Trent is the guy

[buffalo_bills]

And there is nothing we can do about it. Hes gonna be the starting quarterback. You may not like it, but its the reality. Does he suck? Yes. But if we look at the bright side, it he fails, we pick up a frachise Qb early in the draft, and if he succeeds, we are well on our way to the postseason.

[BuffaloWest]

And there is nothing we can do about it. Hes gonna be the starting quarterback. You may not like it, but its the reality. Does he suck? Yes. But if we look at the bright side, it he fails, we pick up a frachise Qb early in the draft, and if he succeeds, we are well on our way to the postseason.

The line sucked too...AND....The guy hasnt really played in a year. But that was not pretty.

[MattyT]

I thought there was definitely more upside to Trent's play than Fitz's. Take away the INT (which was very, very bad) and the overthrow on the deep pass and it was a serviceable performance. I thought Fitz looked like sh-- for the most part. Bad pocket presence, bad timing on his throws, off target a lot. He was the benefactor of a nice run play and blown coverage in the end zone.

 

Neither of these guys are the answer though.

[Mark Vader]

I thought there was definitely more upside to Trent's play than Fitz's. Take away the INT (which was very, very bad) and the overthrow on the deep pass and it was a serviceable performance. I thought Fitz looked like sh-- for the most part. Bad pocket presence, bad timing on his throws, off target a lot. He was the benefactor of a nice run play and blown coverage in the end zone.

 

Neither of these guys are the answer though.

Ooooooo. You are going to get flamed for those remarks. Here's to your guts

[MattyT]

Ooooooo. You are going to get flamed for those remarks. Here's to your guts

lol...it's just so easy to hate on the QBs

[Heels20X6]

I thought there was definitely more upside to Trent's play than Fitz's. Take away the INT (which was very, very bad) and the overthrow on the deep pass and it was a serviceable performance. I thought Fitz looked like sh-- for the most part. Bad pocket presence, bad timing on his throws, off target a lot. He was the benefactor of a nice run play and blown coverage in the end zone.

 

Neither of these guys are the answer though.

 

I'm not going to flame you Matty as you make some good points but the stuff you say to "take away" kind of represents the body of work that is Trent Edwards - a mix of mediocre plays, bad throws and a couple of nice throws that tease you that there might be something there. You're right though, neither of these guys should be starting an NFL game.

 

I'm guessing Chan's plan was: "well, Trent's an OK QB...I just need someone who can hand off a football and manage a game."

 

He was wrong in that regard.

[San-O]

I thought there was definitely more upside to Trent's play than Fitz's. Take away the INT (which was very, very bad) and the overthrow on the deep pass and it was a serviceable performance. I thought Fitz looked like sh-- for the most part. Bad pocket presence, bad timing on his throws, off target a lot. He was the benefactor of a nice run play and blown coverage in the end zone.

 

Neither of these guys are the answer though.

 

 

Yes, please. Take it away. All very far away!

[The Dean]

And there is nothing we can do about it. Hes gonna be the starting quarterback. You may not like it, but its the reality. Does he suck? Yes. But if we look at the bright side, it he fails, we pick up a frachise Qb early in the draft, and if he succeeds, we are well on our way to the postseason.

 

 

Let's say you are right and Chan already has his mind made up. (I question that, but let's ignore that for now.) As obvious as it is to you that Trent starts, it's as obvious to me he isn't likely to start all 16 games and is likely to miss a few due to injury. That's just the way of the NFL. I doubt McNabb plays all the games, either. And Trent has some history.

 

I want to see as much of Fitz and Brohm as possible, as they will need to see some action if they are going to be counted on to step in.

 

With that said, I think more of what we saw from Trent today will make Chan question any decision me may have made (if he has made it).

[MattyT]

I'm not going to flame you Matty as you make some good points but the stuff you say to "take away" kind of represents the body of work that is Trent Edwards - a mix of mediocre plays, bad throws and a couple of nice throws that tease you that there might be something there. You're right though, neither of these guys should be starting an NFL game.

 

I'm guessing Chan's plan was: "well, Trent's an OK QB...I just need someone who can hand off a football and manage a game."

 

He was wrong in that regard.

Yeah, I think Chan is wondering if he bit off more than he can chew with this crop of "gunslingers."

