Orton's Arm

It's true that Hangartnar is overrated by many on this board. But it's possible that some of those who'd overrated him were basing their opinions on the positive things they'd heard about him from Carolina fans. Kyle Williams is a very solid player, and is not overrated by most of the people on this board. Those that want to run Marshawn out of town aren't trying to replace him with a white player: they're trying to replace him with a black player who isn't a thug. People hate Cornell Green because he's a turnstile that gets quarterbacks killed. He has no place in this league even as a backup. People hate Donte Whitner because he talks big without backing it up on the field, and because it was boneheaded for the front office to use the eighth overall pick on a strong safety with below-average one-on-one coverage skills. If he'd been a third round pick--which is about where he should have been chosen--and if he didn't run his mouth, people wouldn't complain about him. When Whitner was chosen eighth overall, it generated a very negative reaction among the fan base, and rightly so. Those who defended the pick wrote things along the lines of, "What if he's the next Ronnie Lott? No one would reasonably complain about using the eighth overall pick to get a player like that." But it's long since become clear to everyone that Whitner isn't the next Ronnie Lott, or even the next Ed Reed. He's just a middle-of-the-road safety who can barely succeed in keeping George Wilson on the bench. The fact that just about everyone on these boards now agrees that taking him 8th overall was a horrible reach removes one source of irritation for those who, like myself, hated that pick from the very beginning.

I'm sure the Jaguars felt that the information Trent could provide was one of the benefits of signing him. But it's also worth noting that their starting QB is playing poorly, his backup is out with a torn ACL or something, and their final option at QB is some guy who should have retired a few years ago, but who happens to know their offense. Not only that, but the Jaguars' head coach specifically said that Garrard was a second-rate QB. The guy running the front office did not indicate any long-term commitment to him when asked. The Jaguars are probably one of the most QB-desperate teams in the league right now. To a starving man, a loaf of somewhat moldy bread can look a lot like a feast. It would not shock me if, later in the season, they benched Garrard for Edwards. Of course, whether that happens depends on how quickly Trent picks up the new offense, as well as whether the Jaguars' coaching staff's disgust with Garrard is stronger than its displeasure at the limitations of Edwards. If Trent does manage to unseat Garrard as the starter, he will soon discover that the Jaguars' offense lacks an offensive line, or much other supporting talent. That situation will doubtless bring back memories of his time in Buffalo and Stanford--assuming that concussions haven't erased those memories. It's also felt that the Jaguars are likely going to be looking to draft a QB in the first round of the 2011 draft. Hopefully Trent can get the Jaguars some wins this season--starting with the information he provides about the Bills--because it's critical that that football team not draft ahead of Buffalo.

Very funny! In answer to your question, I'm waiting until after the 2011 draft to decide on a new screen name. I'm hoping the Bills take Ponder, who I think is a good enough football player to withstand even my curse of DOOM!!! Besides that, I figure the third time's the charm. If my screen name didn't do anything to help Holcomb, and didn't help Edwards, it's got to help whichever QB the Bills choose in 2011. Especially if they do what they should have done fifteen years ago: use a first round pick on a college QB who was a proven pocket passer. A QB known for his accuracy, ability to read defenses, and ability to look at three or four options before making his throw.

A good point. Last year's offensive line takes a lot of grief for its pass protection, as well it should. That was some of the worst pass protection I've seen the Bills provide in the last ten years, which is saying something! Its run blocking was inconsistent, and there were too many times when defenders would beat their man and make their unwelcome presence felt in the backfield. But the OL made up for that by being unusually good at downfield blocking and other things which require good sprinting speed. The overall run-blocking effort was probably about what you'd expect from an average OL. The Bills got above-average play from their RBs last year, so the average yards-per-carry stat is going to reflect the elusiveness of Fred Jackson and the tendency to manually haul people forward for a few extra yards of Marshawn Lynch.

