Why can't Fitz be the face of the franchise?

[NaPolian8693]

Why can't Fitz be the face of the Franchise?

 

Because he's ugly.

[coldstorage5]

Too erratic... Great Back Up Not a championship QB. I like the guy, hopefully he will understand his role.

[akm0404]

Because he isn't good enough to win a championship in the NFL, and that should be our goal, right? Or have we all just agreed that stopping being embarrassing is good enough?

[KOKBILLS]

Fitzy has the most elusive and important QB attribute - the ability to quickly read a defense and make a decision. What good was JP's stronger, more accurate arm when he could never figure out where to throw the ball? And isn't accuracy also a function of receivers running accurate routes? And the offensive line giving the QB enough time? I say give Fitzy more time to establish some chemistry with this group before writing him off. How long did it take Peyton in Indy?

 

Seriously? Are you trying to compare Fitz to Peyton Manning?

 

If you are not old enough or can't remember the 1986 season here's a link:

 

'86 Bills

 

 

It was filled with a lot of games that remind me of what we have seen from these Bills. A QB in his first year under a new coach (actually two) and alot of late game, "in the clutch" failures. Past performance predicts future results right up until it no longer does. Keep an open mind.

 

I know the overall Football intelligence on this Board has hit an all time low when I see, in the same thread mind you, Fitz favorably compared to Peyton Manning and Jim Kelly...

 

Come on folks...Let's get real...Fitz is playing well...OK...But really?

[billsfreak]

I regularly read the Buffalo Rumblings blog on SB Nation, and I enjoy their insightful analysis. However, reading the comments sections of a recent article, one of the mods claimed that Fitzpatrick just doesn't have it in him to be a franchise QB.

 

My question is, why not? Yes, there are things he needs to work on, but he's well-respected and is a true leader on the field (just watch him try and throw blocks down field). He really seems to be thriving in Gailey's system and has great rapport with his receivers. At this point in the season he's projected to finish with about 25 TDs and 12.5 interceptions. He's able to make plays with his feet and has a good handle of reading the field.

 

I like it even from a marketing standpoint. The smart, tough, scrappy Fitzpatrick would be an awesome angle for the Bills, something we could really embrace as an identity, especially considering Buffalo's blue-collar populace.

 

This is all variable on Fitzpatrick playing at his current rate, and to be honest, it is hard to see him continue on pace to do so well with some really tough defenses coming down the stretch. However, if he does keep it up, he's earned himself at least a shot at another year.

Have you been watching the games? Fitz looks pretty good until it is crunch time and the game is on the line and then he chokes week after week.

[JESSEFEFFER]

Seriously? Are you trying to compare Fitz to Peyton Manning?

 

 

 

I know the overall Football intelligence on this Board has hit an all time low when I see, in the same thread mind you, Fitz favorably compared to Peyton Manning and Jim Kelly...

 

Come on folks...Let's get real...Fitz is playing well...OK...But really?

 

 

The thing is deny the point!!! Or consider and accept it. It would be that often times situations, events, or people we have come to view as being great did not immediately show as such. Let's see how he progresses and where he can lead the team. Kelly had many 4th quarter failures in 1986 but the fact that they were in those close games largely becasuse of him was undeniable. Many were not sure that he was Hall-of-Fame/franchise caliber. Not just that year either. The whole play Frank reich thing. Maybe you missed it. A Quote I remember from Jerry Sullivan about Jim Kelly as being just a "bumpkin that throws footballs."

[Paup 1995MVP]

Which Bills team do you watch?

 

Which non-Bills teams do you watch?

 

Did you watch the Bears post-game press conference? Did you hear Fitz diagnose the "underthrown" pass to Johnson?

 

Johnson could and should have made a play on the ball last week.

 

But assuming the three plays you've mentioned are non-debatable, great, he's had three bad plays, two of which were made in games we were already losing.

 

You mean to tell me theses passes define his season? That he makes no other throws in clutch situations? Throws that KEEP us in games in spite of our turnstyle defense?

