Orton's Arm

You're welcome.

Mike Williams in Accident Mike Williams was involved in a traffic accident on his way to Bucs practice. Williams said his vehicle seemed fine, when suddenly its two driver's side tires blew out. The truck rolled over into a ditch. Williams suffered no injury. "It appears the truck's tires blew out due to excessive weight inside the vehicle," said an investigator. "That's funny," said Williams. "My truck was empty except for me."

I was bored, so here you go:

If you're impressed with what a guy's done in college, you give him time to develop in the pros. If, on the other hand, a guy didn't necessarily demonstrate the skills you're looking for back in college, and if he's not doing anything in the pros either, there's not a compelling need to be all that patient with him.

What? So soon? After just 18 pages of posts? Whaddya mean?

Concerned with all the anti-McGahee threads popping up, Levy traded him to the Jets. But thus far, McGahee has yet to contribute anything to the Jets team. How much longer will McGahee be a Jet?

There are quite a few Bills competing for that honor considering the types of guys TD would usually drag in.

Brady Quinn probably won't be a bust. Unlike Losman.

I'm glad I've risen well above that level. On a more serious note, I hope you're right in saying it's probable the Bills have their QB of the future on the roster. I've heard it said that if you have two quarterbacks, you really don't have any. Meaning, that if one guy isn't head and shoulders above the other, neither is going to work out as your starter. Well, you're telling me the Bills don't have two quarterbacks on their roster. They have three. If having two quarterbacks is the same as having zero, maybe having three quarterbacks is the same as having -1. In fact, I know just who the -1 is! But with each of these guys being given more of a chance to prove himself, maybe one will emerge as the true quarterback of the future. If not, there's always next year's draft. If our three guys tank, let's hope for a 1-15 season to get Brady Quinn!

Yet another comparison between a rookie QB's stats and those of a second year player. Ho hum. I brought up the Billy Joe Hobart situation because many Losman fans suggest you eat hot pockets if you give up on a guy after nine games. Billy Joe was given only nine games before getting the boot. I'm not suggesting that the Losman and Hobart situations are identical; just that the whole hot pockets concept is invalid. Losman makes the occassional pretty throw, but he's done nothing in college or in the pros to suggest he can be a consistent pocket passer. He was drafted by a guy whose track record indicates a willingness to overlook the absence of pocket passing skills in favor of athletic gifts. The general manager who said he wouldn't take Losman with the last pick in the seventh round is probably a better judge of quarterback talent than Tom Donahoe. In the highly unlikely event Losman outplays the other guys, he should be declared winner of the QB competition. It's possible for even a blind squirrel like TD to find the occassional nut. However, if Losman fails to win the competition, I don't see any reason to give him starting experience at the other guys' expense in the vain hope he'll become something he's not.

The Carson Palmer comparison I can buy. But in the other cases, you're comparing rookie quarterbacks who haven't yet learned the playbook or the offense with a second year guy who's been given ample opportunity to learn both those things.

I'll buy the fact that this team's problems were coming from a number of places, including the veteran players. So Losman failed to earn the respect of many of his teammates, but those teammates were often ineffective. Maybe he would have gotten more respect from a more effective bunch, but I doubt it.

It did: That's the Mike Williams I know!

Kitna's support is something I hadn't considered. Still, the Bills' players couldn't hope to bring back Bledsoe by revolting, because Bledsoe was with the Cowboys. The same was not the case with the Bengals and Kitna, or with the Giants and Warner. Moreover, Kitna's rating in 2003 was 87.4, while Bledsoe achieved just a 76.6 rating in 2004. So the Bengals were benching a higher producing veteran than were the Bills. I'm not sure what you're getting at here. There's always turmoil in the offseason, and players have come to expect it. But soon enough, the Bills had provided themselves with Plan A in the form of Losman, and Plan B in the form of Holcomb. The Bengals had Palmer as Plan A, and Kitna as Plan B. Are you saying that the Bills lost trust in management because they didn't like their Plan B as much as the Bengals liked theirs, and that this is the reason for the revolt? If so, the revolt sure took on a strange form. A good point. You're drawing a bigger distinction between 8-8 and 9-7 than I'd care to. This isn't exactly your strongest point. Regardless of whether the Bills chose Holcomb or Losman, Moulds would be stuck working with a new quarterback. So I don't see his desire for familiarity being the driving factor in his disrespect for Losman. On the contrary, leading up to that Miami game, Moulds had practiced more, and had played more, with Losman, than he had with Holcomb. If it was just Moulds' opinion, I wouldn't be too concerned. But the lack of faith in Losman wasn't just coming from Moulds.

I can believe that last year's coaching staff was a big part of the penalty problem. And the excessive blitzing problem. And a lot of other problems. While Fewell is completely unknown, I hope he's able to come up with a less predictable, more effective defense that's able to put the Patriots in their place. The other 14 games are important too. But unless the defense can do well against the Patriots, I'll always consider it second-tier.

