I am going to say it....Bills don't need a QB

[Chandemonium]

Yes: correct.

 

You know why the defense is crap? Because the Bills can't draft, and pass on good D players and manage to find the busts

every year.

 

A franchise QB can keep you in many games, and even win you some. The Bills can go back to drafting crap players after

the 2011 first round.

1) If the Bills can't draft and pass on good players to find busts every year, how would picking a Quarterback instead of a defensive player change this?

 

2) Fitz has been keeping us in many games, and has won us 1. We would have won a few more that he kept us in if the defense could make a stop when they needed to.

[San-O]

1) If the Bills can't draft and pass on good players to find busts every year, how would picking a Quarterback instead of a defensive player change this?

 

2) Fitz has been keeping us in many games, and has won us 1. We would have won a few more that he kept us in if the defense could make a stop when they needed to.

 

 

My opinion is:

 

1. The Bills aren't 1 or 2 players away, they just aren't. They can always take a flyer on a McCargo or a Maybin, however

give your team a chance and draft a real QB.

 

2. Fitz had success against 2 very bad teams, and has thrown the Bills out of winning games also. He's a backup.

[Dan]

They Beat Detroit and Cincinnati. That is all. When they beat a Playoff contending team wake me up. Let me know how much faith you have in Fitz after Pittsburgh. This one's gonna be ugly...

 

Exactly. If they win out or win against Playoff contending teams the remainder of this year, then we may have something. Our team is piss poor. Make no bones about it. They need alot of churn in the offseason and bring in some bigtime playmakers via draft and Free Agency. Buddy will draft the best available player on the board and get us some good talent.

Isn't that exactly what was said just prior to the Ravens game?

 

I seem to recall him having a pretty decent game against one of the premier defenses in the league that day. I guess we forget all about that now? So, what will be the excuse if Fitz plays another solid game against the Steelers, but we lose because the defense lets them score 30+ points?

 

You're pinning your assessment of Fitz on 1 game; however, most others advocating for Fitz are looking at the sum of all his games this season. Every QB and team has bad games. One bad game does not make the season. So, regardless of how Fitz looks against the Steelers, how can you so easily discount his performance against the Ravens? The reality is... Fitz is putting together one of the best seasons we've seen from a QB in the last decade. That's hard to dismiss.

[Bill from NYC]

The Bills can throw away 1st round picks on Whitner, McCargo, Maybin, Erik Flowers, Mike Williams, Lynch and McLuvin,

and NOT on a possible franchise QB? That may be one the worst excuses I have heard, given Buffalo's lack of a competent

QB for the last 15 years or so. How many times are you going to be drafting this high and have a Luck possibly available?

 

If the Buffalo Front Office screws this up, as they seem to always do, and wastes another 1st round pick on a bust, or someone who doesn't play, expect many more years of losing footbal, at least while the teamis still in B-lo.

 

Draft LUCK, and give away the store, the farm, whatever you have to get him. IMHO.

 

I understand the premise of your post very well. My question is, what should they do if they think Mallett is better than Luck?

 

The overall mindset here that Luck is absolutely guaranteed to be a smashing success is disturbing. Mallett, based on his almost unseen skill set, has a bigger upside than Luck imo. And, Gailey would seem to be a man who could "coach him up" for various reasons, to include past experience with QBs, and even cultural similarities.

 

Please keep in mind that I really do see your point. Selections such as Whitner, Lynch, McKelvin, Maybin and Spiller have caused us to lose football games. I, like yourself, am about a quarterback because unlike the players I mentioned, they are not a dime a dozen. My point is that it doesn't necessarily have to be Luck.

[San-O]

I guess I'm just going with the crowd and the experts/mock draft bandwagon here.

 

If they think Mallett is better, then get him. Luck seems to have the physical tools and head for the game. I want a smart

QB back there. His accuracy also intrigues me.

Edited November 23, 2010 by SoCal-Surf

[Chandemonium]

My opinion is:

 

1. The Bills aren't 1 or 2 players away, they just aren't. They can always take a flyer on a McCargo or a Maybin, however

give your team a chance and draft a real QB.

 

2. Fitz had success against 2 very bad teams, and has thrown the Bills out of winning games also. He's a backup.

1. you didn't answer my question. If the Bills can't draft as you say, what about the quarterback position decreases their chances of busting? Furthermore, if they aren't one or two players away, how does one person playing one position (quarterback) change this?

 

2. I disagree. If winning is your only metric of success, then yes Fitzpatrick had success against 2 bad teams. However, I did not think he played as well against Detroit as he has in several of our losses. You say that he threw us out of wins in some of these games. While his mistakes did contribute to the losses and can't be ignored, I am of the opinion that we were in these games to begin with primarily because of Fitzpatrick, and that with better play from the defense we would have won. Every QB throws picks. Fitz's happen to be especially backbreaking because the D can't make a stop after a turnover, or even throughout most of the game in many cases this year. If we had a D that came out after a turnover and got one of their own or forced a three and out, the impact of interceptions would be minimal.

[JohnC]

You might as well just say all of those guys are different because their names are not Andrew Luck and they went to teams other than Buffalo, which is true but those are not good reasons to pass on this guy if we have the chance.

 

An example of your point on how a highly rank qb prospect can change the dynamic of a team is Bradford with the Rams. I'm confident that this now very energized franchise is glad it took him.