 

Again, I bring up all the third and long he's completed, the late fourth quarter touchdown pass to Roscoe against KC that forced OT in the first place, and yet these three plays (debatable save the Berry pick, though they are) continually trump everyone's perception of what he can and can't do.

 

You're flat out wrong to say he doesn't make big plays. Wrong, my friend.

 

And you say that elite quarterbacks make plays in the clutch. You mean to tell me that elite quarterbacks can ALWAYS be relied on to make those big plays? Because from where I'm sitting, even with the three blunders you've mentioned, the drive to force OT against KC, the drive to force OT against Baltimore, and the drive to score before the half against Chicago offset the mistakes you've mentioned to SOME measurable degree.

 

Other than that, awesome analysis, Captain Pissy Pants.

Wow, you must be Fitzie's agent or something. Because I have watched every snap he has made as a Bill. And while I like Fitz and think he is far from the biggest problem on our team (Our lack of pass rush and inconsistent OT play is much more glaring) his accuracy for a starting NFL QB is brutal) He misses wide open receivers in every single game. Watch the rest of the NFL and most starting QB's do not miss an open receiver if they are standing vertical. You never see Brees, Rivers, Brady, Manning, Big Ben, etc miss open receivers unless they are getting flattened. Sure he will make some plays, and he is definitely a gamer. But his accuracy is not good enough at this point to win the 10 plus games a year needed to be a consistent playoff contender. You don't like me throwing water on your illusion that he is our next Jim Kelly or even Doug Flutie who with a little bit of defense can lead us to the mecca of success, I am sorry. But that is my conclusion from watching him play the past year.

[The Big Cat]

Wow, you must be Fitzie's agent or something. Because I have watched every snap he has made as a Bill. And while I like Fitz and think he is far from the biggest problem on our team (Our lack of pass rush and inconsistent OT play is much more glaring) his accuracy for a starting NFL QB is brutal) He misses wide open receivers in every single game. Watch the rest of the NFL and most starting QB's do not miss an open receiver if they are standing vertical. You never see Brees, Rivers, Brady, Manning, Big Ben, etc miss open receivers unless they are getting flattened. Sure he will make some plays, and he is definitely a gamer. But his accuracy is not good enough at this point to win the 10 plus games a year needed to be a consistent playoff contender. You don't like me throwing water on your illusion that he is our next Jim Kelly or even Doug Flutie who with a little bit of defense can lead us to the mecca of success, I am sorry. But that is my conclusion from watching him play the past year.

 

YES YOU DO!

 

What's even more frustrating than folks in this argument saying we need a quarterback of this caliber (citing the league's top quarterbacks for what Fitz isnt't) is this wildly fantastical presumption that the elite quarterbacks never make the same kind of inaccurate passes Fitz does! You're straight up WRONG to say that even these players "never miss open receivers" WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!

[KOKBILLS]

The thing is deny the point!!! Or consider and accept it. It would be that often times situations, events, or people we have come to view as being great did not immediately show as such. Let's see how he progresses and where he can lead the team. Kelly had many 4th quarter failures in 1986 but the fact that they were in those close games largely becasuse of him was undeniable. Many were not sure that he was Hall-of-Fame/franchise caliber. Not just that year either. The whole play Frank reich thing. Maybe you missed it. A Quote I remember from Jerry Sullivan about Jim Kelly as being just a "bumpkin that throws footballs."

 

Seriously...You just don't get it...I really don't give a rats a** what the point is...You can't compare Fitz to Kelly or Manning...It makes you look like you don't understand the intangibles that separate the good from the elite...Granted every elite QB had bad Games...Of coarse they did...But they also have intangibles that CLEARLY separate them from the pack...And since when did anyone around here care what Jerry Sullivan wrote?...

 

And I missed NOTHING the past 40 years of Buffalo Bills Football...You know what we called the people who were backing Reich over Kelly? Idiots...The exact same thing I'm going to say about anyone comparing Fitz to Kelly, Manning, or any other lock 1st Ballot Hall Of Fame QB...

