ATBNG
-
Posts
685 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ATBNG
-
-
A message board community can be enhanced with a mix of posters that even includes those who choose a controntational personality. It only becomes pathetic when one of those who chooses such a personality is unable to "take" in the same manner in which he "gives".
As for your comprehension level, high school might be a bit of a jump. I'd think you'd find it a bit embarassing to note that among all the posters in the string you're the ONLY one confused about the subject in the title.
TTU later, it's gotta' be time for your nap!
Right on with that first paragraph as you lob more insults at me rather than answer the very simple question of who the "good QB" you are referring to in your title is.
Here's a webpage that might be able to help you with your next "football observation." Momma JokesI'm probably the only one in the string that is too new to have figured out that debating with you in a civilized and intellectual manner is not possible. I won't be fooled again. The continued deviation of Drew and Brady's career paths from your skewed view of them will be punishment enough.
-
Still trying to differentiate between "Push" and "Pull" I see!
Carry on! You may see the ,"ahem", light when you go back to the original post, a post you alone seem to be struggling to grasp. I'll be sure to dummy the next one down so that there's less of likelihood for you to be forced to embrace the conical cap once again!
Right - when there's no intellectual defense to your argument, childishly insult the people that disagree with you. Aren't you over 40 years old? What's up with that?
You're not going to tell everyone who "the good QB" is, because you know that it makes you look pretty foolish to admit that you meant Drew Bledsoe on 11/16/2004. Apparently digging up insults from your high school days makes you look better by comparison. You might be right about that!
-
The Corleone reference is yours. But I'll play. How's this:
You can lead a horse to water, but somebody always seems to end up with their head stuck up its ass. (Having one's head in there might also explain a considerable difficulty with reading comprehension)!
The fact is that Brady is a poor Red Zone QB who is bailed out by the best kicker in the NFL during the regular season, the post season and especially during big games. I have led you to the facts; you need look no further than the New England game recaps to see that Brady chokes more often than most NFL QBs once he crosses the 20 yard line. Ignore it, deny it, but its a fact supported by his play every week and the resultant stats. This week is a perfect example:
6 Red Zone trips, a running back in Corey Dillon having a field day against us, and only 2 TDs to show for it. It's why Brady remains among the worst in the league in points per red zone play- his red zone trips are most likely to end up as Vinatieri scores.
Bottom line- Brady is very, very good between the 20s and he consequently gets himself a lot of Red Zone opportunities. That's the premium on his playing ability, between the 20s. It does not change the fact that he's a proven underachiver once he hits the red zone.
How is Vinatieri “bailing” him out? He’s supposed to make 90+% of his kicks from inside 40 yards. He’s just doing his job.
You don’t understand the difference between “statistics” and “statistics that actually mean something.” Taking a statistic like Brady’s red zone performance and calling him an “underachiever in this area” is somewhat akin to looking at Cindy Crawford circa 1988 and dismissing her on the basis of her mole. It’s laughable to the point of absurdity.
Brady was a 6th round pick and is 47-13 in his career with two rings. These are “statistics that actually mean something.” He’s the biggest overachiever at his position in the history of the NFL. Splitting hairs on specific stats is entirely unreasonable in analyzing what the kid has accomplished.
Instead of these non sequitur insults, why not answer the question? Who is the good QB referenced in your thread title that succumbed to pressure? Is it really the guy who had an 11 QB rating going up against a nickel package that consisted of a UDFA, a practice squad player, and a wide receiver? And if the answer is yes, did you really just have the temerity to suggest that *I* have my head someplace it shouldn’t be? I shudder to think where yours is.
-
First of all, who is the “good quarterback” referenced in the title? Please don’t tell me it is Bledsoe. He is good compared to the QB on my kid’s Pop Warner team. Today though in the NFL, his past stats mean about as much as Dan Marino’s.
Second of all, insulting Brady for his red zone performance is ludicrous. He got his team in the red zone six times and scored six times (26 points) against the 3rd ranked defense in the league. BUFFALO DID NOT GET INTO THE RED ZONE. You can’t crow about Drew’s red zone ranking this week because there is no data to speak of. If between the 20’s productivity is so easy, what does it say about Bledsoe that he could not even achieve that once in a game?