I agree with most of what you've written. Overall, a very solid post! But there are a few things about which we disagree. Lee Evans: he may not be the guy you want as your #1 receiver. But it can make sense for teams to have a go-to guy to move the chains, and a deep burner for the long bombs. Peerless Price was the Bills' deep burner back in 2002. Alvin Harper was the Cowboys' deep burner back in the '90s. Lee Evans has excellent speed, and tends not to drop passes. If you were to pair him with a Larry Fitzgerald, or even a poor man's Larry Fitzgerald, he could be an important, reliable, useful part of your overall offensive package. Hangartnar: I agree center is a need. Last season Hangartnar was the 32nd ranked starting center in the league, so it's important we upgrade that position. He was not a starter in Carolina. He appeared in a number of Panthers games when starting players got hurt, and was their #1 option if any starting interior offensive lineman went down. Panthers fans had good things to say about him, which would seem to suggest that he did not play center very often when going against elite 3-4 NTs. Bell: is playing a higher level of football this year than he had last year. I tend to think that the LT position will probably need to be addressed if we want a top-15 player. But I see it as a less urgent need than some others; and Bell is probably good enough to get us by for now. Your overall theme is correct. The Bills require a serious infusion of talent before they will be considered a real threat to advance in the playoffs.

Believe me, you're preaching to the choir about the need for good quarterbacking. I would have voted for QB in a heartbeat if it had been an option. (That said, I think the OP's logic in taking QB off the table made sense; so as to allow the discussion to focus on the team's second-most critical need. I feel RT is our second-most critical need after QB. Unless of course Urbick can become a good RT. What do you think the chances are of that happening? I'm not asking that in a sarcastic way: I'm genuinely curious.

Let's face facts: going into the season, Fitz was unable to beat out Trent Edwards for the starting position. As we have just seen, Trent Edwards wasn't able to hold onto his roster spot (at least not with the Bills). I'm assuming that the Bills would have traded Trent away for something if they could have, and that his release indicates no one was interested. Back when Fitz was a free agent a few years ago, no one was interested in him either, except as a backup. I realize that a QB can look good in practice, or even in the preseason, but then proceed to stink things up during games. One could argue that Edwards is the better QB in practice, but Fitz is the better QB in actual games. There's an easy way to put that argument to the test. Last season, Fitz and Trent each had about half the starts. They each played with the same flawed OL, the same joke offensive supporting cast, and the same joke offensive scheme. Below is the comparison for their stats from last season: QB (2009 season)_YPA___rating Edwards__________6.4___73.8 Fitzpatrick______6.3___69.7 Last season, Fitzpatrick's and Edward's stats were nearly identical. The problem here is not only did Fitzpatrick fail to outperform Edwards in practices and the preseason leading into this year, but he also failed to have a statistically better 2009 season than Edwards did. Fitzpatrick is probably a better QB than Edwards. He's certainly willing to take more risks and throw the ball downfield more often; instead of predictably dumping the ball off. But let's face facts here: if the Bills had given Trent Edwards half the snaps in 2009, and had given the other half to Peyton Manning, would Peyton's numbers really have been the same as Edwards'? Would Manning have lost a competition to Edwards going into the 2010 season? The Bills do not yet have their QB of the future on the roster. Fitzpatrick is the next Todd Collins/Alex Van Pelt/Drew Bledsoe/J.P. Losman/Trent Edwards. If the Bills somehow convince themselves Fitzpatrick is the answer, they'll be unlikely to address the QB position early in the draft. That blindness and willful self-deception will cause the Bills to continue to be mired in the same old mediocre QB play we've seen ever since Kelly hung up his cleats.

In that case, thank God the Bills didn't make the mistake of trading for Michael Vick. The Bills need to find the answer at QB. The QB of the future is obviously not on the roster now, and hopefully will come in the 2011 draft. The best QBs in the draft are often taken in the first five picks, or even first overall. Acquiring a player like Vick would do nothing to help our quest to find the next Jim Kelly (Vick isn't the answer at QB), and his presence might push us out of the draft position we need to get that long-term answer. There's a very real chance that 2011 could be a strike year, which would mean that whatever draft position the Bills have in 2011 will carry over into the 2012 draft as well. If a guy like Vick could spoil our draft position for two consecutive drafts, what possible benefit to the team could he bring to offset that? Obviously, the Bills need to do a better job of winning games in the future than they've done in the past. But there's a right way and a wrong way to effect that change. The right way is to acquire a core of rock solid players--especially at the most crucial positions. Then you use free agents and lower round draft picks to fill in the rest. The wrong way is to place a TD-like emphasis on the short-term, while largely ignoring the goal of building a solid core of first-rate young talent. (His trade for an aging Drew Bledsoe was a case in point; as was his decision to use two early picks on running backs in the space of just three years.) Our focus should instead be, "What kind of a team do we want to have three years from now?" And then we should add whichever players will best help us fulfill that three or four year plan.

