Jump to content

Trent Edwards


Wizard

Recommended Posts

I know names like Locker, Luck, Mallett, and Ponder have been thrown out there knowing that, barring some miracle, Buffalo has a top 5 pick in next year's draft. And, yes, my pipe dream is the Bills trade out of the top 5, land Luck or Mallett and somehow get a 1st round LT that becomes a stud. Sorry for the digression. Looking at teams with quarterback position deficiences like the Bills and/or teams that will need a new starting QB soon (i.e. the Vikings with Favre's age and history), is there a starting quarterback worse than Trent Edwards?

 

Would you rather have Trent Edwards over any of the following players?

 

Jason Campbell-Raiders

Bruce Gradowski-Raiders

Jake Delhomme-Browns

Alex Smith-49ers

Brett Favre-Vikings (mainly cuz the guy is 40+ and Jackson and Rosenfels are the guys in line of succession)

Derek Anderson-Cardinals

Matt Hasselbeck (getting up in age and has had injury history recently)

Matt Moore (keep in mind that Jimmy Clausen is his current backup)

 

I would take any of these guys over Trent Edwards this year and next year if I had a choice between Edwards and any of these guys. The team most likely to be in the market for a starting QB would be the Vikings considering that Sage Rosenfels and Tavaris Jackson don't scream a successor at QB much like our Fitzpatrick/Brohm backup plan.

 

Is there anyone worse than Trent Edwards as a starting QB or a well-known backup in this league?

Edited by Wizard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of these players:

 

Jason Campbell-Raiders

Bruce Gradowski-Raiders

Jake Delhomme-Browns

Alex Smith-49ers

Derek Anderson-Cardinals

Matt Moore (keep in mind that Jimmy Clausen is his current backup)

 

while I don't think they are all pretty much better than Trent Edwards, I also think they are terrible and have no future. So there would really be no point in trading, I don't want any of these guys either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know names like Locker, Luck, Mallett, and Ponder have been thrown out there knowing that, barring some miracle, Buffalo has a top 5 pick in next year's draft. And, yes, my pipe dream is the Bills trade out of the top 5, land Luck or Mallett and somehow get a 1st round LT that becomes a stud. Sorry for the digression. Looking at teams with quarterback position deficiences like the Bills and/or teams that will need a new starting QB soon (i.e. the Vikings with Favre's age and history), is there a starting quarterback worse than Trent Edwards?

 

Would you rather have Trent Edwards over any of the following players?

 

Jason Campbell-Raiders

Bruce Gradowski-Raiders

Jake Delhomme-Browns

Alex Smith-49ers

Brett Favre-Vikings (mainly cuz the guy is 40+ and Jackson and Rosenfels are the guys in line of succession)

Derek Anderson-Cardinals

Matt Hasselbeck (getting up in age and has had injury history recently)

Matt Moore (keep in mind that Jimmy Clausen is his current backup)

 

I would take any of these guys over Trent Edwards this year and next year if I had a choice between Edwards and any of these guys. The team most likely to be in the market for a starting QB would be the Vikings considering that Sage Rosenfels and Tavaris Jackson don't scream a successor at QB much like our Fitzpatrick/Brohm backup plan.

 

Is there anyone worse than Trent Edwards as a starting QB or a well-known backup in this league?

Theyre all scrubs. At one time I thought Anderson had talent, but if he can't get the ball deep with Fitzgerald in AZ, that's all I need to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know names like Locker, Luck, Mallett, and Ponder have been thrown out there knowing that, barring some miracle, Buffalo has a top 5 pick in next year's draft. And, yes, my pipe dream is the Bills trade out of the top 5, land Luck or Mallett and somehow get a 1st round LT that becomes a stud. Sorry for the digression. Looking at teams with quarterback position deficiences like the Bills and/or teams that will need a new starting QB soon (i.e. the Vikings with Favre's age and history), is there a starting quarterback worse than Trent Edwards?

 

Would you rather have Trent Edwards over any of the following players?

 

Jason Campbell-Raiders

Bruce Gradowski-Raiders

Jake Delhomme-Browns

Alex Smith-49ers

Brett Favre-Vikings (mainly cuz the guy is 40+ and Jackson and Rosenfels are the guys in line of succession)

Derek Anderson-Cardinals

Matt Hasselbeck (getting up in age and has had injury history recently)

Matt Moore (keep in mind that Jimmy Clausen is his current backup)

 

I would take any of these guys over Trent Edwards this year and next year if I had a choice between Edwards and any of these guys. The team most likely to be in the market for a starting QB would be the Vikings considering that Sage Rosenfels and Tavaris Jackson don't scream a successor at QB much like our Fitzpatrick/Brohm backup plan.

