MDH

Absolutely, he's not that good today. If this is the finished product I don't want him starting for my team long term. But I'm willing to give a young QB some time before I kick him to the curb. Now, a 10 year vet I have no patience with. If a guy like that doesn't come in and provide substantial improvement I'd rather roll the dice with the young guy and hope the light goes on.

What fans can't figure out is that they have no clue. No clue at all in regards to looking at a QB and being able to predict how good (or bad) he'll be. I don't, you don't, nobody on this board does. The fools are the people who have convinced themselves that they have a clue. The guys who get paid millions of dollars a year and spend their lives watching game film have trouble doing it yet many people on this board can look at a few games and state with certainty that a QB simply doesn't have it and the Bills should move on. People don't even understand when they don't understand something. They think they read some articles and watch some games and BAM, they're experts! All the people who "support" EJ just state - time and time again - that it's too early to tell. Sure, odds are he fails (odds are anybody fails, the rate of success for QBs is low.) But that doesn't mean you don't give a kid the chance to develop. The chance he fails jumps to 100% if not given a chance. 14 games does not a chance make.

I think it had more to do with the situation. When those reports were coming out it looked like Ryan would be getting the Falcons job. Trestman runs a pass heavy attack with lots of formations and personnel groupings. A vet like Ryan could probably digest that pretty easily. But now that Ryan has a job with the Bills with a dominant D and questionable QB play it makes more sense to go the Roman route. Run heavy, read option, play action. It's not going to light the world on fire but it's a much better fit for a young QB and plays to the strength of the team - defense.

This was my opinion in the late 90s when Wade's teams continuously lost in the playoffs. Now, I just want the playoffs. If the Bills can achieve that then I'll upgrade my wishes at that time.

I'm guessing that because of the dominant D they just didn't want to make the mistake that would cost them the game. Opening things up would also afford the opposing D's defenders more opportunities to make plays as well. Pretty sure after watching them turn both our QBs into kitty cats that not making a mistake on offense became their mantra.

I can't believe I'm about to do it, but I'm going to defend Marrone and Hackett. The reason they did this was because of their guards. They had guards who couldn't move AT ALL. Did you see them try to get outside to block for a screen? It was embarrassing. They'd fall flat on their faces more often than not. Their lack of agility is why we never saw staples of other offenses like the pulling guards or the spread. When you run the spread you need an OL who can move to execute zone blocking schemes. Our Guards had cement in their shoes. Watching the playoffs is an eye opener. Basic plays for other teams are things we never saw this year because of the OL. All that being said Marrone and Hackett certainly didn't get the most juice out of the lemon that was the offense but it wasn't all their fault.

I just hope it doesn't turn into a Daniel Snyder situation where there is a big splash and we only later come to realize that it was caused by a giant turd hitting the toilet water.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of the move either. In order for it to pan out Brown pretty much needs to be the starter this year and get the majority of the carries. They need to bring in a body at RB (either a mid round pick or re-sign Spiller)but what I'd most like to see are 2 new guards and a RT brought in to challenge Henderson. Basically a complete re-working of the OL. If Hughes has to be let walk to accommodate that then so be it. Do that and Brown/Jackson/Dixon/Who-ever is plenty good.

So you are in the top 50 of your profession on the planet? Because they want to be "right" and they didn't like he pick to begin with.

How do yo think Belichick would do with the "talent" on those Jets teams? I'm guessing he'd have a record like Rex's...or like he had in Cleveland.

Ahh, the "stats don't mean jack" argument which comes out when every stat in the world proves you are wrong. I'm surprised you didn't go with "the eyeball test." That's a good one too.

Of those three I'd take Hoyer.

Only because he plays for a different team. Have you watched Sanchez play or seen stat line before his year with Chip Kelly? Before this year his best completion percentage was 56.7%. Every other year with the Jets his completion percentage was below 55%. And you're saying Manuel can't hit the broadside of a barn? So Sanchez can't hit his own guys with any consistency AND turns the ball over with alarming regularity and somehow he's "better."

He wasn't even average. That first year Sanchez completed 54% of his passes with 12 TDs and 20 INTs. His 2nd year was only marginally better.

As opposed to Sanchez who can hit the broadside of the barn in-so-long as the barn is painted in the opposing team's colors?

Don't agree with you at all. You have to have faith that you scouted the guy and he has the tools you thought he did then let him develop. I know it's a dirty word and this "I want it now" society doesn't like to hear it but unless you Luck-out it's pretty much what you have to do at the QB position unless you're just going to go FA dumpster diving every year or two.

I think you give him an average QB who doesn't turn the ball over (i.e. the "game manager") and he can consistently get this team into the playoffs with a real chance to advance. Crossing my fingers that EJ develops into that guy.

Exactly. I'd rather roll the dice with EJ than bring in a guy who has proven to make big mistakes that cost his teams games time and time again.

post #33!

I might be the only one who doesn't want Schwartz back. Ryan has been successful with his defenses his entire career, even in his later Jets' years when the talent on D wasn't great. Schwartz's success has been directly correlated to the talent level of his D. When the talent level wasn't top notch his Ds weren't very good. I much prefer Rex's D to Schwartz's. People keep thinking that the run D is going to suffer but Ryan has had lots of success vs. the run with his Ds. Pettine's failure vs. the run is not Ryan's. I'm excited to see what Ryan can do with the talent on this D. I don't think he's had a D this loaded since his days in Baltimore.

Nothing false about it. The point was you don't have to promote a well regarded coordinator to HC to fix that side of the ball. If that was the case then there wouldn't be any well regarded coordinators to hire as your next HC because they'd already be head coaches. Get a quality guy to coach the offense and it will be fine. I have my concerns about Roman but he was successful in SF with a dominant running game. Let's hope that had something to do with his skills as an OC. On a side note, I have a feeling that the rumors about Trestman as Ryan's OC had to do with him getting the Atlanta job and having Ryan as his QB. With the Bills D and their lack of a proven QB a lower risk offense is what is needed, enter Roman. Absolutely false. I never liked his mouth but the guy has always been a very good coach. What he did in 2013 with the Jets was amazing. That team had no business being 8-8.

So the only way to have a successful offense is to hire a HC who was an offensive coordinator? That didn't work too well with Marrone. And by extension does that mean that whichever side of the ball your HC isn't an "expert" on will always suck? That's some bazaaro-world thinking.

I think this mostly has to do with the media's (and by extension the fans who follow the draft) insistence that the Bills "reached" and he "wasn't worth a first round pick." So when they talk about Manuel they want to continue this narrative as it plays into what they already believed.

Not wrong at all. Yeah, a few guys will be bargains for a team and help them a lot. Most of the guys won't be. And your example wasn't a high draft pick, so it's not even what was being discussed to begin with.

You get what you pay for. One or two guys in the entire draft will, right out of the gate, play at the level Dareus is currently playing at. So yeah, they're cheaper but they'll likely take years to develop. By that time they'll cost more money... I also highly dispute your claim that Marriota is one of the best prospects since Luck. Hes more of the same. Winston, on the other hand, has all the tools but who knows where his head is at. He might be an all time great but he could be out of the league in a few years. He's worth the risk though, but Marriota is not. Some desperate team will take a chance on him though, I'm glad the Bills won't be one the one.