Good post! You've presented your case well. Any time you go into a draft thinking you have to address a certain position, you greatly increase your risk of getting a Losman or Whitner or McCargo. The key with the draft is not to force things, and above all to resist the temptation of convincing yourself that some player is the answer just because you'd love it if he was.

I voted for offensive tackle. Cornell Green looked better today than he had in the past because the Patriots' defense isn't as good as Green Bay's or Miami's. This year he is the weakest link on the OL, and next year he'll be another year older and worse. We need to get that taken care of if we don't want our QB killed.

Peyton Manning threw 16 interceptions last year. +1 P.S. Is anyone here besides me bothered by the fact that when you try to make two consecutive posts in the same thread, the board software automatically lumps them into one single post? That "feature" is annoying, to say the least . . .

Good post! Just to add to what you've written: since 1997, the Bills have used four first round picks on running backs, and 12 first round picks on other positions. (Including the pick traded away for Bledsoe.) That's 25% of their first round picks right there, on a position that only represents 1/22nd--or 4.5%--of the guys you have on the field. Clearly, the Bills have used too many picks on running backs and defensive backs over the years, while neglecting other positions.

Maybe some of his teammates didn't see it happening. But if they did, the fact that they didn't retaliate speaks to their commitment to, and passion for, the game of football. I don't care who your quarterback is. If someone disrespects him, and you're an offensive lineman, you need to take care of business. Period. But instead, our offensive linemen apparently decided that a lack of concern for the quarterback after the play was over would be a nice contrast with the complete lack of blocking they'd provided during the play.

Are you also suggesting a way for him to "opt out" of Medicare taxes and Social Security taxes? Or would you prefer him to accept the negatives of these programs (higher taxes) without partaking of any of the positives? Are you really saying that if he refuses that one-sided arrangement, that he's a hypocrite? Suppose that the city forced you to pay $100 a month to have your trash removed. And suppose you didn't like the arrangement, and pointed out a private firm could do the job at half the cost. Should anyone who makes that argument be forced to pay for both public and private trash removal? No? Then why do you want that other guy to pay for medical expenses and retirement expenses twice? Under your plan, he'd be paying once through his taxes, and a second time out of his own pocket.

I like that Fitzpatrick plays loose, and that he's willing (and has the arm strength) to take his shots downfield. But his throws are also erratic: a good throw will be followed by another that's completely off-target. I looked up the numbers for the most important QBs we've had in Buffalo over the past decade. The numbers (Buffalo time only) are these: Player___Yards/attempt____Rating Rob Johnson______7.2___83.4 Drew Bledsoe_____6.6___78.5 Kelly Holcomb____6.6___85.6 J.P Losman_______6.6___76.2 Trent Edwards____6.5___77.8 Ryan Fitzpatrick:_6.3__69.7 On the surface, those quarterbacks look statistically similar, with Rob Johnson a little above the pack, and Ryan Fitzpatrick a little below it. But it's worth noting that Johnson's numbers are a little inflated, because he was basically a sack waiting to happen. The quality of supporting casts should also be noted. Most quarterbacks on that list had at least one season of credible pass protection. Rob Johnson had John Fina at LT, and a below-average (but still credible) OL when it came to pass protection. Drew Bledsoe's pass protection was probably in the C- range during his time in Buffalo. Jonas Jennings was at LT (at least when he wasn't hurt), and there were several other average or below-average (but still decent) offensive linemen. Holcomb had no pass protection whatsoever: the Bills' OL of 2005 was an embarrassment to the franchise. The line's pass protection considerably improved during 2006, thereby benefiting Losman. The line has gone downhill since then, with last season being especially bad. Holcomb's and Fitzpatrick's numbers were achieved under worse circumstances than those of the other QBs on the list. After taking into account the quality of offensive line play, Holcomb was clearly a better QB for the Bills than Bledsoe. Even without adjustments to the numbers, Holcomb's average yards per pass is the same as Bledsoe's, and his QB rating is higher. Considering that Bledsoe achieved those stats with pass protection, and Holcomb achieved moderately better stats without, there's no question as to which QB's play was better for the Bills. That difference in their respective levels of play was especially visible in games against the Patriots. Those games were a crucible that burned away all but the best mentally prepared QBs. That crucible converted Bledsoe to ash, but Holcomb emerged from it looking like shining gold. I'll conclude by saying this: the fact that Kelly Holcomb was (probably) the best QB the Bills have had in the past decade says something about the quality of QBs we've had over that time. It's high time this franchise used a top-10 pick on a polished pocket passer of a college QB: a guy like Luck or Ponder.

