Can't really argue with Florio on this one

[dave mcbride]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/09/27/bills-cut-trent-edwards-cant-stick-to-a-plan-once-again/

[Coach Tuesday]

Gregg Rosenthal

[Chilly]

The only thing I'd argue is that there weren't really any available QBs this off-season that would make a good long-term option for the Bills; well, maybe outside of Sam Bradford. Florio could be 100% right on this one, or it could be that the Bills saw the same thing I did: Outside of Bradford, this wasn't a good year to pick up a franchise QB.

 

We'll see what happens in the next off-season.

[dave mcbride]

Gregg Rosenthal

Thanks - missed that. Still, they're kinda one and the same, right?

[DrDawkinstein]

The only thing I'd argue is that there weren't really any available QBs this off-season that would make a good long-term option for the Bills; well, maybe outside of Sam Bradford. Florio could be 100% right on this one, or it could be that the Bills saw the same thing I did: Outside of Bradford, this wasn't a good year to pick up a franchise QB.

 

We'll see what happens in the next off-season.

 

 

you, me, the Bills, and a lot of other people. agreed.

[Yard Monkey]

I don't agree at all. The bills have a long term plan. Figure out who on the roster can't play and get rid of them. In the meantime, I'm positive they are working on finding players to replace...

[DrDawkinstein]

I don't agree at all. The bills have a long term plan. Figure out who on the roster can't play and get rid of them. In the meantime, I'm positive they are working on finding players to replace...

 

+1

 

agreed on the long term plan. the "problem" in the media is that nowadays, everything has to be RIGHT NOW. there is NO WAY anyone could rebuild this mess of a franchise in one offseason. Not without putting the team in a bad place in the near future.

[transient]

This is a reactionary article with absolutely no thought put in to writing it. Who that was available in the offseason would have been better? Who would you have staked the next 3-4 years of a rebuilding process on? Campbell? Thigpen? Troy Smith? The Bills apparently had interest in McNabb, who didn't show similar interest. They took a chance that they could rehab Edwards, and they admitted it when they couldn't... and quickly, no less. If previous regimes had done this, we wouldn't still have had this problem this season, and we would have never had a 4 year Flutie-Johnson QB debate. Their plan was see if one of the current QBs fits the bill, and if not find one next year in a year that might have better QBs available. Bringing in someone who you don't know flat out is better than what's already here is a waste of time.

[earthtobrint]

The only thing I'd argue is that there weren't really any available QBs this off-season that would make a good long-term option for the Bills; well, maybe outside of Sam Bradford. Florio could be 100% right on this one, or it could be that the Bills saw the same thing I did: Outside of Bradford, this wasn't a good year to pick up a franchise QB.

 

We'll see what happens in the next off-season.

 

I think this is accurate.

 

However, if management can't find a long-term option out of the quarterbacks of next years draft class, they're a lost cause.

Edited September 27, 2010 by earthtobrint

[dpberr]

The team got rid of an employee that wasn't getting it done. Happens everyday in America. Perform or get cut. Unless you work for the federal government.

 

I appreciate that Nix and Gailey have the fortitude to make tough decisions.

 

PFT will make this a bigger story than it really is for anybody not named Trent Edwards.

[GG]

I don't agree at all. The bills have a long term plan. Figure out who on the roster can't play and get rid of them. In the meantime, I'm positive they are working on finding players to replace...

 

But the timing is odd. Why give Edwards the majority of snaps in camp & preseason if you think that there's a high probability that he'll be cut? The guy is not a good starting claiber QB. But he is more than an adequate backup. Why not keep him for the year? If you had questions about his abilities, you don't name him the starter, and you probably cut him in August.

 

That's the bizzarro part of the move.

 

It's similar to the cutting of Langston Walker. You cut a perfectly serviceable RT on the last day of camp because he couldn't cut it as a LT? And then you go through a carousel of turnstyles to replace the RT?

 

Maybe there is a plan in there that will begin to emerge. Somehwere.

