotiable attribute in an NFL starting QB. Try again.

Want to know another falsehood? You can pick and choose when to add talent to a football team. If the draft comes up next season and the Bills have a chance to grab an top NFL QB prospect, they should take it, whether the team is ready for it or not. Did the Bills have great direction when they drafted Kelly in 1983? Of course not, they went 4-28 the next two seasons. But they used the opportunity to grab a great player. Was Atlanta ready to draft Matt Ryan last season, or Baltimore ready to draft Joe Flacco? Who cares if they were ready, those teams saw the opportunity to add a talented QB to the roster and took it. Passing on drafting a talented QB because the organization or current talent isn't ready would be foolhardy.

Because you don't replace ass with ass.

Trent Edwards isn't the only problem on this team. There are, of course, many other problems with the Bills. Edwards, however, has shown that he is not the answer at QB. He has no ability to rise above or raise the play of his teammates, which is something you want from a QB. Young, struggling franchises often need the QB to help turn the team around. Edwards has shown himself to be incapable of this. When it comes time for a new Front Office to flush this organization, Edwards should be on that list, with many others.

The comparison is not invalid. The Bills were 4-12 in the 1986 season, Kelly's first year, coming off of back-to-back 2-14 seasons. So I would argue that the current Bills, who are 14-18 the last two season, have BETTER talent now than Kelly had back in 1986. Bruce Smith of 1986 was no where near the player he was in 1990. And Jauron, as bad as he is, has a better record than Bullough. Kelly had worse coaching, and the talent level of the team was worse than it is today, and perhaps worse in franchise history. And Edwards is a "system" QB? There is no system in the NFL that makes a QB who can't throw downfield successful. Again, name one thing that has Ewards has shown on the field, on his own merits, that makes you consider him an NFL-quality starter. He's shown nothing, which makes him expendable.