[ajzepp]

Well, I sure hope that whatever wunderkind you guys think we need to draft can put up numbers as good or better than what Fitzy is putting up. As others have pointed out, there's little to no chance that we're going to be able to draft Luck. I still feel that unless Fitzy has a major meltdown, Chan is going to advocate for him remaining his guy for the forseeable future. I guess we'll see what they do next April!

[Hplarrm]

Amazing how some ugly wins against two bad football teams will change peoples opinions.

 

I know my opinion remains the same despite the two "ugly" wins (quite frankly no win is ugly IMHO.

 

Drafting a rookie (even if he is as good as Peyton Manning was) is probably one of the worst things the Bills could do if the goal is to build a winning team. I thought this was true two games ago because:

 

1. The Bills as a team are simply not good enough as Pitts was when the rookie RoboQB led them to an SB that not only would drafting a one day stud QB make little difference in Bills productivity but in fact as even in the Manning case, this rookie who has become one of the best ever not only made no immediate productivity difference but due to a combination of previous OL investments Indy did prior to Manning but the Bills have not done Luck or any stud QB quite likely gets killed his first year.

 

2. The Buffalo media led by WGR and Sully fanning the flames of a small but vocal minority of fans are simply not mature enough to allow a rookie QB the time and mistakes to become a vet. Basically any QB we pick is like Manning going to hit some rocks his first year and it is quite doubtful IMHO that a rookie QB would end up being declared a bust and run out of town like Young or Favre on their way to likely HOF careers.

 

3. A great performing QB can in fact lead a team (even the D and ST) to higher levels of play with a refuse to lose performance and ethic. However, a rookie QB will like it or not still be a rookie QB (even if he is the next Peyton Manning) and he almost certainly is not going to help Bills production immediately and we all will die.

 

4. By spending the first on a QB by definition we pass on adding to the OLB slot, the OL, and the DL which will be a death blow to the 2011 Bills even with this stud QB.

 

5. Chan Gailey has excelled in the past in building an O around a smart vet like Fitzy, Bulger or even with playoff qualifying run with folks like Fiedler or Kordell at QB. I do not know of any evidence where Gailey has proven to be a breeder of stud rookie QBs.

 

6. The repetitive last 10 years of Bills play has seen us overreach again and again and rush inappropriately players from TC to RJ, to Hobert, to JP, and others into a fruitless search for a savior at QB.

 

Drafting Luck or any any other first round QB was a bad idea two games ago and it is a bad idea now.

[ajzepp]

My question is, what should they do if they think Mallett is better than Luck?

 

 

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

aHEM, uh....err....I mean, uh, interesting point, my friend.

 

( )

[San-O]

1. you didn't answer my question. If the Bills can't draft as you say, what about the quarterback position decreases their chances of busting? Furthermore, if they aren't one or two players away, how does one person playing one position (quarterback) change this?

 

2. I disagree. If winning is your only metric of success, then yes Fitzpatrick had success against 2 bad teams. However, I did not think he played as well against Detroit as he has in several of our losses. You say that he threw us out of wins in some of these games. While his mistakes did contribute to the losses and can't be ignored, I am of the opinion that we were in these games to begin with primarily because of Fitzpatrick, and that with better play from the defense we would have won. Every QB throws picks. Fitz's happen to be especially backbreaking because the D can't make a stop after a turnover, or even throughout most of the game in many cases this year. If we had a D that came out after a turnover and got one of their own or forced a three and out, the impact of interceptions would be minimal.

 

 

1. They can't draft, it's not even an opinion. Take a look at this roster on D. Having a chance to get a franchise Qb doesn't come around every day. Taking a chance on a QB could make a real difference: QBs are hard to come by, and this is a QB/throwing league. You can't throw away draft picks every year on D-linemen or DBs when a potential franchise QB is there is all I'm saying.

 

P.S. I do love me some GOOD D-linemen though. Bills just can't find them.

[BuffOrange]

Yes, I erred big time on Rodgers, but as my prior post confessing so indicates, his inclusion in this discussion is more so moot than Flacco's.

 

Also, I don't take any draftnick's word as bible. I was a big Goeslin fan (sic), but he had Maybin rated even higher than we took him. So who's to say ANY of these guys have the answer?

 

But your last comment is what makes this discussion most infuriating: how incredibly hypothetical it is. There is a chance, after the next two weeks, (albeit an outside one) that we COULD be looking at the 9th or 10th pick. There's even MORE of a chance that Luck won't even declare. By these two factors combined, i think it's highly HIGHLY unlikely he'll be available for us to pick, unless he plummets (for good reason) like Quinn, Tebow, and Leinart before him.

 

in which case, watch us pass on him, watch the board explode, then wait two years for the "i was wrong about luck" posts that will never come.

 

I agree the 1st pick looks unlikely at this point, so maybe it is all hypothetical and pointless. But infuriating? Why say stuff like "he wouldn't be good here" and "he's no Ryan" then? Which point are arguing - that he won't be here or that he won't be good?

 

BTW, I've seen as many "I was wrong about defending the McGahee/Whitner/Maybin" posts as you have seen "I was wrong about Leinart" posts.

Edited November 23, 2010 by BuffOrange

[No Cease Fires]

The Fitz question won't be answered until the end of the season (if then). I'm willing to wait six more games to see where Fitz ends up before deciding if he is the Future.

 

However, I will say this:

 

The only people who seem dead-set against Fitz being the guy are Bills fans. I talk to fans of other teams and they seem to think that we have our guy.