[transient]

But the timing is odd. Why give Edwards the majority of snaps in camp & preseason if you think that there's a high probability that he'll be cut? The guy is not a good starting claiber QB. But he is more than an adequate backup. Why not keep him for the year? If you had questions about his abilities, you don't name him the starter, and you probably cut him in August.

 

That's the bizzarro part of the move.

 

It's similar to the cutting of Langston Walker. You cut a perfectly serviceable RT on the last day of camp because he couldn't cut it as a LT? And then you go through a carousel of turnstyles to replace the RT?

 

Maybe there is a plan in there that will begin to emerge. Somehwere.

 

More snaps aren't going to make Fitz more athletic and he's smart enough to take in the gameplan, so no harm done. I think they were evaluating TE and giving him every chance to succeed, and they saw enough to know he couldn't. Why keep him on the roster in a season that is all about evaluation when the process is over for him?

Edited September 27, 2010 by transient

[dave mcbride]

I don't agree at all. The bills have a long term plan. Figure out who on the roster can't play and get rid of them. In the meantime, I'm positive they are working on finding players to replace...

I think the point is that they thought they had made the right decision in picking Edwards, but they were flat out wrong. So now they're resetting. Again.

 

But the timing is odd. Why give Edwards the majority of snaps in camp & preseason if you think that there's a high probability that he'll be cut? The guy is not a good starting claiber QB. But he is more than an adequate backup. Why not keep him for the year? If you had questions about his abilities, you don't name him the starter, and you probably cut him in August.

 

That's the bizzarro part of the move.

 

It's similar to the cutting of Langston Walker. You cut a perfectly serviceable RT on the last day of camp because he couldn't cut it as a LT? And then you go through a carousel of turnstyles to replace the RT?

 

Maybe there is a plan in there that will begin to emerge. Somehwere.

What's the name of the owner again?

[John Cocktosten]

"Edwards has shown enough in his brief career for a few teams to take him on as a possible backup. Jacksonville makes some sense."

 

 

If J'ville picks Trent up the Bills finally will get even for the Rob Johnson heist!

[RuntheDamnBall]

But the timing is odd. Why give Edwards the majority of snaps in camp & preseason if you think that there's a high probability that he'll be cut? The guy is not a good starting claiber QB. But he is more than an adequate backup. Why not keep him for the year? If you had questions about his abilities, you don't name him the starter, and you probably cut him in August.

 

That's the bizzarro part of the move.

 

It's similar to the cutting of Langston Walker. You cut a perfectly serviceable RT on the last day of camp because he couldn't cut it as a LT? And then you go through a carousel of turnstyles to replace the RT?

 

Maybe there is a plan in there that will begin to emerge. Somehwere.

I'm going to indulge in some speculation, so take it for what you will.

 

I think it's perfectly possible that enough of Trent's teammates went behind his back and said to Gailey that they weren't comfortable going forward. Is that admirable? I am not sure. Does it smack of the inmates running the asylum? Maybe. But, it also would suggest that 1) Gailey is a no BS guy when it comes to players who don't perform, and 2) He would listen to his players and wants them to be accountable to one another, and he wants them to have faith in his system. It's a lot easier to do that when the QB isn't putting the brakes on your system on regular season gamedays.

[tennesseeboy]

The guy is right on point. If there is a "long term plan" one would think that Nix could actually verbalize it. Failing to plan...planning to fail.

[Big Turk]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/09/27/bills-cut-trent-edwards-cant-stick-to-a-plan-once-again/

 

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. No matter how well Edwards played during the preseason to fool Gailey, no amount of time in there would allow him to look like an NFL QB once the real games started. Thats the problem with Edwards...he fools you..will look like the next coming of Joe Montana and Peyton Manning combined in practice, but will look like the next coming of Rob Johnson combined with JP Losman once the games start for real...

 

Not sure what "plan" they are talking about. Its refreshing for a change to not keep trotting the same guy out there over and over again, knowing he has no prayer of doing anything worthwhile on offense...perhaps there is a plan after all. Determine who can play and who can't, and whoever can't play is getting out the door ASAP...

