Orton's Arm

If you're saying Losman has a world of physical talent, I agree. But if playing QB was just about physical talent, why not line Willis McGahee up under center? He'd be faster than every QB except Michael Vick. The real question is whether Losman has the accuracy and mental tools to play QB. You don't know whether 95% of GMs felt he had these mental tools or not. TD and Mike Sherman felt this way about him, but both men are failed GMs.

I want the guy with the better brain. Based on the favorable comments I've seen about Nall from Green Bay fans, it may well be him. A longer thread about Nall also sends the same message--except for the Cal to Green Bay guy.

My point--which apparently you missed--was that teams are often wrong when drafting QBs. They draft the wrong guys (Tim Couch, Akili Smith, Ryan Leaf, etc.) while ignoring the right guys (Tom Brady, Kurt Warner, Joe Montana, Jake Delhomme). General managers as a group aren't good at predicting QB success, and TD was worse than most.

Losman had his whole first year to learn the playbook, study film, and adjust to the NFL. Rookie QBs typically struggle largely due to their lack of familiarity with these things. But Losman wasn't a rookie. Speaking of Ryan Leaf, I remember him leading the Chargers to a comeback win over the Bills. Just because you see flashes from the new guy doesn't mean you'll ever see anything more.

Only two of those were deep strikes to Evans. The third was where the Bills' drive began already in FG range. There was nothing wrong with Losman on those deep balls to Evans, because throwing deep balls to Evans is one of the two things Losman does well. But the things Losman did badly also affected the outcome of the game. Near the Miami goal line, Losman was given a nice, safe pass play to execute. But--surprise!--Losman's pass was very inaccurate, and got intercepted. His defenders saw this as a playcalling problem, not as a problem with Losman himself. And that's typical of how a lot of posters react to Losman. On the rare occassion when he does something well, they give him the credit. But when he messes up, these posters blame anyone and everyone other than him.

Brady was chosen in the 6th round, and Kurt Warner spent time bagging groceries because nobody drafted him. Akili Smith, on the other hand, was chosen third overall.

I'm trying to picture Mike Williams on a basketball court with his four Chinese teammates. I'm not an expert in the appearance of the Chinese basketball team, but I'm guessing those guys would look like twigs next to Mike Williams. So you'd have four Chinese guys who were mobile and could jump. Then you'd have a big black guy who could fill whatever need the team may have for someone who could stand there and take up a lot of space. The problem is that basketball involves moving from one end of the court to the other. To solve this problem, you could put roller skates on Mike Williams. Every time there was a change of possession, Williams' teammates could push him from one end of the court to the other. These skates would have brakes, which Williams could turn on once he'd arrived at where he was supposed to be. He'd stand near the basket, and physically prevent anyone from the other team from getting too close. By simply standing there and reaching up, he'd probably be able to get a certain number of rebounds.

Not every play can be a 40 yard bomb to Evans. Sometimes, the pass protection just isn't there. In fact, with Anderson, Teague, and an injured Villarrial in the lineup, the pass protection was almost never there. A 4 yard gain sure is better than a sack.

Where Losman was drafted is irrelevant. For one thing, sunk costs are sunk--you ignore them in making future decisions. Secondly, TD's track record in making QB decisions is abysmal. TD thought Losman was worthy of a first round pick; but maybe real GMs like Bill Polian or Ron Wolf would see the situation differently. I'm not sure where you got the idea Losman's arm is stronger than Nall's. That aside, both QBs are more mobile and have stronger arms than Brady. Neither Nall nor Losman will fail due to a lack of physical gifts.

Physically, both Nall and Losman have a lot more to offer than Tom Brady. I'm not worried about the physical stuff. Can they see the field as well as Brady can? Can they make decisions as quickly and as well as he does? Do they have Brady's leadership skills? Can they be as accurate as Brady, with Brady's timing? There's where the real potential for upside (or lack thereof) comes in. Bearing all this in mind, take a look at Nall. I'll grant the possibility Nall may be a one-game wonder. But a 139.4 QB rating--largely compiled against a fierce Chicago defense--isn't a Saab Station Wagon. It's a Ferrari. Maybe it's only a Ferrari for a day, but maybe it's something more. The only way to find out is to play him.

If it will make you happy, I can call Losman "a poor man's Michael Vick" instead.