I’m going to be like Michael Corleone here speaking to Carlo. Admit your mistakes, AKC. Admit that you were wrong. Drew is not a good quarterback. He can’t carry Brady’s jock. These posts where you take one bad play amongst 40 by Brady and one good play by Drew and attempt to argue what you are so desperately hoping for but what is so far removed from reality – I mean I hope they don’t end because they amuse me, but they are without any merit whatsoever. You seem to be a serious student of the game who tries to look at the entire field for your analysis, but you have the blinders on for this one.
I will agree with you on one thing – it’s not the coach’s fault. It’s the guy who hired him.
-
Who is this glorious SAVIOR we passed on by taking Losman instead ? This is a hollow argument unless I hear specific names of franchise players worth a top 10 pick in the 2005 Draft. Kyle Orton ? I can name 4 QB's, mimimum, ranked ahead of him. Leinert ( USC), Rogers ( Cal ), Fry ( Akron) & Orlovsky ( U. Conn ).
Since I follow College football very closely, good luck dropping names.
No savior - just a young guy who could have come in for six years and upgrade a position, of which many need upgrading.
This one only projects two QB's as going in the first round - Leinert and Rodgers.
Now Mark - you said earlier that the Bills should pick up proven NFL free agents. That sounds like a good plan, but reality might be much more difficult. There are always players out there that slip through the cracks, but for the most part NFL free agents are free for a reason. They either did not fit in with their last team or they believe that they are worth more money than their original team does. So now it comes down to Donahoe deciding which guys to bring in at what rates in order to build a team with a coherent philosophy. He hasn't done it successfully in four years - why would he begin to do so now? His indecision has also left the salary cap with less flexibility than it could have had - the Bills will be paying JP and Drew in 2005, as well as Travis and Willis...so that wastage will impact what they can do at other positions as well as their depth.
The fish is rotting at the head.
-
Parcells passes on Steven Jackson-future superstar
TD pulls a coup and jumps ahead of Green Bay and snags a talented QB with huge potential.
Dallas has zero running game and is a poor football team.
Buffalo is on the up and up. Our rookie QB gets to get reps in this year and will have that experience to build on for 2005. Not to mention we do not need to tie up money for a first round pick. It frees up cap space to sign a proven veteran.
TD kicked Parcells ass on that one!
1. There is no evidence Jackson is going to be better than Julius Jones.
2. There is no evidence that JP is "talented" - he is all potential right now.
3. Dallas is having a bad season, but how is this relevant to the Bills??? At least they'll have two picks in the draft next year to help position themselve to get better.
4. Buffalo is just slightly better than last season and worse than two seasons ago.
5. Buffalo has signed lots of veterans in the TD era, and it hasn't meant anything in terms of winning.
6. Not every high first round pick is a bust - just the ones that Donahoe picks apparently.
Thus far, TD has by far gotten the worst of this trade. Not one player in the deal has done anything but Dallas has a top tennish pick in hand (I still have some faith that Buffalo can get that pick into the 12-15 range).
-
I'm not sure why this keeps coming up.
Having a high first round draft choice is historically NOWHERE near the coup people like it to be. More often than not, the player doesn't contribute to his salary number until the 3rd year of his contract. Almost half of the time, they never do.
I'm much happier having the cap room that'll be available to sign proven veteran players who will contribute immediately in positions of obvious need than take a chance on a rookie who may very well end up being the "best player available" like a Willis McGahee.
It keeps coming up because your contention that teams would rather not have high selections in the draft has never been borne out with an actual team making a trade where they intentionally give away a high pick for a lower one in order to avoid paying the salary and clear their cap for veterans. It has never happened. It's a reasonable theory but I don't see how you can sell it when no team has actually acted on it yet.
The draft pick if nothing else gives the team more flexibility, and there is a rookie salary cap.
-
Jad - you're right. I'm just trying to be over the top with that one. Not trying to be offensive.