 

I'd be shocked if Buddy didn't try to draft one in the early rounds, though.

[The Big Cat]

He's a 58 % QB career. He is inaccurate.

 

 

http://www.nfl.com/players/ryanfitzpatrick/profile?id=FIT792915

 

P. Manning's % after his first 37 games: 59%

 

16 fewer incompletions over 1,140 attempts to get to Fitzmagic's over the same period.

 

There's no hope for Ryan.

[ajzepp]

The Fitz question won't be answered until the end of the season (if then). I'm willing to wait six more games to see where Fitz ends up before deciding if he is the Future.

 

However, I will say this:

 

The only people who seem dead-set against Fitz being the guy are Bills fans. I talk to fans of other teams and they seem to think that we have our guy.

 

I'd be shocked if Buddy didn't try to draft one in the early rounds, though.

 

I agree...you should ALWAYS be looking for young QBs in the mid to late rounds of the draft, IMO.

[The Big Cat]

I agree the 1st pick looks unlikely at this point, so maybe it is all hypothetical and pointless. But infuriating? Why say stuff like "he wouldn't be good here" and "he's no Ryan" then? Which point are arguing - that he won't be here or that he won't be good?

 

BTW, I've seen as many "I was wrong about defending the McGahee/Whitner/Maybin" posts as you have seen "I was wrong about Leinart" posts.

 

I'm saying I'd rather a player who can make an impact next year. Perhaps a new quarterback could, but we already have on making an impact, so I'd rather our resources be used in different areas.

 

It's not like all college quarterbacks fall off the face of the earth after Luck goes through the draft. They come around EVERY year. There's a chance EVERY year to get your franchise guy and build around him.

 

I want a player we need and can use next year (OT or pass rusher).

[Mr. WEO]

 

 

 

you must not have followed the many many times that i've insisted that the term "franchise qb" means nothing, so of course i'm in no rush to define it for you. i've derided the term's use for weeks now.

 

also, matt ryan had better numbers than luck coming out of college. you can tell me all day that stats don't tell the story, and on a game-game basis i agree. career stats, though, that's saying something. he had the eagles overing around #1/2 his senior year. his college career was more impressive than any quarterback declaring this year, imo.

 

sanchez i still think was a gamble, but years of drafting to the trenches put a solid team around him. the jets were fortunate to have one bad year among several decent years, and he came in to a much more stable situation than any bill qb would in 2011. You think our d will get that tough overnight? no, the jets spent years drafting on d and on the oline so sanchez could be effective.

 

aaron rodgers was a first overall pick, we don't/won't have that.

 

flacco was taken 18th overall in 2008 to a team that finished 13-3 in 2006. he and the ravens have no business in this discussion.

 

Actually, you said this: "we need a franchise qb, yeah no kidding. presuming there's a clear-cut choice to fill that roll completely ignores draft history."

 

To fill "that roll" that "means nothing"?

 

Anyway, disregarding your confusion re: Aaron Rogers, your take on the Jets is interesting. They had lost 4 of their last 5 games, had lost a veteran QB who would take his next team to the NFCC game...AND they had just fired their HC. Yes, this is "a much more stable situation" that Sanchez walked into. Oh, and the Jets starting roster is loaded with guys they never drafted (Richardson, Woody, Tomlinson, Holmes, Edwards, Pace Scott, Cromartie, Poole, and Leonard).

 

As for Flacco, I don't know what your point is--2 years before he arrived they were 13-3? Hmmm....OK. You left out the part where they were 6-10 before that and were 5-11 the year before they drafted him. AND they drafted him because.......they needed a "franchise QB"---that's why he belongs in a discussion about franchise QBs.

Edited November 23, 2010 by Mr. WEO

[San-O]

P. Manning's % after his first 37 games: 59%

 

16 fewer incompletions over 1,140 attempts to get to Fitzmagic's over the same period.

 

There's no hope for Ryan.

 

 

You know why he's only played 37 games in 6 years?

 

Also, I can't believe you're comparing Fitz to Manning.

[zer0vette]

An example of your point on how a highly rank qb prospect can change the dynamic of a team is Bradford with the Rams. I'm confident that this now very energized franchise is glad it took him.

 

You do know that the rams lost to arizona, oakland, detroit, and san fran.. and they are 4-6 in the nfc west, and.. the bills could have easily been 4-6 or better in the AFC east, with a better D. Just saying....

 

We need a D first and an o-line in a veryyyy close second.

Edited November 23, 2010 by zer0vette

[K Gun Special]

I know my opinion remains the same despite the two "ugly" wins (quite frankly no win is ugly IMHO.

 

Drafting a rookie (even if he is as good as Peyton Manning was) is probably one of the worst things the Bills could do if the goal is to build a winning team. I thought this was true two games ago because:

 

1. The Bills as a team are simply not good enough as Pitts was when the rookie RoboQB led them to an SB that not only would drafting a one day stud QB make little difference in Bills productivity but in fact as even in the Manning case, this rookie who has become one of the best ever not only made no immediate productivity difference but due to a combination of previous OL investments Indy did prior to Manning but the Bills have not done Luck or any stud QB quite likely gets killed his first year.

 

2. The Buffalo media led by WGR and Sully fanning the flames of a small but vocal minority of fans are simply not mature enough to allow a rookie QB the time and mistakes to become a vet. Basically any QB we pick is like Manning going to hit some rocks his first year and it is quite doubtful IMHO that a rookie QB would end up being declared a bust and run out of town like Young or Favre on their way to likely HOF careers.