 

I really have nothing against Fitz...But no question I don't believe he's good enough to be the long term future of this Franchise at QB...ESPECIALLY if they get a chance to take an elite Prospect like Luck at #1 Overall...Now if for some reason the Bills don't get the chance to take Luck or Mallet I'm fine with Fitz in the meantime...But I'm not going to swept away by him either...He's not an elite NFL QB...And he probably never will be...

[RkFast]

Why do we even need a "face of the franchise?"

 

More Jim Kelly envy. Stop it.

[Deadstroke]

I have made fun of Fitz for a long time, but I think he MIGHT be an answer.

 

There are plenty of teams that would love to have a guy like him as their QB (he is at least as good as Tony Romo).

 

He gets hit RIGHT AFTER he throws OFTEN. Tom Brady has crapped out under the conditions that Fitz has been playing (fairly well) under.

 

I bet with better protection his accuracy would improve GREATLY. How about an upgrade at 2 positions on the O-line next season? I don't think they need to have "the Top Left Tackle Prospect of the 2011 NFL DRAFT!" or something, just 2 more guys that are significant upgrades.

 

Fitz will be playing for the starting job this last half of the season, and we will see if he can make these Bills "his team".

 

 

It's all in his hands.....

 

 

 

Bell is improving greatly game by game....IMO we may just need a RT and continue to groom the others.

[buffaloaggie]

It's the beard that does it.

He looks too much like Zach Galifianakis with the beard

[TDO'Kearney]

It's the beard that does it.

Because he kinda reminds me of Zack Galifianakis.

 

He looks too much like Zach Galifianakis with the beard

Beat me to it.

[PromoTheRobot]

Seriously...You just don't get it...I really don't give a rats a** what the point is...You can't compare Fitz to Kelly or Manning...It makes you look like you don't understand the intangibles that separate the good from the elite...Granted every elite QB had bad Games...Of coarse they did...But they also have intangibles that CLEARLY separate them from the pack...And since when did anyone around here care what Jerry Sullivan wrote?...

 

And I missed NOTHING the past 40 years of Buffalo Bills Football...You know what we called the people who were backing Reich over Kelly? Idiots...The exact same thing I'm going to say about anyone comparing Fitz to Kelly, Manning, or any other lock 1st Ballot Hall Of Fame QB...

 

I really have nothing against Fitz...But no question I don't believe he's good enough to be the long term future of this Franchise at QB...ESPECIALLY if they get a chance to take an elite Prospect like Luck at #1 Overall...Now if for some reason the Bills don't get the chance to take Luck or Mallet I'm fine with Fitz in the meantime...But I'm not going to swept away by him either...He's not an elite NFL QB...And he probably never will be...

Intangibles are just that...something you can't quantify. Therefore its something you can attribute arbitrarily. You can say QB X has "it" and QB Y doesn't and it's just an opinion. I think Fitz has some measure of "it." Others would disagree.

 

PTR

[Alphadawg7]

Still not buying this one. I saw him make many throws to win games last year when we had a defense and TO.

 

This year he made enough throws to win the Ravens game. Not his fault Nelson fumbled. Made enough to win the Cheifs game. Not his fault the kicker missed a very makable FG. He made enough passes to get us to OT against Bears if our kicker hadn't missed a PAT.

 

QB can't win it on his own. Fitz is playing very well and is getting better.

 

It's way too early to close the book on Fitz and label him as the guy who can't win the big one.

 

I did see Jim Kelly blow some late by throwing picks etc to lose close games. I've also seen Brett Favre do it.

 

Jerking QBs out of the starting lineup and not letting them learn is what we've been doing for the last 5 years. Where has it gotten us?

