folz

Hear, Hear!

Do you all what to know who the true Captain Checkdown is?...It was Jauron. How many times did Trent say last year, when questioned, I'm just doing what the coaches tell me to do. And behind an injured, porous Oline, with nothing resembling an offensive plan and a head coach playing not to lose, they were telling him get the ball out as fast as you can. There was no time for long plays to the WRs to develop and the coaches were afraid to call inside slants. And what are you going to do as the starting QB, disobey the head coach? Well then you'll be riding the pine. Its tough to have swagger, or be "It" when you're losing, probably questioning the game planning, not being allowed to show what you can do, not being allowed to sling it and try to win a game, etc. And if the coaches don't show that confidence in you, then the team starts to question you to, and frustration sets in. I'm not saying Trent is going to light it up, or become the next coming, but I bet he'll look better, be more confident, and take control of the offense better this year because the coaches and therefore the team will have more confidence in him and he'll be in a position where he feels like the guys will follow when he leads. You can have all the swagger in the world, but if no one is following, it means nothing. Now we just have to hope he makes good decisions, is accurate, and can stay healthy. But I'm rooting for him (just as I am still rooting for Brohm, Fitz, Brown, and every other guy on the team). And Trent's new look made me think of Broadway Joe, the scraggly hair and the sideburns. Maybe he can steal a little swagger from Namath.

Come on BillsVet... if the Bills won 5 more games over the last 4 years (that's 1.25 games a year), they would have been .500 for 4 years straight. So, don't make it sound like FightClub is crazy. 7-9 IS close to .500. It's depressing that we are talking about being close to .500, but nevertheless it's not an outrageous statement. And you make it sound like Chan has not been around football at all for 11 years. Sure it's been that long since he was a head coach in the NFL, but he has been an offensive coordinator since then in the NFL and he was a head coach as recently as 2007 (at Georgia). Plus, we were 6-10 last year, not 5-11. I'm not denying the questions that you and we have all raised (QB, LT, OLB, new schemes, pass rush), but don't try to purposely paint the picture darker than it is. And as far as ESPN and anyone who agrees with that ranking, over the last 10 years the 31st place teams have averaged 2.9 wins a season. I just can't see how we will fall to only 3 wins with basically the same players now healthy and with more experience (+ rookies and FAs) but better coaching. Yes, we have a lot of question marks including the coaching (because we haven't seen any games yet), but are we really going to lose 3 or 4 more games than last year with that mess of a season we had?

I'm not saying this should or will make you feel better about him, but George Edwards has been an NFL Defensive Coordinator before and he had already been hired to be the defensive coordinator for one of the top college teams (Florida) before leaving to come to Buffalo. So, I wouldn't say he was a nobody. 1991-1997 Coached in the college ranks for Duke, Florida, Appalachian State, and Georgia 1998-2001 Dallas Cowboys: LB coach 2002 Washington Redskins: Assistant Defensive Coordinator/Linebackers coach 2003 Washington Redskins: Defensive Coordinator 2004 Cleveland Browns: Linebackers Coach 2005-2009 Miami: Linebackers Coach 2010: Hired as Defensive Coordinator of the University of Florida Gators His DC stint with the Redskins ended when Spurrier resigned (he was not retained by Joe Gibbs) He was one of only 2 coaches retained by Sparano after taking over the job from Cam Cameron in Miami. In fact, he started with Saban, was retained by Cameron, and then retained again by Sparano. He has worked under Nick Saban (a Belichick disciple), Steve Spurrier, Marvin Lewis, Dom Capers, Dave Campo, Mike Zimmer, among others. There have been some articles saying he will run a Saban style 3-4. Prominent names Edwards has coached throughout his career include Richard Seymour and Marcus Stroud (Georgia); Dexter Coakley (Dallas); LaVar Arrington, Jesse Armstead and Jeremiah Trotter (Washington); and Jason Taylor, Zach Thomas and Joey Porter (Miami). Former Florida now Dolphins LB Channing Crowder has referred to Edwards as “the best assistant coach in the NFL, period.” Plus, twice in his career he has been involved in changing a D from a 4-3 to a 3-4 (as a linebacker coach--and we all realize how important the LBs are in a 3-4 system and probably where our D needs the most help). Sounds like a pretty solid choice for what the team planned to do. We'll see if he works out or not, but he isn't a nobody without experience.

