Orton's Arm

Interesting post. But since I've decided to stop talking about Losman on this thread, I'll respond with something else. Something . . . related to the original topic of the thread. One of the things I like about these off-season changes is the increased depth at defensive tackle. We've added Triplett, McCargo, and Kyle Williams. With that kind of depth, I'm hoping the defensive tackles won't wear down as easily, and will be able to provide a good pass rush in the 4th quarter. Bill Walsh once said that a deep defensive line was the key to winning games. That dramatic Super Bowl win was a good example. The Bengals had the ball, the lead, and a chance to ice the win with a first down or two. But the 49ers had good depth on the defensive line. The good play by that line led to a Bengals 3-and-out; after which Montana marched his team down the field. I'd still like to see the Bills have more good players at defensive end besides just Schobel. But at least the defensive tackle position seems to be solid.

You're welcome.

The "Noodle Arm" nickname isn't half as clever as the Any_Arm_But_Losman's you came up with. That said, I'll refrain from posting further comments about Losman in this thread.

Losman's situation reminds me of Carson Palmer's. The Bengals used a first round pick on a quarterback. Like Losman, Palmer spent his rookie year watching and learning. The Bengals had a veteran QB whose contribution to the team had been roughly the same as Bledsoe's to the Bills. Palmer was annointed the starter going into his second year; with no quarterback competition. Palmer did go through some early-year struggles. But I've heard nothing about anyone on the Bengals revolting, or failing to play their best for Palmer, or doing any of that stuff. If anything, Kitna was in a stronger position to cause a player revolt than Holcomb was. Kitna had had years to learn the offense and earn his teammates' respect. Unlike Kitna, Holcomb had little starting experience. Also, Holcomb had to start from scratch with learning the offense and getting to know his teammates. Losman, on the other hand, had been given an extra year to learn the Mike Mularkey offense; and to gain the respect of his teammates. You say the Bills were angry about an established veteran like Bledsoe being sent away so an unready quarterback could take his place. But surely the Bengals players were in the same situation. In the Bengals' case, a revolt would seem to have made more sense, because the established veteran was sitting on the bench, ready to play, instead of with some other team. You could point out that Marvin Lewis, by setting a clear direction and sticking with it, did more to avoid a player revolt than Mike Mularkey did. Though one wonders: did Losman fail because Mularkey lost control over his team, or did Mularkey lose control because Losman failed? Mularkey seemed to have good control over his team back in 2004. Only when he made the decision to start Losman over Holcomb on opening day did the players seem to start losing trust in his judgement. You could compare Losman's situation with another one where the coaches failed to set a firm direction: the Flutie/Johnson controversy. Johnson was a young, unproven guy the Bills used a first round pick on. Flutie had a ton of experience from his time in the CFL; and he was able to come in and provide an immediate impact. Nonetheless, many of the Bills' players and coaches supported Johnson. I remember reading an article saying the locker room had become divided three ways. One faction (of which Eric Moulds was a member) favored Flutie. Another (to which Jerry Ostroski belonged) favored Johnson. The third--Jay Riemersma comes to mind--was neutral. Even in the absence of firm direction from the top, a relatively young, unproven Rob Johnson was able to show his teammates enough in practice and in games to have some of them on his side, and many others neutral. I could be wrong, but I just don't get the feeling Losman's support in the locker room is anything near to what Johnson's was. I doubt the Bills of today are much more impressed by Holcomb than the earlier Bills teams had been with Flutie. Maybe this particular Bills team sees less in Losman than the earlier one saw in Johnson. It's not exactly the kind of realization that would make you sleep easy at night if you were the Bills' coach.

And yet you've written Nall off after fewer games than that! Which is better: Losman's 13 appearances with a 63.5 rating, or Nall's six appearances with a 139.4 rating? If you need to write off one guy or the other, this one's an easy call.

Having spent some time on the Green Bay message boards, I've yet to come across a positive post about Mike Sherman's job as general manager. I don't know whether Nall is the answer--just that I won't blindly trust Mike Sherman's judgement. As for those who wanted Sherman as the Bills coach--it's possible for a guy to be a good coach but not a good general manager. Let's just hope the nearest example of such is as far away as Green Bay.

So in 2004, the Bears had to face Nall, and they finished with the 21st ranked defense. In 2005, they avoided Nall, and their defensive ranking went up to #1 or #2. Coincidence? I think not. On a more serious note, I didn't realize Chicago's defense was below average in 2004. But often if a team does well in a given year, it's because it had finished the previous year strong. So you'll hear about a team that went 6-10, but four of those wins came during the final six games. The next year, that team will be 12-4 or something. For Chicago to have done as well as it did on defense in 2005, you'd think the defensive improvement might well have started late in 2004.