 

Huh? What games are you watching? Getting better? Did you just decide to make that up to make a point or something, because he clearly hasnt gotten "better" since the Balt game. Newsflash, here are his stats since the Balt game:

 

67-123, 54% comp, 668 yds, 3 TD's, 3 INT's for a QB rating of 68.07

 

How can anyone say he is "getting better"? Since when is a 1:1 TD:INT ratio, comp 54% of his passes, and a 68 QB rating considered playing very well? He has clearly gotten worse. He also has 5 INT's over his last 4 games and about a dozen would be INT's that defenders dropped over the same span.

 

Its funny how Bills fans want to cling on to that ONE Balt game for dear life as if its the norm. People were going nuts over his "stats" after Balt game because on paper they looked so much better then how he played in the NE, Jets, and Jac game. In all 3 games, he got a late TD at the end of the 4th when the game is mostly out of reach and the D's were playing "bend but dont break" defense. During the rest of each of those games he was largely ineffecitive with the exception of the first half against Jax.

 

You also talk about how he made enough throws to win Balt game and KC game yet completely disregard the throws that led us to a loss. Like the 2 INT's that gave Balt the lead for good. After commanding the first half and taking us to halftime with a lead, he comes out with 2 awful INTs to give Balt the lead for good. Which is also why his stats were so high, because we had to play catchup the rest of the game.

 

In KC, he was completley ineffective almost the whole game, including just 50 yards passing at half time. He should have had a pick 6 on the very first play of the game. In 5 full quarters of play, he still only had 223 yards passing. He had just ONE good drive all game, and that was the late TD to tie the game. As bad as he was prior to that drive, he was even worse after completing just 33% of his passes on the 4 drives that could have won us the game with one INT (inlcuding missing a wide open Spiller by a mile for the win before Lindell missed the FG).

 

Chi he also had 2 more costly INT's, including a terrible one on the final drive to try and win us the game.

 

Is all the blame on him? NO, of course not, its never on just one player. But to say he is getting better and making enough throws to win games is crazy. He makes enough throws to keep us in games, but enough mistakes that makes them hard to win when we should win.

 

Even if you add in the Balt game, his stats over his last 4 games are not very impressive:

 

96-166, 57% comp, 1050 yards, 7 TD's, 5 INT's with a 78.14 QB rating.

 

Yes, he plays with heart and I love that, and Yes this offense is much better with him then it was with Trent...but just because he is better then Trent ever was does not mean this guy should be our full time starter for the future. I like the guy, but as our eventual backup.

Edited November 17, 2010 by Alphadawg7

[Chandemonium]

Huh? What games are you watching? Getting better? Did you just decide to make that up to make a point or something, because he clearly hasnt gotten "better" since the Balt game. Newsflash, here are his stats since the Balt game:

 

67-123, 54% comp, 668 yds, 3 TD's, 3 INT's for a QB rating of 68.07

 

How can anyone say he is "getting better"? Since when is a 1:1 TD:INT ratio, comp 54% of his passes, and a 68 QB rating considered playing very well? He has clearly gotten worse. He also has 5 INT's over his last 4 games and about a dozen would be INT's that defenders dropped over the same span.

 

Its funny how Bills fans want to cling on to that ONE Balt game for dear life as if its the norm. People were going nuts over his "stats" after Balt game because on paper they looked so much better then how he played in the NE, Jets, and Jac game. In all 3 games, he got a late TD at the end of the 4th when the game is mostly out of reach and the D's were playing "bend but dont break" defense. During the rest of each of those games he was largely ineffecitive with the exception of the first half against Jax.

 

You also talk about how he made enough throws to win Balt game and KC game yet completely disregard the throws that led us to a loss. Like the 2 INT's that gave Balt the lead for good. After commanding the first half and taking us to halftime with a lead, he comes out with 2 awful INTs to give Balt the lead for good. Which is also why his stats were so high, because we had to play catchup the rest of the game.

 

In KC, he was completley ineffective almost the whole game, including just 50 yards passing at half time. He should have had a pick 6 on the very first play of the game. In 5 full quarters of play, he still only had 223 yards passing. He had just ONE good drive all game, and that was the late TD to tie the game. As bad as he was prior to that drive, he was even worse after completing just 33% of his passes on the 4 drives that could have won us the game with one INT (inlcuding missing a wide open Spiller by a mile for the win before Lindell missed the FG).