I'm not a Whitner basher, I think the guy is solid (although unimpressive for where he was drafted), and I like his passion for the team, but... I would start Wilson and/or Scott before I would start Whitner. I really don't see how the team doesn't start Wilson this year, unless the duties of the 3-4 are so different that Scott's or Whitner's skill set matches it better. But every opportunity G. Wilson has had over his career, he's impressed (well at least me). He's smart, a total team guy, and he played really well last year. I would start Wilson most of the time, but in games against teams with good pass catching TEs or middle receivers, play Scott a lot. Unless Whitner finally blossoms in this new system, under new coaches, I'd be very disappointed to see him starting this year.

I have no problem with people evaluating the team, seeing holes and question marks, wondering why they did or didn't make certain moves and then based on their opinion saying its going to be a rough season in the win column for the Bills. I also understand being cautious about what to expect from Nix, Whaley, Gailey, etc. because we have been through coaching and GM turnovers that didn't work out and sometimes change doesn't mean improvement. What I have a problem with is the people who guess 0-2 wins (we had six last year amidst a perfect storm of problems), trash players on the team (not evaluating how good they are or not or if we should stick with them, but just throwing out personal attacks), failing to recognize the talented players we do have (like one post I read that said everyone of our starters could be upgraded by third stringers from other teams), etc., etc. I have no problem being realistic about the team (even though I'm one who is optimistic), but how realistic is 1 win? How realistic is "we don't have one player that would start for another team?" There is a spectrum of optimism and pessimism and anyone on either extreme is not being realistic. The rest of us can discuss the issues, players, moves, coaching, etc. We can be critical of the team or players while still supporting them and not attack them personally. We're all Bills fans...but I think what people get tired of are not the people who aren't optimistic (trying to be realistic) about this upcoming season or coaching staff or whatever, but the ones who can never see anything positive about the team and trash the team any chance they get.

Do you like Grape, Orange, or Fruit Punch?

I didn't agree with everything Albany said, but I did like his last line. Just saying your optimistic about the team doesn't mean you're a head case that doesn't see the teams faults as well and expect them to go to the Superbowl or something. I'm optimistic because I feel like a breath of fresh air has swept through this organization. I might have been hopeful when G. Williams, Mularkey, and Jauron were hired, but I never felt like "these are the guys that are going to turn this thing around" like I do with Nix and Gailey. Do I think we will be a better team than last year? Hell Yes. Will that show in the win column? Maybe not, but I know we aren't going to be 1-15 Johnny. Am I still concerned about our OL, QB, and OLBs? Absolutely. We may not have the answer at these positions yet, but the OL and QBs won't be worse than last year if for no other reason than experience and coaching. And no I'm not just hoping for us to not be worse than last year and I would have been thrilled to have an all-pro QB and LT, but that doesn't seem to be in the cards for this season, so we just have to root the guys we have on to achieve their full potential until we can acquire the all-pros (they don't grow on trees). But they won't be worse than last year with all that went on. Do I expect us to make the playoffs? Expect, No. But I'm not automatically ruling it out either and God knows I'll be rooting for it till we're mathematically eliminated. Am I looking for (and expecting) a more exciting team that at least shows promise of what they can become down the road? You betcha. It's just more fun (for me) to be optimistic and I feel like the team is finally giving me cause to...and this time I don't think its just FO smoke and mirrors. I could be wrong, but how could it be wrong when it feels so right.