 

3. A great performing QB can in fact lead a team (even the D and ST) to higher levels of play with a refuse to lose performance and ethic. However, a rookie QB will like it or not still be a rookie QB (even if he is the next Peyton Manning) and he almost certainly is not going to help Bills production immediately and we all will die.

 

4. By spending the first on a QB by definition we pass on adding to the OLB slot, the OL, and the DL which will be a death blow to the 2011 Bills even with this stud QB.

 

5. Chan Gailey has excelled in the past in building an O around a smart vet like Fitzy, Bulger or even with playoff qualifying run with folks like Fiedler or Kordell at QB. I do not know of any evidence where Gailey has proven to be a breeder of stud rookie QBs.

 

6. The repetitive last 10 years of Bills play has seen us overreach again and again and rush inappropriately players from TC to RJ, to Hobert, to JP, and others into a fruitless search for a savior at QB.

 

Drafting Luck or any any other first round QB was a bad idea two games ago and it is a bad idea now.

 

 

Im at a loss for words.

 

Taking a player, assuming he's as good as Manning, is the worst thing a franchise can do to build a winning team????

 

The bills have tried to solidify their lines like Indy did, see Wood, levitre, wang, hangartner.

 

If a Manning type player is there you take him, its silly to argue otherwise. i mean cmon mannnnn

[BuffOrange]

You do know that the rams lost to arizona, oakland, detroit, and san fran.. and they are 4-6 in the nfc west, and.. the bills could have easily been 4-6 or better in the AFC east, with a better D. Just saying....

 

We need a D and an o-line.

 

The Rams personnel is dreadful. Worse than ours. Probably worse than Carolina's. 4 wins with a last second loss @Tampa is quite an accomplishment for them and their rookie QB; and I admit I didn't think highly of Bradford.

[San-O]

Im at a loss for words.

 

Taking a player, assuming he's as good as Manning, is the worst thing a franchise can do to build a winning team????

 

The bills have tried to solidify their lines like Indy did, see Wood, levitre, wang, hangartner.

 

If a Manning type player is there you take him, its silly to argue otherwise. i mean cmon mannnnn

 

 

+ 1

 

I was SO dumbfounded when I read that, I started to reply, and then stopped.

[Van_phelaN1]

and I'm going to say it you dont know a damn thing about football.

 

who would you rather have fitz or,brady,either manning,brees,flacco,ryan,big ben,palmer,rivers,vick,mcnabb,rogers,bradford, get the point?

 

look i like fitz and he is the best we have by a mile however in the NFL like polian and brandt and all the GM's who know their sh-t all say the most important thing on a football team is QB then LT.

 

its not a coincidence that all the teams that have franchise QB's are in the playoffs every year. its because they have the ability to elevate every player on the offense and make them better.

 

that being said the object of this game is to always improve yourself so if we can draft a potential franchise QB any GM worth his salt will do it.

 

want a perfect example. look at what SD did they had brees yet they still went ahead and drafted rivers and instantly started him.want to know why it was because they knew he was a rare talent,or as Nix said a no brain er. its called common sense.

 

franchise QB's dont grow on trees and if you can get one you damn well better or your dead.

 

this draft has @ LEAST 3 OR 4 potential FRANCHAISE qb's with one all world sure fire star in Luck. if Nix does not take one of these guys this year he should be fired but mark my words he will.

 

unfortunately its our buffalo bad Luck that we will not have a shot @ Luck however there are @ least 3 other QB's who we will be able to get hopefully and there is no doubt in my mind Nix will take one.

 

do i want fitz cut no. what i want is for fitz to tutor our new QB and be our second string QB. if we dont get Luck or Mallett or Locker maybe fitz will have to be our starter one more year but then is back to the bench.

 

mark my words we will get our QB of the future in the first round this year or we will trade back into the first round if we are unable to land luck with our own first round pick.

 

fitz is a great competitor but he is not a QB that can win us a super bowl. he simply does not possess the physical tools namely arm strength and accuracy to be a franchise QB and anyone who does not understand that does not know football plain and simple.

 

so just stop with all this fitz is our guy for the future BS because as much as all you guys have a man crush on him he is what he is a great backup and will never be a franchise QB.

 

What is funny about this post is that you are the one who actually comes off looking like he knows nothing about football.

 

Bradford? Really? Yeah look at that amazing elite shuffle pass he made on Sunday. I am not saying Fitz is a franchise QB but I think people need to start admitting that he is better than they gave him credit for and he has more potential to improve even though everyone kept saying "no upside." People were wrong and now they want to start with this "oh but I love Fitz. I just don't think he is the guy, but i do like him and uh."

 

Keep back peddling guy.

 

Oh and if you want to talk about elevating the play of everyone on the field you only need to look back at how well Johnson and Parrish played with out previous QB.

 

I was down on Fitz and said all of this stuff from day one and how he was not the guy and was as good as he was going to get. Well guess what, I was WRONG. He might not be headed to the Hall of Fame but we were wrong when we assumed he was a career back up. At least I am man enough to admit it.

[BuffOrange]

What is funny about this post is that you are the one who actually comes off looking like he knows nothing about football.