A big part of basketball is jumping. The idea that Mike Williams can jump is . . . difficult to take seriously. But if he did somehow manage to jump, he'd knock a hole in the floor when he landed!

That's right. With Losman, you pretty much know what you're getting: Kordell Stewart II. Nall is more of an unknown. There's a chance he's a one-game wonder, just as there's a chance he can actually play. The only way to find out for sure is to put him on the field and see what he does. I'm glad about the QB competition, and I hope it's a fair one. Assuming no attention is paid to draft status, either Holcomb or Nall should be able to beat out Losman. If neither can, the search for Kelly's successor will continue.

Apparently you missed the point of my posts.

This thread's excuse for Losman is that the playcalling was poor. Losman's defenders point to the fact the Bills ran the ball more often, and more successfully, with Holcomb under center. Give JP a running game, we're told, and imagine how much better he would be. On the surface, this sounds reasonable. Until you count the men in the box. With Losman under center, defensive coordinators had no respect whatsoever for the passing game, so they ganged up to stop the run. There's not much point in running McGahee into an eight or nine man wall for a 1 yard gain. When the other team dares you to beat them with the pass, you have to be able to do it. Usually, Losman couldn't. The coaches appear to have altered their gameplans to play to their various QBs' strengths. Holcomb's strengths include quick decision-making and getting rid of the ball quickly. On the other hand, Losman's strengths are limited to his mobility and his ability to throw the deep ball. The coaches' failure to take better advantage of Losman's mobility is probably due to trying to turn him into something he isn't--a pocket passer. However, they did seem to take as much advantage of his deep ball ability as the offensive line would allow. Under Holcomb, the passing game's success helped open up the running game. This never happened under Losman. Losman's defenders urge us to be patient. Had Losman demonstrated an outstanding ability to read defenses and make good decisions back in college, this patient attitude would be justified. As it is, I don't feel Losman will ever develop into anything more than what he is right now: a poor man's Michael Vick.

Nall came into the Chicago game in the second quarter. Not exactly cleanup duty. I'll grant you the comparison would be a lot more meaningful if we had 30 games for each player. But the fact Nall did so well with his limited playing time is at least worth something. A QB's upside is based first on his decision-making and ability to read the field; things Nall may well have. Losman doesn't excel at these things, and probably never will.

When the Jaguars' management got a load of this thread.

That's why the Bills signed Nall.

Craig Nall has the big arm you need to hit those deep throws in the Fairchild offense. Also, Nall's QB rating is 139.4, while Losman's is just 63.5. Bear in mind a lot of Nall's success came against a very good Chicago defense in a game late in the year. I'm not sure whether the game was at Chicago or Green Bay, but either way it was someplace cold and windy. Of the three players, Nall clearly has the most upside--if he can continue to play at the level he's achieved in his limited playing time. He's also the only QB of the three selected by the current regime. But if Nall isn't what the coaches were hoping for, Holcomb is a very solid plan B.

Ummm . . . I wasn't responding to you. Go back and read the first page of the thread, and you'll see which people I was responding to.

I'm sure there are plenty of Losman defenders who will be happy to do their part regardless of whether I do mine!

I've read posts that said Losman played poorly because he lacked pass protection. Losman played poorly because there weren't enough running plays called. Losman played poorly because most QBs play poorly their first nine games. Losman played poorly because his WRs didn't try hard enough. Losman played poorly because the playcalling wasn't good enough. But this is the first thread where I've seen it written that Losman played poorly because the defense played poorly. By the end of August, let's try to come up with at least three more ways to explain away Losman's poor play!

You'd better not let JP hear you say that stuff about Favre.

The Bills have been looking for Kelly's replacement for the last decade. Suppose that ten years from now they're still looking. Also suppose Leinart lives up to his billing as the next Tom Brady. If both those things happen, the Whitner pick was a mistake, even if he does turn into the next Ronnie Lott.

Of course they're displeased with him. He hasn't shown up to a single Bucs team meeting, or a single Bucs practice. He's made no effort to obtain a copy of the Bucs playbook. Based on the absence of any spike in the balance of trade for cloth, Williams hasn't been fitted with a Bucs uniform. While the Bucs haven't made any negative public statements about Williams, they've quietly responded to his behavior by making sure his name isn't listed on the team's roster.