Just a few notes to keep the optimism flowing ... Gailey actually prepares a plan B and C (unlike Jauron and Co.), ready to overcome the worst case scenario instead of only hoping for the best: On K. Mitchell calling defensive plays: “Those guys have been in the fire so to speak, so you would like for those guys to be able to handle it as much as possible,” said Gailey. “Those veteran guys will end up getting the majority of that kind of responsibility on our football team. That’s what you want. You want your veterans to be able to do that. And in this day in age you never know when injuries are going to hit. You’re trying to make sure that we have as many people that can handle that duty as possible.” Coaches expect players to execute better (unlike, well, you know): "...the 11-on-11 segment had some spotty execution. So much so that offensive coordinator Curtis Modkins pulled the entire offense in for a huddle." A Coach with confidence? “You better have confidence in this business,” he said. ”If you don’t have confidence in this business you’re going to lose in a hurry. We have confidence that our system will put guys in position to make plays. You’ve still got to go make them, but I think we’re going to have guys that have some talent. We’ve got to make sure that they get the opportunity to go be special on the field and that’s what we’re working on. You try to have confidence without being cocky.” Chan Gailey And for all those who say we have no talent, how is our secondary looking? We may still have some big holes and question marks at important positions, but I bet there are a lot of teams who envy our offensive and defensive backfields (RBs, CBs, Ss). And I'm starting to get excited about our young WRs too. Kyle Williams. I've never understood the fans who don't think he's good. From day one that kid has been a player and that's all we've heard from both coaching staffs he's worked with, things like "now that's a football player". 66 tackles last year. In the radio interview (link below) he talks a bit about the switch and some of the things the D will do. I think he'll be just fine in the middle. It's hard not to root for him, he just seems like a funny, down to Earth kind of guy: http://rope.wgrf-fm.fimc.net/Norton_Interv...iams_062210.mp3 And Eric Wood is back, did you see Gailey light up in the interview talking about him. Keep the hope alive...Go Bills!

I hated it when they first switched to "Shout" because the song brought up other references for me than the Bills and I felt the song should be original (as most fight songs were back then--even though many were terrible like the Miami one). We had a bad one ourselves at the time "We can make it happen, we can make it happen, yeah" I remember the year they introduced that song, they actually printed a little music sheet in the program so we'd all know how to sing it and all of its maybe 10 words. Of course I grew to love "Shout" during the 90s and sang it as loud as anyone at games in OP and at backers bars in both Boston and NYC. But, I have come full circle now and feel that it is past its time and it feels like living old memories not creating new ones. New era, new team, hopefully new hope...new song. The only problem is we could end up with something worse...I'd be all for changing the song if the new one was good. And we'd all get used to it just like we did "Shout" if the team started winning again. The Bills have changed their song a number of times, its not like the Redskins or other teams who have had their songs forever.

I was listening to the Lee Evans radio interview http://www.wedg.com/goout.asp?u=/article.asp?id=1843584 and they asked how Chan Gailey's offense was different from last year's offense and his response was: "I don't want to call his (Gailey's) offense simple, but its, you know, he has the ability to get guys in different places and you know, still stay with the same play. It's not an offense where you have, you know, you go into a game with two or three hundred plays. He has the base package of things he likes to run and they can mix up formations and personnel and do the same thing, so, I think that's good cause the plays that will be run will be plays that you've run over and over and over and over again. You know them like the back of your hand; and that's the kind of sense I'm getting from it and I think that will help, you know, even when guys come in they'll know what they're doing and I think that's a big key going into the season or down the road." So it seems like Gailey's system means learn a smaller number of plays really well and then disguise them with formations and personnel. That kind of reminded me of the 90s Bills offense. I'm not saying Gailey will have that type of success by any means, but it sounded similar in that the players become experts at a handful of plays---like the couter trey, etc. back in the day---so execution is always at a high level. And as Lee said, with fewer plays but ones that have been run over and over, if you have to play 2nd or 3rd stringers due to injury or whatever, their heads aren't swimming because they haven't had any reps in half the plays in the playbook for that game...they can come in and execute at least at their own top level because they're confident in their knowledge of the plays. It also made me think that last season, with Jauron and Schonert, maybe it wasn't one of them being right and one wrong, maybe they were both wrong. (I'm reading between the lines here, so I could be off, but...) If Turk was coming in with 200-300 plays per game and the guys couldn't get them down, remember them, or whatever, then maybe Jauron was right in telling him he had to scale it back. But the problem with Jauron's scaling back was that with fewer plays, they didn't know how to disguise them, so other teams knew what was coming when they saw the Bills line up. Could that have been our problem last year?