[Like A Mofo]

How does releasing Trent, a holdover from the previous regime, suggest that this team has no plan?

 

I guess the same might be said for Andrew Reid in Philly when they benched Kolb after 10 pass attempts, after they let McNabb go via trade because of Kolb and now they are going with Vick?

 

But oh that is right, Reid is winning, so that does not qualify

[macaroni]

Why keep him on the roster in a season that is all about evaluation when the process is over for him?

 

I would have kept him around to be our backup .... or the backup to our backup. While I do agree with the thought process of T.E. not playing a part in our future, he does know our offense, he was on our roster, and it didn't cost us anything to keep him just in case we needed him.

 

Now if we have a plan on what to do with that spot on the roster we just created to make the team better this season .... then it's a moot point ... but this move just scares me

[dave mcbride]

How does releasing Trent, a holdover from the previous regime, suggest that this team has no plan?

 

I guess the same might be said for Andrew Reid in Philly when they benched Kolb after 10 pass attempts, after they let McNabb go via trade because of Kolb and now they are going with Vick?

 

But oh that is right, Reid is winning, so that does not qualify

What do YOU think the plan is? Because I sure as hell don't see one. At least not yet.

[DrDawkinstein]

The guy is right on point. If there is a "long term plan" one would think that Nix could actually verbalize it. Failing to plan...planning to fail.

 

hes talked about it a number of times. he's not going to give you exact dates that he is going to fill exact positions. you have to take/find what you can, when you can.

[Beerball]

+1

 

agreed on the long term plan. the "problem" in the media is that nowadays, everything has to be RIGHT NOW. there is NO WAY anyone could rebuild this mess of a franchise in one offseason. Not without putting the team in a bad place in the near future.

I'll give you that to a degree, but, wouldn't you agree that the team put themselves into a deeper hole when they decided to change the defensive scheme? We put valuable pick and FA acquisitions to defense and ignored (with early picks or FA) the o-line and QB positions. We still look very shaky at LB.

 

Outside of Spiller we arent' seeing production from draft picks. Does this surprise you?

 

Nix has also stated he's not a 'trader' on draft day. Why not?

Edited September 27, 2010 by Beerball

[cale]

Adam Schefter tweets that the Bills tried to trade him in the offseason. No takers. So the obvious thing was to start him. This organization is run by maroons.

 

From Adam Schefter:

 

Bills had been trying to trade Trent Edwards since off-season. With no one interested, Buffalo decided it was best to release him.

[Chilly]

I think the point is that they thought they had made the right decision in picking Edwards, but they were flat out wrong. So now they're resetting. Again.

 

That's not necessarily true. Schefter's reporting the Bills were trying to trade Edwards all offseason.

[Sanners]

It's called a sunk cost. You don't make current or future decisions based on past costs. Edwards is done with the Bills, thus he is cut. Very simple.

[CircleTheWagons]

I prefer to think that releasing Edwards shows some confidence in Brohm and Gailey wants him taking more snaps in practice. Edwards may have preferred to be released than be the third string QB and the team granted his wish.

[transient]

I think the point is that they thought they had made the right decision in picking Edwards, but they were flat out wrong. So now they're resetting. Again.

 

Just because Gailey was talking him up doesn't mean he thought he was the answer. As for picking him, he clearly had the best preseason of the three against the opposition's #1 defenses. I'm sure Gailey was trying to be as supportive as possible in an effort to get the best out of him. What would you have rather he did, complain publicly that he's the best of a bad lot... admit that he was on a short leash while they determine if he has a chance to translate his preseason to the regular season... undermine any little bit of confidence that he might have... admit to the fans that they don't have the long term solution at QB on the roster to save face despite the message it would send to the team? Just because Florio thinks they could have done it differently doesn't mean this wasn't part of the plan... the short time that it took to make the decision makes me think it could have been the plan all along.

 

I would have kept him around to be our backup .... or the backup to our backup. While I do agree with the thought process of T.E. not playing a part in our future, he does know our offense, he was on our roster, and it didn't cost us anything to keep him just in case we needed him.