-
Actually I have met Drew and spent some time talking with him. Granted it was a few years ago but I don't think he's changed that much as a person. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve to be criticized for his current lack of abilities. I'm saying the personal shots at him are unnecessary and unwarrented. Anybody here put into his situation would handle themselves the same way. How do you know he doesn't do the physical, social and mental work required to be successful? How do you know he doesn't want it enough? According to everybody on this board he doesn't have the SKILLS. No amount of preparation can make up for a lack of skills. I don't buy it for a minute.
He was the first pick in the 1993 draft. He’s been paid more money than any other player in football since he came into the league. Both of these facts point toward a player that either has excellent raw SKILLS.
Yet he has a career losing record despite playing six years under probable Hall-of-Fame head coaches and another four years (97, 98, 03, 04) on teams with very highly ranked defenses. His career passer rating is astoundingly mediocre (76.5). He doesn’t seem to have the faith of his teammates – witness Reuben Brown’s hissy fit from last year, or the Patriots’ very quick assimilation to Tom Brady in 2002. He doesn’t stay with his organization in the offseason to work on his game but retreats to Montana. His mechanics come and go frequently. He can’t make plays to his left. He doesn’t sell play-action convincingly.
I'm not taking personal shots at him. I'm saying what I think of his performance as an NFL player. Is Coy Wire a good person? How about Ryan Lindell? They get trashed regularly on the board. How come they don't get this "good person" defense? It's always Drew and Stevetojans grandmother that get high marks as people. It's simply not relevant. Grady Little was a good guy, but he was a horrible baseball manager. If the Red Sox used the decency criteria, they might have never won a championship. Sentamentality is a killer in pro sports - too tough a business for that. Fans want results.
Maybe it's the "Parenting with Dignity" books that set Drew apart in this regard for posters. I admit - I think it's a nice notion that he wishes to be a good parent and appreciates his solid upbringing. On the other hand, his kids aren't that old yet so I question whether he really could be classified as an expert from whom I should take advice. The true test for Drew as a parent might be when his kids get in that 15-18 age range where they'll figure out that due to Dad's career they can snort coke off the back of a stripper and only put a slight dent in their allowance.
-
I don't believe it anymore. If that were the case, he'd be more prepared to play than he was last night. I think just a the opposite - compared to other players at his position, he does not do the physical, social and mental work required to be successful. He doesn't want it enough.
And I'm sorry - I'm tired of hearing about this "good guy" nonsense. First of all, I'm guessing you don't know him from (his brother) Adam - you just go by what you see and hear in the press and from other people. Everyone on the planet is supposed to be a good person - why does this guy get extra credit for it??? Saying that I'm being "pathetic" criticizing his abilities as a quarterback because he's a "good person" is just an inane argument. I don't have to be good at athletics myself to reach that conclusion.
-
OW should have cut him then. They'd have taken the 7 million dollar hit now. They're in 15th place out of 16 teams in the conference. Is it that big a deal to be 15th versus 16th this year when the future is being wagered so carelessly? This is the exact time to take th ehit - when the team isn't good enough anyway.
This is how awful a manager Donahoe is - he clearly made moves for this year between the Drew deal and the Losman trade as if the Bills would be a 9-7, 10-6 wild card type team. Instead they're in 15th, they're down a first round pick to the rest of the league, and he's extended the time period for which they have to play Bledsoe.
TD is the one who traded for Drew and his contract, and he just couldn't admit he was wrong. This extension of the time that the Drew trade hurts the team is inexcusable.
-
For everyone who defended the decision to keep Drew in the offseason and cite his yards, his productivity, his golden arm, his two Super Bowl appearances, that overrated performance in the 2002 playoffs against Pittsburgh – it is now time to admit that you were wrong. He doesn’t have in his soul what it takes to lead a team to the promised land.
Look at last night from Drew’s perspective. He’s coming into Foxboro – a place where he spent 9 years. He’s playing at a stadium that he arguably helped build. He’s playing against the coach and the team that benched him. There was a chance during Super Bowl week in 2002 that he might play over a slightly hobbled Brady in the biggest game of them all, and Drew was relegated to the bench.