Your points are well-taken. I remember how Brady's play took a big step downward when the Giants defense dominated his OL in that Superbowl. You're right: it's possible for a QB to produce at a high level even with bad OL play, but guys like Rodgers and Roethlisberger are better examples of that than Montana or Brady. (Though Montana and Brady are or were better quarterbacks overall.) Another quarterback who was good at compensating for bad OL play was Kelly Holcomb. Granted, he didn't have the arm strength to make all the throws. But if you're playing behind the joke OL he had in 2005, you're not going to be able to stand in the pocket for 5 seconds waiting for long bombs to open up anyway. What impressed me about Holcomb's play was that in every Bills game he played from start to finish, the offense scored at least 14 points. Considering the way his OL was consistently dominated, and the running game was frequently shut down, 14 points per game minimum is pretty solid. He also came close to leading to the Bills to victory in Foxboro, in a game where our defense didn't play particularly well. Compare that game to how Drew Bledsoe usually did against the Patriots: his look of dejection, his head hanging down, and complete, thorough Patriots domination from the very first snap. Based on the litmus test of the Patriots, Kelly Holcomb was the best QB the Bills have had in the last ten years.

I'd argue that the real jerks out of control are the politicians in Washington and Albany who love the idea of spending other people's money. The Tea Party is a reaction against that, because neither political party has exactly done a stand-up job of reining in out-of-control spending.

The Bills obviously didn't have a starting-quality QB going into the 2010 offseason. Given that fact, they clearly needed to draft The Guy. But if The Guy isn't there when your team is picking, you should do nothing about the QB position. Wasting picks on players who were "sort of" The Guy or had the potential to maybe someday be The Guy is what got us Losman and Edwards in the first place. Half measures such as Jason Campbell or moldy bread are worse than useless. At its best, a Jason Campbell-type signing or trade might bring us two or three more wins than we otherwise would have had. Those wins push us lower in the draft, thereby making it more likely that The Guy will be gone before our pick. Any time you set out to achieve anything, you should begin with the end in mind. The end here is obvious: get a franchise QB as a step toward the longer-range goal of building a Super Bowl winner. Acquiring the Jason Campbells of the league does nothing to advance the team toward getting The Guy. The 2011 draft seems like it will be a golden opportunity for the Bills to draft a franchise QB. Let's hope they successfully take advantage of it.

How is your bolded statement unique to the QB position? What did Aaron Maybin do last season to help the Bills improve their record? What has Spiller done so far this year to help the Bills win games? Leodis McKelvin looks good now, but I don't remember him setting the world on fire as a rookie CB. Even Orlando Pace often struggled as a rookie. A lot of rookie players, at a lot of positions, aren't going to play all that well. It's also somewhat safe to say that Fitzpatrick isn't exactly a threat to unseat Peyton Manning as the game's best current quarterback. Put another way, the 2011 Bills aren't likely to get strong play from the QB position almost no matter what they do. They could always sign some second-tier free agent as a starter. But they could do that anyway even with a first round QB on their roster. Rookie QBs should remain firmly on the bench, as Carson Palmer did after being chosen first overall by the Bengals. If I were the Bills, one quarterback I would strongly consider is Ponder. He is a polished pocket passer, and is considerably more NFL-ready than many other QBs considered first round prospects. His accuracy, ability to read defenses, and to see multiple reads is something this team could really use. If the Bills are lucky enough to get the first overall pick, there is a chance of being able to trade down a bit and still ending up with Ponder. Then the Bills' second round pick could be used on a RT; thereby solidifying two of the most important positions on offense for many years to come.