 

Bradford? Really? Yeah look at that amazing elite shuffle pass he made on Sunday. I am not saying Fitz is a franchise QB but I think people need to start admitting that he is better than they gave him credit for and he has more potential to improve even though everyone kept saying "no upside." People were wrong and now they want to start with this "oh but I love Fitz. I just don't think he is the guy, but i do like him and uh."

 

Keep back peddling guy.

 

Oh and if you want to talk about elevating the play of everyone on the field you only need to look back at how well Johnson and Parrish played with out previous QB.

 

I was down on Fitz and said all of this stuff from day one and how he was not the guy and was as good as he was going to get. Well guess what, I was WRONG. He might not be headed to the Hall of Fame but we were wrong when we assumed he was a career back up. At least I am man enough to admit it.

 

Fine line between being a man and gross overreaction to a couple good games, which as you'll recall Lossman had in 2006. I too am man enough to admit I previously thought he was not one of the best 32 QB's in football and now I believe he is. So by that definition he's not a career backup. Personally that's not really what I'm shooting for in my QB though.

[JohnC]

You do know that the rams lost to arizona, oakland, detroit, and san fran.. and they are 4-6 in the nfc west, and.. the bills could have easily been 4-6 or better in the AFC east, with a better D. Just saying....

 

We need a D first and an o-line in a veryyyy close second.

 

How many games did the Rams win the previous year? Who do you think is odds on going to be the rookie of the year this year? Being a franchise qb doesn't mean that you are going to be a miracle man. The Rams now have the most important position on the team addressed for a decade or more (assuming health). Now they can address their other needs.

 

Drafting a qb with a high draft pick doesn't mean that you can't address some other critical defensive needs with your other picks and some free agent pickups.

[Bill from NYC]

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

aHEM, uh....err....I mean, uh, interesting point, my friend.

 

( )

 

LOL!

 

I must admit that you surprise me. You seem to think that it is just impossible for Mallett to be a top qb in this league. You know, you and the pundits could be wrong. It isn't impossible.

 

Take it from me......I thought RJ would be a star, and that Pat Williams was washed up when we cut him.

[Kelly the Dog]

Completion percentage is very often an entirely inaccurate look into a quarterback's accuracy. With the types of passes Fitzpatrick throws, with this line, with this defense not giving him good field position and often playing behind, 60% is not only good, it's excellent. He doesn't dump the ball off to backs all that often. He rarely is asked to throw safe passes to TEs. He doesn't throw a lot of WR screens and swing passes that are essentially running plays but bump up your completion percentage and -- perhaps most importantly -- he doesn't throw 4-5 yard passes on 3rd and 8-15 like a lot of QBs do, he almost always tries for the first down or the tough pass. 59-60% is great for the kinds of balls he throws and chooses to throw. 59-60% would be lousy for a safe QB, or one who played in an offense with a lot of dump offs and screens.

 

He's also often extremely accurate on tough passes, fit into tight windows. He is inaccurate too much on throws he should make, which is why he has the bad rap for inaccuracy. But if he completed two more of those per game, and yet didn't complete two of the really hard ones he often does hit, people wouldn't say he was inaccurate.

 

To be candid, I thought he was too inaccurate as well, and said it all the time. There used to be too many passes he needs to hit with guys open. But those are becoming less and less. And he seems to have gotten over that hump with experience, and with the confidence Gailey has given him. It remains to be seen if he can keep this up. But I am not, for the first time, betting against it. This week against the Steelers, at home, could go a long way answering some questions. The last six weeks should tell us a lot. I don't think right now we know if he is our guy or not, but for the first time, he very well could be.

[JohnC]

LOL!

 

Take it from me......I thought RJ would be a star, and that Pat Williams was washed up when we cut him.

 

Pat Williams was cut because Donahoe gave him a take it or leave it contract offer. He left it. At the time of his release he was playing at a very high level. That was a long term damaging decision for our defense. Typical Donahoe decision-making process. It revolves around his ego and his dictatorial tendencies.

 

There was a lot of people, including me, who thought RJ was going to be an impact player. He was the type of player whose sterling parts didn't equal the end product. At the qb position exceptional physical talents get neutralized with inadequate mental talents. RJ and JP were similar type players. All bodies and no brains. Instinct for the game is not easily measured but it very evident when watching the games. Neither had it.

Edited November 23, 2010 by JohnC

[No Cease Fires]

Fine line between being a man and gross overreaction to a couple good games, which as you'll recall Lossman had in 2006. I too am man enough to admit I previously thought he was not one of the best 32 QB's in football and now I believe he is. So by that definition he's not a career backup. Personally that's not really what I'm shooting for in my QB though.

 

Fitzpatrick has already exceeded Losman's 2006 TD total with six games to play.

 

I'm in no way advocating Fitz as the team's cure-all moving forward, but it's kind of funny the lengths some fans will go to to downplay what he's done for the team this season.

[zow2]

I'm tired of all the "franchise quarterback" talk. I really am. In the NFL there are some great QBs, some bad QBs and the rest are kind of bunched up. Fitz is in that bunched up category but he has climbed rapidly this year to near the top of that heap. There's no reason to believe that if he had a better team around him, that whe would not improve into a great QB. Somehow, people seem to think that Brady, Manning and Brees never have a bad game or throw a bad pass or two? Didn't Peyton just throw away a game last weekend at NE? Didn't Brady get completely punked and look awful at Cleveland a couple weeks ago (and a few other games)? Brees didn't look good at all early in the season. I mean, why do posters expect Fitz to be perfect on every throw every week? my gosh, it's ridiculous. I would like people to realize that Fitz is playing at a very high level on a very mediocre to below club. If i could trade Fitz for one of these guys today, I'd do it in a heartbeat. That's between 11-13 guys. That's it. This is who i'd rather have then Fitz and its a pretty short list. I think the team should still grab one of the Elite QB's on the draft to groom for the future, but i would not be at all upset if they went heavy on D and O-line.