Imagine if that happened to you at your job, and some younger person was chosen to make a big presentation in your stead. Would you not be extra prepared and extra focused if you got a chance to redeem yourself or compete against that person at some point in the future? Would you not put your heart and soul into proving to everyone that they made a big mistake passing you over?
Last night Drew was lethargic, slow, easily fooled by coverages. He looked underprepared and sluggish. His play action was dreadful. His mechanics were out of whack. Most critically, his body language and persona oozed defeat. He looked beaten from the time the game started, and clearly he had the look of a man who was in over his head as he stood on the sideline after being benched. He’s a loser.
Restructuring Drew in the offseason and extending the time period of the Bills’ financial commitment to him was the keystone mistake among many that should cost Donahoe his job. If he couldn’t figure out in two years being around a high profile guy like Drew that he doesn’t have it, then he has no chance to hit on enough of the other 52 guys to get the Bills’ back into the playoffs.
-
a 9 and 7 record COULD get us a playoff berth, isnt that right?
I know nothing about the head to heads or afc records, etc....
Is it really true that we are now officially out?
If its simply record and we COULD go in iwth a 9 and 7 record, we will suffer through maybe even 4 more weeks of Drew. It wont be until we lose our 8th that we are officially out. Thats at least 2 more. If we beat the Rams at home, thats 3 weeks that JP doesnt start.
I see no way in hell TD or MM starts JP when we still are mathmatically in it.
9-7 is not going to get a playoff berth in the AFC this year. There are 8 teams in the AFC that are 6-3 or better. In order for Buffalo to get in at 10-6, three of those teams would have to finish the season 3-4 or worse. In addition, the tiebreakers (loss to Jags, loss to Ravens, 6 AFC losses) are already highly unfavorable. I suspect this will be a year that a 10-6 team in the AFC does not make it in.
The Bills should do what's best for the franchise starting now. 2004 is over. What is best - well, that is up for debate.
-
Debating Losman versus Drew obscures the real debate that is important for the franchise - Donahoe or Dona-no.
The man be better than I am at judging NFL talent, but I'm failry confident he's average to below average when comapred to his peers.
2004 seems out of reach with the Bills' in 15th out of 16 and with 8 AFC teams at 6-3 or better. The brass needs to determine whether Donahoe is hitting with ALL his acquisitions at a high enough clip overall and not solely base it on Losman's performance or lack thereof.
-
I thought the play early on where Harrison dropped a likely INT-TD was very telling. They lined up Troy Brown on Moulds on 3rd down, and then switched the coverage after the snap. They knew Drew would be tempted to throw to that matchup, and he made a bad read that should have gone for seven the other way.
That type of play indicates that Drew is owned.
Drew is seemingly always one step behind. Considering that as well as his massive income intake since arriving in the NFL, I would LOVE to play poker against him.
-
I thought Drew's comments after the 2003 season finale where he said he'd sit down with Donahoe to discuss Gregg Williams's future were telling. There is some special treatment. He got it with the Pats as well until his injury.
Donahoe's best hope to retain his position is to convince the fandom that the Evans/McGahee/Losman troika is a future powerhouse. I think that at this time this will be best served by Losman sitting. If he plays when he is this green, Wilson et al might conclude once and for all that TD is incompetent and send him on his way. Losman has to be big time considering th ehuge price that was paid to acquire him.
-
I for one feel as though game experience is only helpful once the guy has enough organizational, practice, and film experience for game experience to be meaningful.
JP looked so horrible out there that I would be in favor of his spending more time on the bench. He doesn't even know yet what he'll need to know, or some cliche like that applies. Patience is required at this point.
-
I have a friend of the family this evening in ICU fighting for his life. He has a broken neck, collpased lungs and is in a drug induced coma to prevent further injury.
No one knows if he will even survive this, be paralysed or walk away with a few injuries. Please pray for my friend who is a good man, a good family man and a very respectable member of the San Diego community.
Life is unfair sometimes. This man derserves so much better and I cannot fathom God's plan in all of this. Please pray for his recovery and support for his family.
That is horrible. I will do as you ask. Good luck to your friend and his family.