 

Chi he also had 2 more costly INT's, including a terrible one on the final drive to try and win us the game.

 

Is all the blame on him? NO, of course not, its never on just one player. But to say he is getting better and making enough throws to win games is crazy. He makes enough throws to keep us in games, but enough mistakes that makes them hard to win when we should win.

 

Even if you add in the Balt game, his stats over his last 4 games are not very impressive:

 

96-166, 57% comp, 1050 yards, 7 TD's, 5 INT's with a 78.14 QB rating.

 

Yes, he plays with heart and I love that, and Yes this offense is much better with him then it was with Trent...but just because he is better then Trent ever was does not mean this guy should be our full time starter for the future. I like the guy, but as our eventual backup.

I must not have watched the same Baltimore game as you did. It was Shawn Nelson's fumble that gave Baltimore the lead for good, not Fitz's picks.

[Wayne Cubed]

YES YOU DO!

 

What's even more frustrating than folks in this argument saying we need a quarterback of this caliber (citing the league's top quarterbacks for what Fitz isnt't) is this wildly fantastical presumption that the elite quarterbacks never make the same kind of inaccurate passes Fitz does! You're straight up WRONG to say that even these players "never miss open receivers" WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!

 

I think you are right to say even elite qb's miss wide open receivers. But where the differences lie between fitz and elite qb's is how often fitz misses wide open recievers. Like the passage of time, its almost guarunteed fitz will throw 4-5 god awful passes and miss wide open guys in ONE GAME. For an elite qb he might miss that same amount over the course of 2 or 3 games.

[The Big Cat]

I think you are right to say even elite qb's miss wide open receivers. But where the differences lie between fitz and elite qb's is how often fitz misses wide open recievers. Like the passage of time, its almost guarunteed fitz will throw 4-5 god awful passes and miss wide open guys in ONE GAME. For an elite qb he might miss that same amount over the course of 2 or 3 games.

 

I'm sorry, but I find the numbers used to make your claim arbitrary, at best.

[Adam]

This is much like the "Aaron Schobel is the best on the team, so he is the best in the league" argument. Fitz was an upgrade over Edwards and he is a great backup QB. If you accept him as your franchise guy, you accept mediocrity.

[bluenews]

He needs to shave his face!!

 

Can't throw crucial fourth quarter interceptions!!

 

I want Cam Newton, the next Mike Vick!!

[Alphadawg7]

I must not have watched the same Baltimore game as you did. It was Shawn Nelson's fumble that gave Baltimore the lead for good, not Fitz's picks.

 

Yes, you must not have watched the same game or have that classic TSW infliction called "selective memory" because we lost the lead for good in the 3rd quarter after Balt scored on both of Fitz's INT's. We later tied the game, but never led again. Balt never again trailed in that game after scoring on both INT's in the 3rd quarter.

[Wayne Cubed]

I'm sorry, but I find the numbers used to make your claim arbitrary, at best.

 

Well of course they are arbitrary, there is no stat for missed wide open receivers. The closest stat we have is comp %. Which for the past 4 games, the games when some fans fell in love with fitz, his completion percentsge was around 57%, as already stated in this thread. But you can sit there and say you havent noticed the missed receivers or errant throws.

[Chandemonium]

Yes, you must not have watched the same game or have that classic TSW infliction called "selective memory" because we lost the lead for good in the 3rd quarter after Balt scored on both of Fitz's INT's. We later tied the game, but never led again. Balt never again trailed in that game after scoring on both INT's in the 3rd quarter.

I remember the game just fine. As you just said yourself, we later tied the game. If the game is tied no one has the lead. Therefore, the picks did not give Baltimore the lead for good.

[JESSEFEFFER]

Seriously...You just don't get it...I really don't give a rats a** what the point is...You can't compare Fitz to Kelly or Manning...It makes you look like you don't understand the intangibles that separate the good from the elite...Granted every elite QB had bad Games...Of coarse they did...But they also have intangibles that CLEARLY separate them from the pack...And since when did anyone around here care what Jerry Sullivan wrote?...