[seadog]

I'm not going to flame you Matty as you make some good points but the stuff you say to "take away" kind of represents the body of work that is Trent Edwards - a mix of mediocre plays, bad throws and a couple of nice throws that tease you that there might be something there. You're right though, neither of these guys should be starting an NFL game.

 

I'm guessing Chan's plan was: "well, Trent's an OK QB...I just need someone who can hand off a football and manage a game."

 

He was wrong in that regard.

and I think that's how Bill's fans need to evalute the QB's. Whom can manage the game and make the fewest mistakes because we certainly don't have a play maker on the roster. I think we need to run about 80% of the time, throwing it enough to keep the defense honest.

[Buffalonian-at-Heart]

I thought there was definitely more upside to Trent's play than Fitz's. Take away the INT (which was very, very bad) and the overthrow on the deep pass and it was a serviceable performance. I thought Fitz looked like sh-- for the most part. Bad pocket presence, bad timing on his throws, off target a lot. He was the benefactor of a nice run play and blown coverage in the end zone.

 

Neither of these guys are the answer though.

 

Sorry but that INT was just as much on Evans. Come on Lee you've got to make sure he doesn't catch it.

[Fixxxer]

Ooooooo. You are going to get flamed for those remarks. Here's to your guts

 

Not at all, I understand what he was trying to say, but not many people will agree with him.

[Mark Vader]

Not at all, I understand what he was trying to say, but not many people will agree with him.

I must say that I am impressed with how much restraint is being shown by the posters tonight.

[MattyT]

Sorry but that INT was just as much on Evans. Come on Lee you've got to make sure he doesn't catch it.

Evans may take a share of the blame, but you just don't make that throw in that situation. Even Brown had better sense than Edwards in that same situation except that he threw the ball away (for a penalty) instead of putting it up for grabs with a flat-footed WR.

[Fixxxer]

I must say that I am impressed with how much restraint is being shown by the posters tonight.

 

It was the first game of the era, it was not going to be perfect. I'm a little dissapointed at the body language of the entire team though, I thought they were going to be a little more fired up. Maybe they were tired as Theisman said at one point in the broadcast.

I liked how the game started but it went downhill after the first Skins TD.

[John from Riverside]

Let's say you are right and Chan already has his mind made up. (I question that, but let's ignore that for now.) As obvious as it is to you that Trent starts, it's as obvious to me he isn't likely to start all 16 games and is likely to miss a few due to injury. That's just the way of the NFL. I doubt McNabb plays all the games, either. And Trent has some history.

 

I want to see as much of Fitz and Brohm as possible, as they will need to see some action if they are going to be counted on to step in.

 

With that said, I think more of what we saw from Trent today will make Chan question any decision me may have made (if he has made it).

 

 

Dean you and i are on the same page......except I think Trent misses a lot more then a few.....

 

Keep Brohm close Chan

[DanInUticaTampa]

As bad as the offense looked, the RBs looked great. If our starting o-line can actually do some things right and not get penalties, we can probably be decent just running the hell out of the ball.

 

I am guessing we were "pass UNhappy" tonight because Gaily wants to get a real good look at the QBs. He knows they suck, so they are the ones he really needs to work with. I am sure that when the regular season starts, we are going to pound the ball on the ground. No way does gailey trust fitz and edwards to lead a half decent passing game.

 

I am more worried about the defense..... they looked like they took a few steps back from last year.

 

Either way, I am just hoping they fix a lot of these mistakes and hopefully don't embarress themselves. Hopefully a strong run game can do a lot for this team. Because the QB play being bad looks like a more of a sure thing than before.

[SteamRoller67]

Sorry but that INT was just as much on Evans. Come on Lee you've got to make sure he doesn't catch it.

 

Yeah...a floating piece of **** on the run is NOT the wide receivers fault! Gimme a f%&@ing break...

[Heels20X6]

I must say that I am impressed with how much restraint is being shown by the posters tonight.

 

I think a lot of that restraint is coming from most of the board falling in the category of "Well, the team doesn't look good - I am not surprised in the least" group.

 

Let's face it, we all knew this was a rebuild year and that the #1 and #2 QBs would require a Drew Brees-like salvation to improve this team's dismal offense.

 

It is what it is.

[MattyT]

I think a lot of the anger and disappointment towards Trent tonight comes from those who still had unrealistic expectations of the guy. In my mind, it's established that the guy won't ever sniff a pro bowl and may never captain a team with a winning record. At this point, the goal is to find the best of what we got till the next guy comes along.