I stopped watching the NBA years ago (before the ref scandal) because it all became geared to generating stars. A star player could hack a young guy or no name guy and never get called for it, yet when that star player drove the lane on the next play and missed the bucket when there was no or very minimal contact, a foul was called and he'd get 2 shots. Games were not called fairly and despite whether the league was doing that to rig the outcome of games or not (which I don't at all put past them), the star treatment alone made it unfair and took the fun out of the game for me. I was a huge Celtics fan growing up and a Lakers/Celtics final would have normally had me going crazy...yet, I haven't watched 1 game of these finals. If you want to watch basketball, watch college hoops. Now, I never thought the NFL was rigged...sure the better teams might get the benefit of the doubt more often than not, but like others say, you could chalk that up to human nature by the refs, not necessarily a conspiracy. But, Super Bowl XL Pittsburgh vs. Seattle, Jerome Bettis in his last game before a home audience, etc. gave me pause for thought. I do feel like the outcome of that game was severely altered by the refs. Was it a league conspiracy? I have no idea, but it did make me worry that the NFL might turn into the NBA. And the wholes Cheatriots fiasco didn't help either. But, so far it looks like that has been avoided (I hope). I still think the game has integrity. But for those who think it is too hard to rig an NFL game, all you have to do is look at holding penalties. The refs could call a hold on almost any play. A few holding calls at crucial moments could definitely change the outcome of a game if it makes a team punt, knocks them out of field goal range, pins them against their endzone giving the other team great field position on the turnover, etc. It might be tough to guarantee the outcome of a game, but they could sure stack the odds for or against a team pretty easily if they wanted to. I think we as fans (fans of all NFL teams) hold the burden of keeping the league honest, showing outrage if the league ever starts turning in that direction and/or not watching, buying their product if it came to that.

YES!

If make or break means vets that either step up now or they could be gone, either before or just after this season, then I'd say: (Traditional: Guys who haven't stepped up yet and need to in order to stay) Hardy McCargo Ellis Maybin (These guys have had some production but need to take it to another level or could be gone) Trent Fitz Marshawn Mitchell Ellison Kelsay Youboty Mitchell and Kelsay because of the switch; Marshawn, less about his production and more about his attitude. Youboty mostly because of the injury history. Not saying others aren't on the hot seat, but these are the guys that I would say are in a true make or break season (at least as far as their career with the Bills is concerned).

IF YOU DON"T WANT TO READ THE WHOLE POST, PLEASE AT LEAST LOOK AT THE TWO QUOTES AT THE BOTTOM. I can only imagine that most of the posters saying Levy is overrated, not HOF worthy, and worse yet not integral to the 90s Bills must be too young to actually remember watching that team. He was the oil that made that machine run, the glue that kept it together, and an overall great leader and motivator. PLEASE, please do not let his 2 years as GM tarnish his legacy...Marv was a great coach, just ask Bill Parcells, Don Shula, and others of that era that coached against him. Marv was a leader of men, he kept that team on track, personalities in check, inspired, motivated, and yes, well coached. The Superbowls, it always comes back to he sucks because he lost 4 Superbowls...everyone talks about him getting outcoached as the reason we lost. Well, was he out coached in the 123 games he won as a Bills coach? (that works out to 10.69 wins on avg. per season over 11 years). How many other coaches have been able to keep his team's eye on the prize to even go to 2 Superbowls in a row let alone 4. And let's not mention that SB XXV was lost in the last seconds on a missed field goal (that close) against a Bill Parcells team and Bill Bellicheat defense. Two of the greatest coaches ever and if Norwood straightens out that kick, Marv would have beat them. Actually Marv did beat them, unfortunately, it was during that same regular season. Week 15, December 15th, about a month before the Superbowl, the Bills beat the Giants 17-13 in another hard fought contest at the Meadowlands. Let's also not mention that that Bills team loved to party, even the night before the big game. Washington in SB XXVI still seems like a fluke to me...who knows what the hell happened in that game, I suppose it is as others said we just ran into another NFC East power running game. The NFC East (not the NFC) was our achilles heel. We ran over just about everyone else. Our record against the NFC in the Superbowl years was 14-2 and the two loses came in the last games of the'90 and '91 season when we were resting our starters for the playoffs). But the NFC East was built with beef up front and power running, which as others said was our one major weakness. By the time we get to the 3rd and 4th SBs against Dallas, our team had been together, basically since 1985/1986. We started losing players to age, the early years of FA, etc. We were waning as all dynasties do, while the Cowboys were hitting their stride. We were still good and had our core players (as evidenced by beating Dallas in week 2 of the '93 season between the two SB loses), but Dallas was a better team and built to shut us down. Anyhow, sorry for another long post, but it drives me mad to hear this talk about Marv. Was he a great GM, absolutely not. He came really with the hopes of coaching again, and with Wilson begging him to bring some stability and loyalty back after the Donahoe debacle. So, for Ralph and the franchise, he took the position for two years...I think more as an ambassador to the fans and media and a bit of sage advice here and there rather than as a true GM, which is Ralph's fault, not Marv's. Did it go well? Obviously not. But does that make his history as a great BILLS coach all of a sudden meaningless? Hell no. Polian and Levy were a team...just listen to how Polian speaks of Marv as a coach...they did it together. Throw in another coach (as some have said) and that same chemistry, never quit attitude, special teams, motivation, etc. wouldn't have been there. "It is said that leadership is that unique quality which enables special people to stand up and pull the rest of us over the horizon. By that or any other definition, Marv Levy is one of the greatest leaders this game has ever known." Bill Polian "That's one of my frustrations, not getting Dan Marino back into the Super Bowl, and Marv had a lot to do with that. They had a great team with great players. Bill Polian made it all happen when he hired Marv, and Marv's genius and ability to coach was just the natural fit for Buffalo." Don Shula