-
I think that there is some truth to that. Lawyer takes a lot of bad angles in general in both coverage and on blitzes. He's got a big heart and he's a great leader, but he does overpursue generally on defense and sometimes overestimates his own speed trying to run aroudn people or at wide angles.
The Patriots have big money players at CB, QB and DL. In general, these are three of the highest paid positions in football. They also had a highly paid safety in Milloy, but his is a position that is among the cheapest in football. Therefore, it made the most economic sense to cut Lawyer, along with the fact that he's not the player that Law/Seymour and Brady is.
-
You don't start Losman until you are mathematically out of it. Even if you have a shred of a chance you stay with your opening day starter. That's just how it is in the NFL.
Remember how Wade was (rightly) crucified for quitting on his team? The same would happen to MM if he pulled the plug too soon.
I think it is over in terms of the playoffs. They are now in 15th place out of 16 in the conference. There are eight teams that are 6-3 or better in the AFC. Three of them would have to go below .500 and the Bills would have to go 7-0 to have any chance. 1 in a 1000. At this point, you do what's best for the franchise.
-
It's been a good run. He's made more money than practically anyone over the course of his career to play a game. He just doesn't have IT. He's never had IT. You can take all the stats and yards and Super Bowl appearances and just put them to rest for good please - he's lacking something, and there's no chance it's showing up now after a random 12 year hibernation.
Drew is a caretaker. For the Bills' sake, it better be a caretaker for Losman.
-
Losman looked horrible. Drew starts next week without question. 2005 will be Losman's time if it is going to happen - he just doesn't have enough NFL experience (meaning everything - film, practice, etc.) to be viable right now. Both turnovers in garbage time were eyepoppingly bad.
-
You are likely correct. And what I am saying, for the third time, is that what the RNC did in plain sight, was different than what they did when there weren't cameras everywhere. Karl Rove has said that the evangelical right was delivered Bush his "mandate". While the RNC pandedred to this group on the campaign trail, they made an effort to keep them out of sight at their convention. The Democratic party is truly, for better or worse, a party of inclusion. There are numerous factions in the Democratic party. They tried to represent them all.
The Democrats are not a party of inclusion. Look at what they've done on abortion. There was a steady contingent of pro-life democrats just 15 years ago. Now they are treated like pariahs. Bob Casey (the Democratic governor of an eternal swing state - Pennsylvania) had to speak at the RNC because he was pro-life.
What the Democratic party tries to do is to appeal to its voters through grouping - you are this race or sex or sexual preference or economic status, and so we will clearly be better for you in that context because we will do this for your group (and thus elevate you). If you identify yourself as an individual that places his/her group statuses secondary, I suspect you're more likely to vote Republican. Even though this administration has been atrocious on spending, there still is a better fighting chance backing the Repubs than the Dems if you feel the federal and total tax burden is far too excessive.
The Dems need to stop assuming they have the intellectual high ground and start fighting for it again. I'm never buying that they are progressive though. They continually want to raise taxes and spending and increase the amount of involvement and particpation that government has in controlling people's economic decisions and redistributing wealth. Just what are they progressing towards?????
-
Why? We're not expected to win. We're 3 and 5 for god sakes. You better hope the Pats win because your team will look awfully bad losing to a 3-5 team at home no less. The whole damn country is expecting a Pats trouncing. The Bills have had many crushing defeats in their history so a Bills loss on Sunday would be down the list on the crying meter for their fans.
I guess I don't understand this attitude. Being happy with diminished expectations seems a bit defeatist to me. Buffalo will be 3-6 with every loss in the conference (and with the conference looking strong enough across it that there might not be any 9-7 teams that get in) if the Bills lose.
If the Pats lose, they're 7-2 and still in control of the division with no prior losses. They'll still be 24-3 over their last 27 games. They're not going to look bad nationally no matter what the result is.
The 1994 Pats were 3-6 and down 20-0, and made the playoffs. Why look for moral victories before elimination?
This game is everything to the Bills. Everything.
It's pretty obvious to me now
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I agree on the reasoning, but not the motivation. JP isn't ready to play as Sunday night showed, and as long as JP is an unknown quantity, TD looks he's set up the Bills for the future.
It would be nice if they, you know, won a majority of their games one of these years.