 

Now if we have a plan on what to do with that spot on the roster we just created to make the team better this season .... then it's a moot point ... but this move just scares me

 

In what scenario would we need him, though? To fill in for a game or two so that we don't ruin our playoff chances? Sounds like they're planning on bringing back Levi Brown, the Cardinals LT.

 

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/120316-terrible-espn-reporting-levi-brown/

[macaroni]

What do YOU think the plan is? Because I sure as hell don't see one. At least not yet.

 

If I were Nix (and I'm not) the only two positions I would feel a need to immediatly clear a roster spot for would be OLB and OT .... with the horrible showing our run defense gave us yesterday sealing the edge ..... I'm guessing OLB from somewhere.

[BuffaloWings]

Adam Schefter tweets that the Bills tried to trade him in the offseason. No takers. So the obvious thing was to start him. This organization is run by maroons.

 

From Adam Schefter:

You actually believe something that Schefter says?

[DrDawkinstein]

I'll give you that to a degree, but, wouldn't you agree that the team put themselves into a deeper hole when they decided to change the defensive scheme? We put valuable pick and FA acquisitions to defense and ignored (with early picks or FA) the o-line and QB positions. We still look very shaky at LB.

 

Outside of Spiller we arent' seeing production from draft picks. Does this surprise you?

 

Nix has also stated he's not a 'trader' on draft day. Why not?

 

sure, but when youre already in a hole as deep as the Bills, its a perfect opportunity to blow it all up and start from scratch. Get the systems you WANT to have and start building those.

 

this season was a wash before it even started, EVERYONE knew it, including the new coach and GM. better to make all the big changes and see which turds float and which turds sink. we can keep the ones the float and move on.

[HARCO186]

The arguement on that article is not one person said Trent looked bad in OTA's or in camp or even in preseason. People on this board said Trent looked good in DRILLS and in practice. Trent was hands down a better qb than the rest. Well once the bullets started flying, Trent looked scared, and wasn't able to handle the load. I feel it was not just a decent move, but a very bold statement by the management. Like it or not the Bills are not a playoff team. Maybe at best 8-8 is what I have always said and even that might not happen. Chan the Man found out first hand that Trent just lost control or the game was too fast for him. Chan wants to make it clear that he's not wishy washy. He went who played the best, and they failed. So he cut his losses and is now moving on. That tells me he doesn't want anyone to get the wrong idea of if Fitz fails will we go back to Trent. Trent is the flat tire spare who is just not useful anymore. GREAT MOVE CHAN AND BUDDY. Let the team know that they have a chance and if it's not good enough, then time to move on!!!!!!!!!!

[transient]

I'll give you that to a degree, but, wouldn't you agree that the team put themselves into a deeper hole when they decided to change the defensive scheme? We put valuable pick and FA acquisitions to defense and ignored (with early picks or FA) the o-line and QB positions. We still look very shaky at LB.

 

Outside of Spiller we arent' seeing production from draft picks. Does this surprise you?

 

Nix has also stated he's not a 'trader' on draft day. Why not?

 

I think the transition to the 3-4 made sense, and that they thought they could sink draft picks into positions of definite need (Spiller pick aside) while evaluating what they had on the roster at QB and LT where there were no players available who they clearly thought would come in and start this season. LB is a definite concern, but it's not unreasonable to see who they could successfully convert from DE to OLB before deciding that they needed to be replaced NOW. I feel they are trying to prioritize their rebuild by determining what positions need to be upgraded first after they've fully gotten a handle on the current roster, which unfortunately can't be accomplished in the preseason due to the vanilla nature of it.

[macaroni]

In what scenario would we need him, though? To fill in for a game or two so that we don't ruin our playoff chances? Sounds like they're planning on bringing back Levi Brown, the Cardinals LT.

 

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/120316-terrible-espn-reporting-levi-brown/

 

 

Gee I don't know .... but there has to be a reason most teams carry three QBs .... and with our line I'd recommend carrying about a dozen .... I'm just sayin' we all knew Trent was weak (and I liked Trent) the coaching staff HAD to feel they could correct his defects ... but they went from he's our starter and we'll coach him up on the fly, to, he's garbage and we don't even want him contaminating our locker room pretty darn quick.