I found this interesting in the article too: "On offense, the New England Patriots were tied for fifth, breaking tackles on 6.3 percent of their plays. The Bills were tied for eighth at 6.2 percent. The Dolphins were tied for 15th at 5.6 percent. You'd think a run-dominant team like the New York Jets would be higher than 24th, making opponents miss on 4.9 percent of their plays." Obviously, our skill players can make things happen, we were 8th in the league at O players breaking tackles (and we added CJ too), now if we can just get them the damn ball, we'll be in good shape. And I never understood all of the talk last season that Poz wasn't playing well, the guy is solid and still getting better.

The problem was the offensive coaching (you can take that two ways). And a young OL with a ton of injuries. I'm not saying our QBs are or were real good or helped at all, but Jauron and AVP were in over their heads when it came to anything resembling an offense. And how Jauron and Co. refused to even give young guys or backups a chance when they were obviously performing better than the starter or deserved a better look (Greer, Wilson, F. Jackson, Parrish, Hardy, Johnson, etc.) just drives me mad. I'm glad to see everyone getting a chance to assert themselves under Gailey. With Jauron, the starters didn't have to work as hard because they knew they weren't going to lose their spot and the young guys might not work as hard because they weren't going to get on the field unless there was an injury. I know they're professionals and they should work hard all the time, but without incentive, its usually hard to give your all all of the time with no let downs. The farther away Jauron's regime becomes the more clear it is why he could never win in this league as a HC, his philosophy on almost everything was wrong (S&C, team competition, offense, personnel, accountability, game management, etc., etc.). Sure, last offseaon we talked about our skill players hopefully (and we were wrong), but everything is different this year. And hopefully one of our QBs can step up to at least be a solid starter. There is a much better chance of that with Gailey and Cortez (known for their work with QBs) than with AVP, no QB coach, and "No-offense is a good offense" Jauron.

12-15 carries a game is fine with me if say 1 or 2 of those are TDs that our other players might not have scored on the same play, changing say a FG to a TD or taking a kickoff return to the house. Or if he significantly changes field position and/or momentum in a game for us by popping off a big play at a critical moment. And he's a rookie, while we already have 2 quality backs...nothing wrong with easing him in to the pro game. I guarantee you though, if he is proving to be the best back on the team by mid- or late-season, he'll be getting more carries. And even if he only gets 12-15 touches per game all year, if he becomes a Chris Johnson, or our new Thurman, or even just a real good back next year and beyond (no guarantee of course, but...) will you still be saying that he didn't get enough production in his rookie year to warrant the #9 pick?

