Wizard Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 (edited) 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 September 20, 2010 by Wizard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Barker Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 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 More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 Not to nitpick but Rosenfels is backing up Manning in NY On to your post if Matt Moore is relased after the season id like to see him brought in...hes a skilled player and could at least keep the seat warm til our draft pick is ready Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Barker Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 Not to nitpick but Rosenfels is backing up Manning in NY On to your post if Matt Moore is relased after the season id like to see him brought in...hes a skilled player and could at least keep the seat warm til our draft pick is ready Ya, he's been doing GREAT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 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 More sharing options...
BillsNYC Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 This season is a bust anyways, I'd rather take a guy with HEART who can help the players around him develop that is exciting to watch. Edwards has no benefit to this team right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jr1 Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 Kelly Holcomb 2.0 needs to go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T master Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 (edited) 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 September 20, 2010 by T master Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeHateMe Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 Trent is the worst football player on earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 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 More sharing options...
Thunderstealer Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 Defenses are ahead of offenses it seems. The pocket qb has been in big trouble lately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yungmack Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 Just your list of QBs shows how sucky most of them in the NFL are. And for the kiddies around here who are all about "cut Trent and get a real QB," there is no such thing as a QB tree where you can pluck two or three great ones anytime you choose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBaumer Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 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 More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 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 More sharing options...
mob16151 Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 (edited) Matt Moore might actually be worse, but it's close. Edited September 20, 2010 by mob16151 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heels20X6 Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 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 More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 Seattle traded for Charlie Whitehurst to be the successor for Hasselback. Good point. There's a decent chance we won't have a lot of competition to find a QB. A lot of teams are actually set at the position. It just doesnt seem that way from our vantage point given our situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devldog131 Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 Not anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikey98277 Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 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 More sharing options...
Recommended Posts