 

IMHO .... there is something afoot

[GG]

I think the transition to the 3-4 made sense, and that they thought they could sink draft picks into positions of definite need (Spiller pick aside) while evaluating what they had on the roster at QB and LT where there were no players available who they clearly thought would come in and start this season. LB is a definite concern, but it's not unreasonable to see who they could successfully convert from DE to OLB before deciding that they needed to be replaced NOW. I feel they are trying to prioritize their rebuild by determining what positions need to be upgraded first after they've fully gotten a handle on the current roster, which unfortunately can't be accomplished in the preseason due to the vanilla nature of it.

 

And how are those picks of definite need doing?

[DrDawkinstein]

I think the transition to the 3-4 made sense, and that they thought they could sink draft picks into positions of definite need (Spiller pick aside) while evaluating what they had on the roster at QB and LT where there were no players available who they clearly thought would come in and start this season. LB is a definite concern, but it's not unreasonable to see who they could successfully convert from DE to OLB before deciding that they needed to be replaced NOW. I feel they are trying to prioritize their rebuild by determining what positions need to be upgraded first after they've fully gotten a handle on the current roster, which unfortunately can't be accomplished in the preseason due to the vanilla nature of it.

 

excellent post

 

And how are those picks of definite need doing?

 

at week 3 of their rookie year, tell us who is a bust

[transient]

And how are those picks of definite need doing?

 

I bet you get frustrated when your microwave popcorn doesn't pop fast enough. It's game three of a rebuild, get some perspective.

[GG]

at week 3 of their rookie year, tell us who is a bust

 

Nice hyperbole.

 

How's this, while it's too early to declare anyone a bust, you would expect the picks specifically targeted for the definite need to at least be dressed for live game action, let alone challenging for starting spots against players ill suited for the new defensive alignment. Are you telling me that there wasn't a single available LB in the draft's first 5 rounds who would push any of the Bills' holdover or FA LBs for a starting spot?

[TheChimp]

The only thing I'd argue is that there weren't really any available QBs this off-season that would make a good long-term option for the Bills; well, maybe outside of Sam Bradford. Florio could be 100% right on this one, or it could be that the Bills saw the same thing I did: Outside of Bradford, this wasn't a good year to pick up a franchise QB.

 

We'll see what happens in the next off-season.

But what are NEXT draft's QBs really like? I saw that Mallett meltdown against 'Bama and if they go for him, they're taking a huge risk. What about the other QBs in this coming draft, are THEY the ones to go for with the first pick? Or are there some really awesome pass rushers, run stuffers, Centers or Left Tackles that would be better options?

 

How crazy will this place be if the Bills don't pick a QB early NEXT season, either? I won't necessarily be that upset, so long as the guys they pick for the lines show more upside.

[Vinny4sum]

I prefer to think that releasing Edwards shows some confidence in Brohm and Gailey wants him taking more snaps in practice. Edwards may have preferred to be released than be the third string QB and the team granted his wish.

 

Good point.. and he may have been released because he does your team no good as number 3 and all he is to the rest of the team is a visual reminder of failure. He did not have a win at all cost mentality and that can infect a team and I would argue has infected some on the team.

 

I have fired employees because while they were adequate employees, they were poison in the cafeteria. That does not mean they didn't lip service the right answers it means their presence was a distraction.

[KOKBILLS]

Maybe there is a plan in there that will begin to emerge. Somewhere.

 

I seriously doubt it...And that's not what I want to believe, it's just what I believe now after 10 years of this crap...It's just beyond dysfunction and these people are supposed to be football people...Chan Gailey is a Veteran Coach, so was DJ...For both these guys to march Edwards out there as their unquestioned Starter, then bench him a few weeks later...You were right to say bizzarro because it's just bizzarro world period over there at OBD...Has been for a while now...There's no rhyme or reason...It's like a petri dish of losing culture...It's just sad...