 

Michael Vick

Philip Rivers

Ben Roethlisberger

Tom Brady

Aaron Rodgers

Peyton Manning

Drew Brees

Matt Ryan

Joe Flacco

Eli Manning

Tony Romo

Mark Sanchez (maybe)

Kyle Orton (maybe)

[The Big Cat]

I'm tired of all the "franchise quarterback" talk. I really am. In the NFL there are some great QBs, some bad QBs and the rest are kind of bunched up. Fitz is in that bunched up category but he has climbed rapidly this year to near the top of that heap. There's no reason to believe that if he had a better team around him, that whe would not improve into a great QB. Somehow, people seem to think that Brady, Manning and Brees never have a bad game or throw a bad pass or two? Didn't Peyton just throw away a game last weekend at NE? Didn't Brady get completely punked and look awful at Cleveland a couple weeks ago (and a few other games)? Brees didn't look good at all early in the season. I mean, why do posters expect Fitz to be perfect on every throw every week? my gosh, it's ridiculous. I would like people to realize that Fitz is playing at a very high level on a very mediocre to below club. If i could trade Fitz for one of these guys today, I'd do it in a heartbeat. That's between 11-13 guys. That's it. This is who i'd rather have then Fitz and its a pretty short list. I think the team should still grab one of the Elite QB's on the draft to groom for the future, but i would not be at all upset if they went heavy on D and O-line.

 

Michael Vick

Philip Rivers

Ben Roethlisberger

Tom Brady

Aaron Rodgers

Peyton Manning

Drew Brees

Matt Ryan

Joe Flacco

Eli Manning

Tony Romo

Mark Sanchez (maybe)

Kyle Orton (maybe)

 

Fixed, and a big ole +1

[zow2]

Fixed, and a big ole +1

 

You're the man. Kind of agree w/ your revisions...

[Alphadawg7]

Completion percentage is very often an entirely inaccurate look into a quarterback's accuracy. With the types of passes Fitzpatrick throws, with this line, with this defense not giving him good field position and often playing behind, 60% is not only good, it's excellent. He doesn't dump the ball off to backs all that often. He rarely is asked to throw safe passes to TEs. He doesn't throw a lot of WR screens and swing passes that are essentially running plays but bump up your completion percentage and -- perhaps most importantly -- he doesn't throw 4-5 yard passes on 3rd and 8-15 like a lot of QBs do, he almost always tries for the first down or the tough pass. 59-60% is great for the kinds of balls he throws and chooses to throw. 59-60% would be lousy for a safe QB, or one who played in an offense with a lot of dump offs and screens.

 

He's also often extremely accurate on tough passes, fit into tight windows. He is inaccurate too much on throws he should make, which is why he has the bad rap for inaccuracy. But if he completed two more of those per game, and yet didn't complete two of the really hard ones he often does hit, people wouldn't say he was inaccurate.

 

To be candid, I thought he was too inaccurate as well, and said it all the time. There used to be too many passes he needs to hit with guys open. But those are becoming less and less. And he seems to have gotten over that hump with experience, and with the confidence Gailey has given him. It remains to be seen if he can keep this up. But I am not, for the first time, betting against it. This week against the Steelers, at home, could go a long way answering some questions. The last six weeks should tell us a lot. I don't think right now we know if he is our guy or not, but for the first time, he very well could be.

 

Fitz may be the most inaccurate QB at throwing a screen I have ever seen. Several have been into the ground, even a couple that were backward and turned into live fumbles, along with a couple sailing into the sidelines. More importantly, not only does he throw way too many incompletes on screens, the completed ones are too frequently at the recievers ankles, behind him, above his head, etc, making it impossible for the player to make a move and advance the ball.

 

Someone needs to spend some serious time working on this with him, its about the easiest throw in football and he struggles to execute it consistently.

 

And, I am sorry, his accuracy is an issue and he is not extrememly accurate on tough passes as you say. Yes, he has made some tough passes, some great ones even, but he also has thrown a lot of bad INT's, had a dozen more dropped INT's that were just terrible throws, and most of them occured on timing routes which are tough passes and require the QB to make an accurate throw. Of course, he has also had some that were just so far from the WR they resmebled a wild pitch in baseball. More importantly, if you watch the games rather then check the stat page, you will see many of his completed passes were inaccurately thrown causing the WR to take a bad hit, catch it below his knees, go up and make a crazy tough catch, cause the reciever to break off his route or break momenutm, etc.

 

If someone wants to argue his guts, grit, heart, etc then fine, that makes sense, and he has all that. But to argue that this QB with a career 58% completion rate is accurate is a little silly.