I disagree with the bolded statement. If you were watching Bills games back in the Super Bowl years, you probably remember the AFC Championship game. The Houston Oilers had been a hot team that year, and had won eleven or twelve straight regular season games. However, Joe Montana and the Kansas City Chiefs had knocked them out of the playoffs in the divisional round; in a game that proved to be a shootout. Then the Chiefs came to Buffalo for the AFC Championship Game. In that game, the Bills' defense as a whole dominated the Chiefs' offense as a whole. Joe Montana led the Chiefs to just two first half field goals before getting injured just before halftime. Montana was the very embodiment of the phrase "elite quarterback," and yet the circumstances in which he found himself precluded large amounts of Chiefs' offensive production. The Bills ended up winning that game 30-13. If a quarterback's offensive supporting cast gets dominated heavily enough by the defense, not even Joe Montana can make much difference. All that being said, a quarterback should be accurate, and demonstrate good awareness of everything happening around him, regardless of the circumstances in which he finds himself. Trent Edwards hasn't done that, and hasn't played well enough to deserve to hold onto a starting position. I don't think Fitzpatrick is good enough to deserve to be a starter either, but I realize you have to start someone.

If that's the definition you want to use, then fine. But if you're applying that definition to Edwards, you have to apply it to Losman as well. Losman was named the starter going into three separate seasons: 2005, 2006, and 2007. Edwards was named the starter going into the 2008, 2009, and 2010 seasons. Losman was benched for poor play in two of his three "opening day starter" seasons: 2005 and 2007. Edwards was also benched for poor play in two of his three "opening day starter" seasons: 2009 and 2010. We gave Losman plenty of chances and found out he's not the answer. He can't even make the final roster cut of an NFL team. The decision to move on from Losman, and to see what our other young quarterbacks had, made sense. As the most promising of those young quarterbacks, Edwards deserved his chance too. Now that he's been given that chance, it's clear he's not the answer at QB either.

How closely does Longball follow this team? Is he a fan like the people here, or are there a number of teams he covers? One reason I ask this is because I'm confused as to why he described the interior of the Bills' OL as "fine." Is he aware of the problems we experienced with 3-4 NTs last season? Did he watch what Clay Matthews and the other Green Bay defenders did to our interior OL this past Sunday? I'm sure Longball knows a lot about football in general, but I'm not necessarily convinced he's been following the Bills as closely as we have. (Unless there are still undeveloped interior OL from whom he hopes to see improvement.) I'm also curious as to whether he expressed an opinion about how the Bills are supposed to fill the hole at QB. A franchise QB is the hardest-to-fill position in all of football. The Bills just benched their starting quarterback, and thus far we look to be in line for a very high draft pick. If the 2011 draft isn't the right time to draft our franchise quarterback, when would be? A lot of the best QBs are gone by the fifth overall pick of the draft. Of today's current starters, Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, and Carson Palmer were chosen first overall, Matt Ryan was picked third overall, and Philip Rivers was chosen fourth overall. Palmer's injury problems aside, each of those players is at or near the franchise level. If we have a (rare) opportunity to add a guy like that of our own, why should we pass that opportunity up? Look at the current Bills' quarterback situation! Any time Ryan Fitzpatrick seems like your best available option at QB, you know it's high time to do something.

You and I have had differing levels of optimism about the talent level on this team in general, and about some of the players in particular. But those differences aside, I've always thought of you as a standup guy. Stay classy.

Based on the comments, I was expecting a much worse article than the one I found. One of Sullivan's points is well-taken. If you're going to appoint a guy a starter, you should be willing to stick with him a while. Edwards was benched after two games, and Spiller was benched after one. At the same time, I'm reminded of a line by Jane Austen, "Would Mr. Darcy then consider the rashness of your original intention as atoned for by your obstinacy in adhering to it?" But pithy quotes from Austen aside, changing horses this early in the season--at two very important positions--does not reflect well on the early days of Gailey's coaching tenure. My own assessment of Gailey's coaching tenure is a lot more favorable than Sullivan's is, at least thus far. But at the same time, I don't believe my opinion is the only valid one. I realize Sully rubs a lot of people the wrong way, and that there's a concern that he goes through mental contortions to see things in a more negative light than he should. I tend to read Sully's articles as lists of potential criticisms that could conceivably be leveled against the current regime (whatever that regime may be). Some of the criticisms will make sense, others less so.

The fact that Fitzpatrick actually has a camp says everything I need to know about the current quarterback situation on this team.