 

Is there anyone worse than Trent Edwards as a starting QB or a well-known backup in this league?

 

I would definitely bring in Gradkowski the kid has a set and isn't afraid to go down field & possibly Campbell but the others ????? We can lose with what we got i want to win !!!!!

Edited by T master
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of these players:

 

Jason Campbell-Raiders

Bruce Gradowski-Raiders

Jake Delhomme-Browns

Alex Smith-49ers

Derek Anderson-Cardinals

Matt Moore (keep in mind that Jimmy Clausen is his current backup)

 

while I don't think they are all pretty much better than Trent Edwards, I also think they are terrible and have no future. So there would really be no point in trading, I don't want any of these guys either.

 

It's a hypothetical question. I would rather have any of those guys starting over Trent. None of them including Trent are long term solutions but they are all better than Trent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually many teams are set at their QB position. Fingers crossed we wont have too much competition in the off season when we're looking.

 

Seattle

Cleveland

Oakland

Jacksonville

San Francisco

Buffalo

 

These are the teams that will need QBs next year. Out of these teams, I think Cleveland and Oakland will be the two teams that MAY finish worse than us.The battle in week 14 will be a big one when they face Cleveland. Soooo, say you have Mallett, Luck, Locker and Ponder as the top 4 QBs....Bills should have a pretty good shot at the top 2. By the way, what are all these character issues surfacing around Mallett????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seattle

Cleveland

Oakland

Jacksonville

San Francisco

Buffalo

 

These are the teams that will need QBs next year. Out of these teams, I think Cleveland and Oakland will be the two teams that MAY finish worse than us.The battle in week 14 will be a big one when they face Cleveland. Soooo, say you have Mallett, Luck, Locker and Ponder as the top 4 QBs....Bills should have a pretty good shot at the top 2. By the way, what are all these character issues surfacing around Mallett????

Raiders might be happy with Campbell, too soon to tell. And 9ers seem to be committed to Smith, at least so far. Im also not sure if Jags will give up on Garrard, I wouldn't until they fill their other needs. And Delhome may have Cleveburgh on hold, especially since they're developing Colt. Seattle I'd say is likely looking in Carroll's 2nd year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raiders might be happy with Campbell, too soon to tell. And 9ers seem to be committed to Smith, at least so far. Im also not sure if Jags will give up on Garrard, I wouldn't until they fill their other needs. And Delhome may have Cleveburgh on hold, especially since they're developing Colt. Seattle I'd say is likely looking in Carroll's 2nd year.

 

 

Seattle traded for Charlie Whitehurst to be the successor for Hasselback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know names like Locker, Luck, Mallett, and Ponder have been thrown out there knowing that, barring some miracle, Buffalo has a top 5 pick in next year's draft. And, yes, my pipe dream is the Bills trade out of the top 5, land Luck or Mallett and somehow get a 1st round LT that becomes a stud. Sorry for the digression. Looking at teams with quarterback position deficiences like the Bills and/or teams that will need a new starting QB soon (i.e. the Vikings with Favre's age and history), is there a starting quarterback worse than Trent Edwards?

 

Would you rather have Trent Edwards over any of the following players?

 

Jason Campbell-Raiders

Bruce Gradowski-Raiders

Jake Delhomme-Browns

Alex Smith-49ers

Brett Favre-Vikings (mainly cuz the guy is 40+ and Jackson and Rosenfels are the guys in line of succession)

Derek Anderson-Cardinals

Matt Hasselbeck (getting up in age and has had injury history recently)

Matt Moore (keep in mind that Jimmy Clausen is his current backup)

 

I would take any of these guys over Trent Edwards this year and next year if I had a choice between Edwards and any of these guys. The team most likely to be in the market for a starting QB would be the Vikings considering that Sage Rosenfels and Tavaris Jackson don't scream a successor at QB much like our Fitzpatrick/Brohm backup plan.

 

Is there anyone worse than Trent Edwards as a starting QB or a well-known backup in this league?

 

Off of your list-

Campbell - benched during game

Bruce Gradowski- Did win the game

Jake Delhomme-Sucks soon to be benched by the way he is playing

Alex Smith-49ers see above post

Brett Favre-Vikings would never play in buffalo, would only play at a superbowl caliber team(not buffalo right now)

Derek Anderson-Cardinals - benched

Matt Hasselbeck see delhomme answer

Matt Moore just lost his starting job

 

No reason to bring in any of them, we need to stop picking through the trash, hasselbeck maybe to help a roookie out in learning the ropes but thats it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...