 

And I missed NOTHING the past 40 years of Buffalo Bills Football...You know what we called the people who were backing Reich over Kelly? Idiots...The exact same thing I'm going to say about anyone comparing Fitz to Kelly, Manning, or any other lock 1st Ballot Hall Of Fame QB...

 

I really have nothing against Fitz...But no question I don't believe he's good enough to be the long term future of this Franchise at QB...ESPECIALLY if they get a chance to take an elite Prospect like Luck at #1 Overall...Now if for some reason the Bills don't get the chance to take Luck or Mallet I'm fine with Fitz in the meantime...But I'm not going to swept away by him either...He's not an elite NFL QB...And he probably never will be...

 

This is getting interesting. Yes I can compare his play this year to Kelly's in 1986. Their losses are very similar. Just like I can compare their ages (soon to be 28 for Fitz while Kelly was comparably 14 1/2 months younger. I hold this as an example to refute those convinced the late game failures are evidence of what his future production is to be like. As far as the "immeasurables", he has some going on. I'll start with 99th percentile smart, gutsy, and having the support of the team (he even passed the T.O. test-not easy to do.) He also has no problem standing up and owning his mistakes. Something you'll recall Jim Kelly having a big problem with early in his career. Oops! I just contrasted Fitzpatrick to Kelly. Am I allowed to do that without having my football intelligence questioned?

[The Big Cat]

Well of course they are arbitrary, there is no stat for missed wide open receivers. The closest stat we have is comp %. Which for the past 4 games, the games when some fans fell in love with fitz, his completion percentsge was around 57%, as already stated in this thread. But you can sit there and say you havent noticed the missed receivers or errant throws.

 

You're right, through all of this I have maintained, forthright, that Fitz makes all the throws, is always on target, and never misses an opportunity to put the ball precisely where it needs to be.

 

That's been my argument from the get go.

 

[flopagamo]

Stevie Johnson should be the face of the franchise... Fitz should be the beard of the franchise.

 

Speaking of the face of the franchise... Have the Canucks taken Trent Edwards' banner down from the Rogers Centre yet? I was up in Toronto some months ago and it was still there. Caused me great pain while driving by it.

[Alphadawg7]

I remember the game just fine. As you just said yourself, we later tied the game. If the game is tied no one has the lead. Therefore, the picks did not give Baltimore the lead for good.

 

LMAO...Ok, how about this: Fitz's INT's gave away OUR lead for good...is that better?

Edited November 17, 2010 by Alphadawg7

[KOKBILLS]

This is getting interesting. Yes I can compare his play this year to Kelly's in 1986. Their losses are very similar. Just like I can compare their ages (soon to be 28 for Fitz while Kelly was comparably 14 1/2 months younger. I hold this as an example to refute those convinced the late game failures are evidence of what his future production is to be like. As far as the "immeasurables", he has some going on. I'll start with 99th percentile smart, gutsy, and having the support of the team (he even passed the T.O. test-not easy to do.) He also has no problem standing up and owning his mistakes. Something you'll recall Jim Kelly having a big problem with early in his career. Oops! I just contrasted Fitzpatrick to Kelly. Am I allowed to do that without having my football intelligence questioned?

 

Seriously...As long as you keep making comparisons between the two I personally will always question your Football intelligence...But maybe that's just me...

 

I'm starting to think you're never going to get this...Once Fitz has led some Team to a Super Bowl or two we can open up this conversation again if you like...I get the whole everybody has got to start somewhere argument...But guys like Kelly and Manning did it in High school, College, in Jimbo's case the USFL where he set Passing records, and of coarse in terms of Wins and SB appearances in the NFL...They are VERY special talents that don't come along often, and to me at least, it's insulting them to be compared to Fitz in any way, shape, or form...I completely realize that some may not agree with me on this, and I also realize that Fitz is young enough to still have the chance to prove me wrong...I'm just saying I don't think it's gonna happen, and in a couple years it MAY be debatable who was a better Bills QB, Fitz or Reich...But NEVER Fitz or Kelly...Ever...