[Alphadawg7]

I'm tired of all the "franchise quarterback" talk. I really am. In the NFL there are some great QBs, some bad QBs and the rest are kind of bunched up. Fitz is in that bunched up category but he has climbed rapidly this year to near the top of that heap. There's no reason to believe that if he had a better team around him, that whe would not improve into a great QB. Somehow, people seem to think that Brady, Manning and Brees never have a bad game or throw a bad pass or two? Didn't Peyton just throw away a game last weekend at NE? Didn't Brady get completely punked and look awful at Cleveland a couple weeks ago (and a few other games)? Brees didn't look good at all early in the season. I mean, why do posters expect Fitz to be perfect on every throw every week? my gosh, it's ridiculous. I would like people to realize that Fitz is playing at a very high level on a very mediocre to below club. If i could trade Fitz for one of these guys today, I'd do it in a heartbeat. That's between 11-13 guys. That's it. This is who i'd rather have then Fitz and its a pretty short list. I think the team should still grab one of the Elite QB's on the draft to groom for the future, but i would not be at all upset if they went heavy on D and O-line.

 

Michael Vick

Philip Rivers

Ben Roethlisberger

Tom Brady

Aaron Rodgers

Peyton Manning

Drew Brees

Matt Ryan

Joe Flacco

Eli Manning

Tony Romo

Mark Sanchez (maybe)

Kyle Orton (maybe)

 

The problem here is that you are living off of 2 games for Fitz, Balt and Cincy. He was not very efficient in the NE game, in fact, we were down 16 even with a Spiller KO return for a TD, or we would have been down 23 with 4 min to go as he struggled to find any consistency all day. He was awful against the Jets, and disappeared in the 2nd half against the Jags until he got a garbage time TD with 1 min left and the Jags just giving away the middle of the field to keep the clock rolling. He had a great statistical game at Balt, but his 2 INT's in the 3rd quarter gave away our lead for good. KC he had about 50 yards passing in the first half, and only one good drive the entire game which was the late 4th quarter TD which he followed it up with an INT when we were close to FG range and a chance to win the game in regulation. In fact, after the one TD, he completed just 33% of his passes with an INT over the last 4 drives, all game winning potential drives. His 2 INT's hurt us bad against Chi, struggled against Det, and then started the game with an INT this weekend that Cincy gifted him back where that first TD drive shouldnt have even happened, but Cincy bailed us out 3 times to keep the drive alive. Conincidentally, he was awful against Cincy until the 2 safeties got hurt. I mean just look at how bad they blew the coverage on SJ when he was so open he could have had a picnic and my grandma could have completed the throw to him.

 

So really, you are hanging you hat on 3 quarters of play against Balt (1st, 2nd, and 4th) and two quarters against Cincy (3rd and 4th where he was great). Outside of that, he has been largely ineffective and mistake prone. In fact he has 7 INT's over his last 5 games and KC dropped 2 right in their hands and Cincy gave one back to start the game this weekend plus several other dropped INT's he has been lucky on.

 

So, the point is, no one expects him to be perfect every week on every throw, but what some of us with a more realistic eye of what he has done want to see is more consistency and less complete bone head throws before we bye into him. I REALLY hope he develops more and can be that guy, would love to be able to just have our QB spot settled, but thus far, he has really not done as much as it seems considering almost HALF of his TD's have come in 2 games along with 36% of his yards and yet critical mistakes and struggles have been present in most of his games.

[Kelly the Dog]

Fitz may be the most inaccurate QB at throwing a screen I have ever seen. Several have been into the ground, even a couple that were backward and turned into live fumbles, along with a couple sailing into the sidelines. More importantly, not only does he throw way too many incompletes on screens, the completed ones are too frequently at the recievers ankles, behind him, above his head, etc, making it impossible for the player to make a move and advance the ball.

 

Someone needs to spend some serious time working on this with him, its about the easiest throw in football and he struggles to execute it consistently.

 

And, I am sorry, his accuracy is an issue and he is not extrememly accurate on tough passes as you say. Yes, he has made some tough passes, some great ones even, but he also has thrown a lot of bad INT's, had a dozen more dropped INT's that were just terrible throws, and most of them occured on timing routes which are tough passes and require the QB to make an accurate throw. Of course, he has also had some that were just so far from the WR they resmebled a wild pitch in baseball. More importantly, if you watch the games rather then check the stat page, you will see many of his completed passes were inaccurately thrown causing the WR to take a bad hit, catch it below his knees, go up and make a crazy tough catch, cause the reciever to break off his route or break momenutm, etc.

 

If someone wants to argue his guts, grit, heart, etc then fine, that makes sense, and he has all that. But to argue that this QB with a career 58% completion rate is accurate is a little silly.

I'm only talking about his accuracy this season, which has substantially improved. Up until now, I also thought, and said even in the post you responded to that he was inaccurate on too many passes, especially ones that are relatively easy. It cost us the NE game when he overthrew an open Parrish at the goalline that was intercepted. It's happened often this year, especially on a few bombs to Evans.

 

But to me (taking velocity out of the equation) he's like a fastball throwing pitcher who throws a lot of wild pitches and when he's bad he's really bad -- BUT -- at the same time, overall he throws more strikes than guys with more consistent control. And if he is getting more batters out and striking more guys out, plus the walks or wild pitches are not hurting him, the optics of the bad pitches are distorting the reality of the sum of the parts.

 

If Fitz threw a lot to the backs and TEs he would easily be at 65%. That's considered very good in this league. He also has to throw immediately because our line gives him two seconds not three or four like other lines do.

 

He throws a TON of extremely accurate passes, often into tight spots. And I totally disagree that a good percentage of his completions are bad passes. He hits guys in stride all the time. Those passes (I would say there have been 15-20 over the season) that are low to the ground that Stevie Johnson has caught right at the first down marker or endzone are extremely accurate passes. Perfect in fact. If you think they are not accurate because they were low, that is just nonsense.