What "sorry track record with QBs" are you referring to? Okay, I'll admit TD's first major QB decision was to draft Kordell Stewart. His next was to allow Neil O'Donnell to hit free agency, to be replaced with Stewart. Stewart worked out so well he was out of football after just a few years. After being fired from Pittsburgh, TD came to the Bills. His first major QB decision here was to trade away a first round pick for Bledsoe. Two years later, TD used another first round pick on Bledsoe's replacement. TD's decision to replace O'Donnell with Stewart had worked out so well that he decided to do the same thing again by replacing Bledsoe with Losman. Before the start of the 2005 season, TD concluded Losman had at least as good a chance of leading the 2005 Bills to the playoffs as Bledsoe did. The thinking was that Losman's mobility would make up for whatever newbie mistakes he might make. What possible reason could you have for not trusting the QB evaluation skills of someone like this?

I'd add to this by pointing out Nall has usually played well in the preseason. It's not much, but it's more than can be said of Losman.

That's a very extreme statement. In that case, your assessment of Reich was wrong. I agree with your amusing comment about the mad scientist. But how much of a line did Rob Johnson have in front of him? Not much, but he's still a bust. Or since you brought up Billy Joe Hobart, how good was the line in front of that guy? Maybe if Billy Joe Hobart had been given a line . . . well, nevermind. As for player support, the coach can't just go into the locker room and say, "I want you to start respecting player X." Player support is something Losman has to earn on his own. These players know a lot more about Losman than you or I do. If they don't support him, it's not exactly the best sign. Take Notre Dame, back when Joe Montana was a sophomore. There was an established starter there. But when that starter was pulled to give Montana a chance to play, did the players revolt? No! On the contrary, a wave of excitement rippled through the team--the players knew they were going to win. They loved the decision to put Montana under center. It took Notre Dame's coaches a while longer to figure out something the players already knew. I'll grant that a second-year QB has to fight an uphill battle to gain player preference over a seasoned veteran. But I don't get the feeling that anyone from the Giants felt as negatively about Eli Manning as some of the Bills' players apparently felt about Losman. Kurt Warner is a better quarterback than Kelly Holcomb, so you'd think that the Giants players would be more mutinous than the Bills. The fact the Giants' players seem to have been more accepting of the switch speaks volumes about the relative perceptions of Manning and Losman.

That's an easy call. I wouldn't want to bet my career on either one if I could help it. But if it had to be one or the other, I'd take the guy who could render the other team's defense Nall and Void. I've seen Green Bay fans suggest Nall may be the next Hasselbeck, or the next Brad Johnson. There are a few people who say Nall may be nothing more than a career backup, but for the most part the fans seem to think he should have been given much more of a chance than he was. Nall has played well not just in NFL Europe, but also in a regular season game against Chicago. In a preseason game against the Bills, the backups on Green Bay's offensive line were getting dominated by the Bills' constant blitzes. Nall responded by getting rid of the ball quickly; a trait Losman has yet to learn. Losman had some success playing backyard ball over at Tulane, but he's done very little to suggest he can make the transition to the NFL. Nall, quite frankly, has done a much better job of displaying NFL-style traits than Losman has. Reading complex defenses. Making decisions quickly. Things like these are what separate the Peyton Mannings from the Ryan Leafs; and they are also what separate Craig Nall from J.P. Losman.

That's a funny nickname you came up with! Glad to see the creative juices are flowing. I'll grant you that a Mike Sherman endorsement means little, whether its recipient is Losman or Nall. My main point is that if Nall outplays Losman, Nall should get the start. The fact that a couple of failed GMs thought Losman was worthy of a first round pick shouldn't cloud what would otherwise be a clear picture.

Physical potential or overall potential? I'll grant Losman is a more physically gifted player, but so what? As long as a QB can make all the throws, it's mental potential that determines most of his upside. I've seen nothing to indicate Losman has any more mental potential than Nall. On the contrary, if what Packers fans are saying is true, Nall is very good at seeing the field and making good decisions. Losman has yet to show he can do these things.