Yes, fixed...thanks. Good point. Without looking up each guy, I saw at least 9 starting QBs who are starting for a team they weren't drafted by (Delhomme, Orton, Cassel, Campbell, Romo, McNabb, Cutler, Favre, and Brees). Only 3 of those are 1st rounders (one of whom is McNabb who played the majority of his career with the team that drafted him). So, I guess that goes to the point that others were making, when a team drafts a QB in the first, they don't like to get rid of them too soon even if they aren't panning out because they want to prove they made the right pick, or because they spent a lot of money on him, etc. But also, when a 1st rounder is good, most teams will hang on to them, when they bust then they aren't really worth picking up, so very few 1st rounders get traded and then help the new team. But obviously teams can and do get QBs that can help the team via trade. That sounds about right 11 out of the 19, although I think a couple more might reach that level (Bradford, Young, maybe one or two more) but its just still too early to tell. I really just started looking up the info to see how many lower round guys were starting to see if statistically there was a chance that a 7th rounder (Levi) could be a starter in the future. And of course all I learned was what we already knew, the odds are low for a 7th rounder to turn into a legit starter (12.5-15.5% based solely on 2010 starters), but it has and does happen. Yeah, that could be interesting...our former QB vs. a guy some fans wanted us to trade for.

Yeah, fixed the post..thanks. Don't know how I screwed that up, I guess I still had predraft talk on my brain.

We always talk about where QBs are found, some say you have to get one in the first round, others point to Brady going in the 6th, etc. So, I thought I would take a look at the projected 2010 NFL starting QBs to see where they were drafted. I'll post the full list below (and I could be wrong about who some of the starters will be) but it breaks down like this: Of the 33 potential starters (not counting our Bills...w/2 possibilities each from Clev and SF): 19 1st rounders 5 2nd rounders 2 3rd rounders 2 4th rounders 0 5th rounders 2 6th rounders 1 7th rounders 2 UDFA And just a note: last year Warner and Moore both had starts as UDFAs (I assume CAR will start Claussen this year) So, the overwhelming majority are 1st rounders. Granted some of them are young and may not pan out...but, for this purpose I'm only looking at if they are a starter, not how good a starter they are, I'll let you guys debate that if you care to. But, most are indeed 1st rounders, however, 24% are 4th round or lower and 18% 6th round or lower. And on the other side of the coin, you have the 49ers who have 2 not just 1st rounders, but #1 overall picks, neither of whom I would feel comfortable with...And then there are the Raiders who before releasing Russell actually had 4 1st round QBs (Russell, Boller, Campbell, and Losman) along with a 3rd and 6th round selections (Frye and Gradkowski)...will any of them ever happen? And speaking of the Raiders QBs, I found this interesting article comparing them... http://drafthistory.com/ Scroll down and check out the stat graphics comparing the QBs...how much better is Campbell than JP? Maybe not as much as some of us thought (statistics-wise at least)...the article quote on JP is: "And I've overlooked former Buffalo Bill starter J.P. Losman, who won a championship in the UFL last season before joining the Raiders at year end. Look at Losman's career statistics, which in many respects appear better than all the other's except Campbell. Losman completes a fair percentage of his passes, for as many yards per attempt as Campbell, throws nearly as many touchdowns as interceptions, but does have a hard time making decisions which results in an inordinate number of sacks. He was shell-shocked in Buffalo, but as a former number one draft pick, he may be worth the risk of keeping." That's it, just a few tidbits I thought I would pass along. Here's the (obviously unofficial) list: Mia Henne 2nd NE Brady 6th NYJ Sanchez 1st Buf Edwards 3rd/ Brohm 2nd/ Brown 7th/ Fitz 7th Bal Flacco 1st Cin Palmer 1st Cle Delhomme UFA/ McCoy 3rd Pitt Rothlisberger 1st Hou Schaub 3rd Ind Manning 1st Jax Garrard 4th Tenn Young 1st Den Orton 4th KC Cassel 7th Oak Campbell 1st SD Rivers 1st Dal Romo UFA NYG Manning 1st Phi Kolb 2nd Was McNabb 1st Chi Cutler 1st Det Stafford 1st GB Rodgers 1st Minn Favre? 2nd Atl Ryan 1st Car Claussen 2nd/ Moore UFA NO Brees 2nd TB Freeman 1st AZ Leinart? 1st Stl Bradford 1st SF Smith 1st/ Carr 1st Sea Hasselbeck 6th