 

He has thrown a lot of bad screen passes, I would agree. That is something he does not do great. But they don't hurt us all that much and it's not something I'm at all worried about. He's thrown some very good ones, too, and those are not such easy balls. In fact, it's hard to throw consistently good screen passes and a lot of QBs can't throw them. It's also difficult on TV a lot of times to see why that happened.

 

Right now, if Fitzpatrick didn't misfire on the 2-3 passes a game that he probably should hit, he would be playing at an all-pro franchise quarterback level. I am not saying he isnt inaccurate with passes that he should make. That's his major problem right now. BUT, I think you are others are totally misreading the sum of the game, and giving too many demerits for those few a game when he is making more than that many tough passes a game. If he continues at this pace, he's going to throw 32 TDs in 14 games. Jim Kelly threw 33 once in his career, and never more than that. And Fitz is on this team, not a Super Bowl team

[The Big Cat]

Fitz may be the most inaccurate QB at throwing a screen I have ever seen. Several have been into the ground, even a couple one that were went backward and turned into live fumbles, along with a couple sailing into the sidelines. More importantly, not only does he throw way too many incompletes on screens, the completed ones are too frequently at the recievers ankles, behind him, above his head, etc, making it impossible for the player to make a move and advance the ball.

 

Okay so far.

 

Someone needs to spend some serious time working on this with him, its about the easiest throw in football and because he struggles to execute it consistently.

 

I'm not sure who made this rule. I'd actually go so far as to say that the touch passes are far and away the harder ones to throw.

 

And, I am sorry, his accuracy is an issue and he is not extrememly accurate on tough passes as you say. Yes, he has made some tough passes, some great ones even, but he also has thrown a lot of bad INT's, had a dozen two or three more dropped INT's that were just terrible throws, and most of them occurred on timing routes which are tough passes and require the QB to make an accurate throw. Of course, he has also had some that were just so far from the WR they resembled a wild pitch in baseball. But sometimes in that situation, the passer and the receiver just aren't on the same page. More importantly, if you watch the games rather then check the stat page, you will see many of his completed passes were inaccurately thrown causing the WR to take a bad hit, catch it below his knees, go up and make a crazy tough catch, cause the reciever to break off his route or break momenutm, etc.

 

Boy, once you get past all the falsehoods and exaggerations of your post, it's actually quite substantive.

[zow2]

The problem here is that you are living off of 2 games for Fitz, Balt and Cincy. So really, you are hanging you hat on 3 quarters of play against Balt (1st, 2nd, and 4th) and two quarters against Cincy (3rd and 4th where he was great). Outside of that, he has been largely ineffective and mistake prone. In fact he has 7 INT's over his last 5 games and KC dropped 2 right in their hands and Cincy gave one back to start the game this weekend plus several other dropped INT's he has been lucky on.

 

I was at the Miami game last year and Indy for that matter....hence i was pounding the lecturn so to speak to have Fitz start the opener this year vs. Miami. Made me ill that Gailey threw Tony SParano a gift by starting Edwards in that game. Sparano would have told you which QB he would rather have faced seeing as Fitz carved up his team in Orchard Park last fall. Anyway, the point is I'm not hanging my hat on 3 Qtrs vs. Baltimore and 2 Qtrs vs. Cinci. Nice try. I actually like his "body of work" since he's been here. If you want to pick apart every teams QB to that level of detail, then I'm sure you can try to convince yourself that Brees, Rivers, Ryan, Flacco etc,,, are very flawed QB's as well. I guess only Mike Vick is off the hook since he hasn't thrown a pick yet this season or an inaccurate pass. So far this season, Fitz's attempts, yards, completion % and TD's are way up. Maybe it's not a coincidence since he is now working under Chan Gailey.

 

Just try not to work so hard to convince yourself that Fitz is not good. It's like some posters are on a crusade against the guy. Jeez!

[ajzepp]

LOL!

 

I must admit that you surprise me. You seem to think that it is just impossible for Mallett to be a top qb in this league. You know, you and the pundits could be wrong. It isn't impossible.

 

Take it from me......I thought RJ would be a star, and that Pat Williams was washed up when we cut him.

 

Oh, trust me brother, I'm USUALLY wrong

 

I think it's just that the only other time I've really felt strongly about a particular player on the Bills (in a negative way, that is), was with Bledsoe. When I see Mallett, I see Drew...and it scares the HELL out of me. I know you said before you'd be happy with a Drew type player, but I would really struggle with that. I just don't like players who put up all sorts of big numbers but then wither in the big games or against better teams. It's been beaten to death, I know, but that's why I keep beating the anti-Mallett drum lol

[finknottle]

If a Manning type player is there you take him, its silly to argue otherwise. i mean cmon mannnnn

 

And if a winning lottery ticket is there, you buy it. i mean cmon mannnnn

[section122]

So after reading this entire thread I am left with a few questions I wouldn't mind some answers to

 

1. Who besides luck fits your guys description of a franchise qb? Mallet? Ponder? Locker?

 

2. With what pick would you be willing to take said franchise qb with? Top 5? top 10?

 

3. Who do you feel is better than fitz or will be better than fitz?

 

4. Will we realistically have a chance to draft this qb with what is looking to be a pick in the 4-10 range?