In economics terms, they shouldn't be. In the real world, they often are. Why? Because key decision-makers have their credibility tied up in specific high-profile decisions. A lot of TD's credibility was tied up in the outcome of the Losman experiment. On the other hand, if your fifth round pick never does anything, nobody will really care. Fortunately, none of Levy's credibility is at stake with Losman. You mention salaries. If player A and player B give you the same amount of football talent, you'd want to go with whichever player was cheaper. This is especially true under the salary cap. Sometimes it's hard to get rid of a guy due to the acceleration of bonuses. But usually by the time you figure out a guy isn't going to work out you've amortized most of his bonus anyway.

In order for a team to get the greatest comeback in NFL history, a number of things have to go right. Having Kevin Gilbride call the other team's offense was one of those things. Having Frank Reich under center was another. Be honest with me--do you really think a guy like Trent Dilfer or Gus Frerotte could have brought the Bills back? I don't. Yes, Kevin Gilbride's pass-oriented playcalling created an opportunity to come back. Reich was able to take advantage of that opportunity. A lesser QB couldn't have.

I'll grant Houston's playcalling could have been better in that game. It was, after all, Kevin Gilbride calling their plays. But even with that said, I still feel you have to give the Bills credit for playing lights-out in the second half. That credit goes first and foremost to Frank Reich.

Glad to know you think so highly of my other posts.

Losman had over 400 passing attempts both years at Tulane. Nall had just 250 attempts at Northwestern State. All those extra yards Losman piled up were because of the added pass attempts. While at Northwestern State, Nall achieved a higher yards per pass attempt than Losman. Nall's TD:INT ratio is about twice as good. Losman's college completion percentage is better than Nall's, but only slightly.

Thanks for the informative response, Lori. I'm guessing most of those 62 total games were garbage time. But between the six starts and whatever non-garbage time Reich received as a backup, he probably had at least as much experience as Losman does today. That weakens this particular example a little, but I feel my main point still stands: quarterbacks can learn on the practice field and in the film room. Maybe Reich isn't the best example of this, because he went into that Houston game with more playing time than I'd realized. So I'll give a different example. Like Losman, Tom Brady spent his rookie year on the bench, and got a chance to play in his second year. Unlike Losman, Tom Brady clearly outplayed Drew Bledsoe. I'm not saying every quarterback should be expected to play at the same level as Tom Brady. My point is that Brady's play in his first full year as a starter was in the same category as his subsequent accomplishments. He didn't need to inflict multiple years of poor play as the starter upon his team before showing what he was capable of.

Nall's best year was in Northwestern State, where he posted a 56.8% completion percentage. Losman's percentages were higher: 57.4% and 59.5%--but only slightly. To me, the real difference is in the TD:INT ratio. Losman threw twice as many TDs as INTs both years, while Nall threw nearly four times as many TDs as INTs while at Northwestern State.

I've always considered that comeback game to be the finest hour of Buffalo sports. It seems like you're belittling that game in a misguided effort to defend Losman.

Your second paragraph seems to be addressed to someone other than me, even though I'm the one you quoted. There's no way that anyone can possibly accuse me of being unaware of the possibility that Losman is a bust.

Sorry about that. Even Ryan Leaf could have led the Bills to the biggest comeback in NFL history. It's something that's done on a regular basis. Likewise, Leaf could have led the Bills to a playoff win against the Steelers in the following week, just like Reich did.

There's a world of difference between Carson Palmer's situation and Losman's. Palmer was generally regarded as worthy of a very high draft choice. But in Losman's case, most GMs and observers felt there was a big three at QB: Manning, Rivers, and Roethlisberger. Losman was more physically gifted than any of the big three, so these GMs obviously saw something else about him that wasn't as good. TD, however, decided he didn't agree with the consensus view; and that to him it was a big four. TD's track record for QB decisions is abysmal; so his endorsement carries little weight. Whereas you might be patient with a QB selected in the first round by Ron Wolf, you might be a little less patient with a physically gifted but rather inaccurate QB chosen by the same GM that drafted Kordell Stewart.

Adjusting to the NFL is a pretty broad concept. Some of the adjustment happens in practices, minicamps, film rooms, meetings, coaching, the preseason, that sort of thing. Losman had two off-seasons of this, plus his rookie year. All this, before he set foot on the field to play Houston. Then there's the adjustment process which happens through gameday experience only. But how much regular season experience did Frank Reich have before he led the Bills to that comeback win over Houston? Over time, those meetings, practices, and preseasons were enough for Reich to figure out which end was up; and that was with probably less regular season experience than Losman's had. Nor was Reich an isolated example. Look at the way Chad Pennington was able to quickly produce for his team after having spent significant time sitting and learning.