[Another Point of View]

He needs to be better looking then me!

[KOKBILLS]

Huh? What games are you watching? Getting better? Did you just decide to make that up to make a point or something, because he clearly hasnt gotten "better" since the Balt game. Newsflash, here are his stats since the Balt game:

 

67-123, 54% comp, 668 yds, 3 TD's, 3 INT's for a QB rating of 68.07

 

How can anyone say he is "getting better"? Since when is a 1:1 TD:INT ratio, comp 54% of his passes, and a 68 QB rating considered playing very well? He has clearly gotten worse. He also has 5 INT's over his last 4 games and about a dozen would be INT's that defenders dropped over the same span.

 

Its funny how Bills fans want to cling on to that ONE Balt game for dear life as if its the norm. People were going nuts over his "stats" after Balt game because on paper they looked so much better then how he played in the NE, Jets, and Jac game. In all 3 games, he got a late TD at the end of the 4th when the game is mostly out of reach and the D's were playing "bend but dont break" defense. During the rest of each of those games he was largely ineffecitive with the exception of the first half against Jax.

 

You also talk about how he made enough throws to win Balt game and KC game yet completely disregard the throws that led us to a loss. Like the 2 INT's that gave Balt the lead for good. After commanding the first half and taking us to halftime with a lead, he comes out with 2 awful INTs to give Balt the lead for good. Which is also why his stats were so high, because we had to play catchup the rest of the game.

 

In KC, he was completley ineffective almost the whole game, including just 50 yards passing at half time. He should have had a pick 6 on the very first play of the game. In 5 full quarters of play, he still only had 223 yards passing. He had just ONE good drive all game, and that was the late TD to tie the game. As bad as he was prior to that drive, he was even worse after completing just 33% of his passes on the 4 drives that could have won us the game with one INT (inlcuding missing a wide open Spiller by a mile for the win before Lindell missed the FG).

 

Chi he also had 2 more costly INT's, including a terrible one on the final drive to try and win us the game.

 

Is all the blame on him? NO, of course not, its never on just one player. But to say he is getting better and making enough throws to win games is crazy. He makes enough throws to keep us in games, but enough mistakes that makes them hard to win when we should win.

 

Even if you add in the Balt game, his stats over his last 4 games are not very impressive:

 

96-166, 57% comp, 1050 yards, 7 TD's, 5 INT's with a 78.14 QB rating.

 

Yes, he plays with heart and I love that, and Yes this offense is much better with him then it was with Trent...but just because he is better then Trent ever was does not mean this guy should be our full time starter for the future. I like the guy, but as our eventual backup.

 

Thank You...That's all I can say...Thank You for adding sanity to this conversation...

[PromoTheRobot]

Well whatever you feel about Fitz you better get used to the beard because he will be the Bills QB the rest of this season and likely the season after, whether we draft the next great hype or not.

 

PTR

[Texas Bill]

Seriously? Are you trying to compare Fitz to Peyton Manning?

 

 

 

I know the overall Football intelligence on this Board has hit an all time low when I see, in the same thread mind you, Fitz favorably compared to Peyton Manning and Jim Kelly...

 

Come on folks...Let's get real...Fitz is playing well...OK...But really?

It wasn't a favorable comparison - Manning went 3-13 his first year in Indy. No one thinks Fitz is a franchise QB, just sayin it's too early to tell. And Andrew Luck could be the next Ryan Leaf.

[Chandemonium]

LMAO...Ok, how about this: Fitz's INT's gave away OUR lead for good...is that better?

Yes, that is much better. It may seem like a small difference, but it's the difference between a factually correct statement and a blatant lie.

[Dr. Fong]

Fitz with a better team around him would definitely be a QB that I could see leading a team to the playoffs. Beyond that I don't know.