Although I disagree with Russ 'em about Trent pushing the ball, I agree about Brohm. When I watched the video (before seeing this thread) it jumped out to me as well... I thought, "Wow, Brohm throws a beautiful ball." Sure its only rookie camp, and no pads, and 5 secs of footage or whatever, etc., etc. but don't kill the guy just for stating the obvious. Watch the video, it's a pretty looking ball in the air. I'm not a Brohm die-harder...my assumption of late was that Trent would win back the starter's job. I just don't think Fitz is the answer and don't think he really has a shot at the job and I didn't know enough about Brohm to have confidence to think he could come out and win the job...but throw the rookie in and some coaching and I'm starting to get excited about this QB competition and how it will turn out. Hopefully they all get better, but one guy really comes on to seize the job. And did you see the Trent TRX video...he's working hard too... http://www.sportsfanshopdeals.com/trent-ed...k-trx-training/ I'm not confident we have a franchise quaterback on hand, but I am confident that Chan will make all of these guys better and he'll put the best one out there on Sundays.

I 100% agree with "Bad play call, bad design, bad protections" and I give blame to the receivers as well. And I wasn't saying the line was the rock of Gibralter by any means, sure it would've been nice if they had given Trent more time, but since they didn't, then Trent needs to throw that ball away. Yes, you're right only about 3 seconds before there is pressure, but Trent drops back and makes his reads in 2 seconds, no one is open, on the third second, as soon as he feels that pressure from the left, he should be chucking that ball to the sideline knowing he doesn't have enough time to go through the progressions again. Yes, it's 3rd down, but it's also a 3-3 ball game at the start of the second quarter. If it isn't there and you have that many guys rushing you've got to throw it away and punt and try to get it next possession. Now if its the 4th quarter and you're down, maybe you stick in the pocket longer...but not in this situation. Anyhow, what I guess I was originally reacting to was ripping Hangartner (not that I think he's the 2nd coming of Kent Hull or anything), but let's remember that last year he had a rookie on either side of him...I don't think he is/was as bad as some people think.

If you really look at that play objectively, this is what happened (according to my amateur eyes): The Jets are sending a blitz, rushing 5 men from the line with 1 LB on a delayed blitz and 1 LB checking the RB. It's a three step drop for Trent (a quick play) and knowing there's a blitz coming, you better get rid of it quick. D. Bell successfully blocks #98 J. Meredith successfully blocks #92 Hangartner chips #99 which allows E. Wood to successfully block #99 Hangartner turns back to 93 who beats him, BUT... Levitre is looking to block #98 who Bell already has taken care of what should have happened is while Hangartner chips #99 and passes him off to Wood, Levitre should have been chipping #93 and then passing him off to Hang before he turns to help Bell with #98 On the other side D. Fine initially has #97 blocked, who then beats Fine inside on a 2nd move Fred Jackson successfully blocks LB #57...but #52 is also coming on the blitz Trent takes 3 step drop kind of pumps the ball twice, then feels the pressure from #93 on the left, takes a step up, but by this time #97 has beaten Fine with his 2nd move and #52 is coming in, Trent takes another step in and then buries his head. So, if you were to blame anyone on the O-line, it would have to be Levitre... but really, Trent had 2 (maybe 3) chances to throw the ball...if he had thrown at any of those moments, Fine's man and the delayed LB (who are the guys who crushed him) don't even get close to Trent. On a quick play with a blitz coming, you look for your hot read and try to complete it, if it's not there you gotta throw it away. It's not about whether you see it coming or not, it's about the internal QB clock that they always talk about. You have to know in that type of situation how much time you have and act accordingly. So, I definitely put that play on Trent, with Levitre, of course, not helping the situation. Anyhow, I'm not trying to dump on Trent...I like him and I think he looks like our best option right now (Fitz ain't it and Brohm and Brown are unknowns). I hope Trent can put it together with better offensive coaches/play calling, but that play was definitely not Hangartner's fault, and even the best lines in the league can't hold out for long against a 7 man rush...you have to get rid of that ball quicker. To the original post, according to how people refer to it, yes, you'd have to say Trent is injury prone and it does worry me, but does that mean he can't go out and play next season without a significant injury? No, because who knows and with better coaching maybe his clock gets better rather than rung.

Gailey > Van Pelt/Jauron by a mile, if for nothing but experience That's the big difference...Spiller is icing (hopefully a very sweet one). The O may not be great next year or even above average, but it WILL be better than last season. Now if only a QB and some of the young OL and WR can step up...then we might have something.