The above quote is from a different thread. I'm responding to it here to give that other thread a chance to drift back towards its original topic. Carson Palmer was generally regarded as being worthy of a very high draft choice. At least two general managers felt that way about Losman; but both men have since been fired. Other general managers saw the situation differently, including at least one who said he wouldn't take Losman even in the 7th round. While nobody questioned Losman's athletic abilities, many felt he wasn't accurate enough or a good enough decision maker to be worthy of a high draft choice. A widespread endorsement by general managers around the league--such as the one Palmer had--is more convincing than the endorsement of a general manager who, at least in the past, allowed himself to place more importance on a quarterback's athletic gifts than on his accuracy or decision-making. The two situations are vastly different from a pedigree standpoint. But both Losman and Palmer faced similar situations in terms of gaining the respect of their teams' veterans. Both sat on the bench their rookie years, both were annointed the starter ahead of a popular veteran leader going into their second years, and both suffered early-season struggles. Based largely on what the Bengals saw of Palmer in practice and in games, they chose not to revolt. Based on what the Bills saw of Losman in practice and in games, many chose differently. I'm not saying the two situations are exactly the same; but they're similar enough that you should be worried.

I can buy that. When I think of defensive penalties, I think of London Fletcher. Not that all the calls against him were justified, but I still feel he could have done a better job of avoiding many of those calls. With rookies like Whitner and McCargo on defense, and Fletcher still here, I'm not sure how much progress we'll be able to make in cutting back those penalties.

The real question is, would I be able to support him? My stomach would be distended from all that crow I'd have to eat, so I'm not sure how much support I could give anyone if I'm lying in some hospital bed.

Mostly, I'm responding to those who are all starry-eyed about him based on all those draft picks we gave up to get him. Others seem to believe that athletic ability plays a greater role in determining a QB's success or his upside than I think it does. Tom Brady has the mobility of a three legged tortoise, but his accuracy and good decision-making allow him to take control of the game. I want the Bills to have a quarterback with these abilities too. Losman doesn't have those traits now, and I doubt he ever will.

In the eyes of a Losman partisan such as yourself, I'm sure they have been. Obviously there's nothing anyone can say about Losman which will change your mind, so I'm not too worried about what you believe or don't believe. My main point about Losman is that there's nothing special about him which should cause the Bills to be any more patient with him than with a relative unknown like Nall. Yes, Losman was selected with a first round pick. But the guy who selected him didn't have a clue about how to judge a quarterback. I've heard there were other general managers who wouldn't have drafted him even in the seventh round. I'm tired of reading about how much physical talent Losman has. Akili Smith had plenty of physical talent too. I'm even more tired of reading about how, if you've already given up on Losman after just nine games, you must eat hot pockets. You know how many games Billy Joe Hobart played for the Bills? Nine. You know what his career passer rating was? 67.0 Losman's is 63.5. As long as Losman's on the roster, you may as well have him take part in the quarterback competition. But the main part of being a good quarterback is the ability to throw accurately, to read defenses quickly, and to make good decisions. I see no reason to act as though Losman is more likely to develop these traits than any other young quarterback who may happen to be on the roster.

That's my line. The difference is that I used it in reference to a reasonable post.

Then act like it.

You're trying to tempt me into making another Losman post on this thread, aren't you? I mean, this is the kind of post I'd love to respond to. But instead, I'll make another comment about the Bills' defense. Even in 2004 when the defense was good--overrated but good--I noticed the Patriots had a lot of success with throwing short, quick passes, and with running the ball to the outside. The improved secondary should help trim back the success the Patriots will have with those short passes; and maybe Whitner's speed will be an asset in shutting down those outside running lanes. Maybe the defensive scheme would help too, in that it places a premium on speed and swarming; things that are generally good at shutting down the outside run. Maybe Belichick will respond by running the ball straight at our rather smallish DTs.

Um . . . YOU of all people aren't in the best of positions to be complaining about a crusade. There are maybe four or five people who are responsible for at least half the pro-Losman posts, and who respond to any criticism of Losman by personally attacking the messenger. You are one of those people. If you're going to complain about my "crusade," you need to start acting a lot less like a crusader yourself.

I agree with 90% of the above, and I don't feel like arguing about the remaining 10%. Certainly the Bills should do their best to look at the camp competition with unbiased eyes. Kelly the Fair and Balanced Dog made an interesting point about that competition, in that Holcomb would have the edge based on his veteran experience. Nonetheless, Kelly TFABD thought Holcomb shouldn't be allowed to win the competition, based on his age and limited upside. I have to admit that if Holcomb and Nall played roughly evenly, I'd give the benefit of the doubt to Nall for those reasons. I can only speak for myself, but I'm not trying to annoint Nall the savior based on just 33 pass attempts. It'd be like offering a woman a marriage proposal after the first date. Still, if a woman is everything you could possibly hope for on that first date, you ask her out again. A 139.4 QB rating is everything you could possibly hope for from your quarterback. Marv made a good decision by bringing Nall in for a closer look.