Peter King Writes Regarding Fitzpatrick

[T master]

Fitz is a good fit right now. I don't see him as the long term solution though. I believe we need Andrew Luck. I believe him to be the answer at QB, but I don't think he's coming out and with the uncertainy of the 2011 season, I don't think it will happen. That being said. If He comes out you get him, if he doesn't go with Fitz and build your TRENCHES UP!!!!

 

Finally some one with a little common sense . We need O & D line & LB to be stronger !!

[The Big Cat]

Finally some one with a little common sense . We need O & D line & LB to be stronger !!

 

Honestly, I've watched a handful of Stanford games this year and I really don't understand the obsession with Luck. Perhaps someone could explain it to me.

 

Watching Cam Newton I find myself involuntarily blurting "Damn!" I've definitely never had that happen watching Luck.

 

Now, please don't read that as an endorsement for drafting Cam Newton. I think if he falls to the second we take him there, but he's not worth our top 3 pick.

 

IF we take a quarterback in the draft, he'll spend at least 8 games next year watching Fitz play, and I just don't see that sitting well with On-Top-Of-The-World, one year wonder Newton.

 

But as I mentioned yesterday, we ALREADY have two young, unproven NFL commodities (one of whom WAS a college stud) studying and learning from Fitz.

 

Can it be assumed that ANY rookie QB on this roster next year would be the FOURTH most developed player by week one? And if that's the case, if we're going to eek out 4 wins this season--TOPS--don't we want that top 3 pick to be near the front of the depth chart next year?

[Acantha]

Honestly, I've watched a handful of Stanford games this year and I really don't understand the obsession with Luck. Perhaps someone could explain it to me.

 

Watching Cam Newton I find myself involuntarily blurting "Damn!" I've definitely never had that happen watching Luck.

 

There's a big difference between that "wow" factor in college ball and what it takes to be an NFL QB. IMO, Luck is the most sure NFL prospect since Matt Ryan, and in fact I think he's better (though his transition would benefit greatly from at least one more year in college). Those types of players don't come around very often.

 

But as I mentioned yesterday, we ALREADY have two young, unproven NFL commodities (one of whom WAS a college stud) studying and learning from Fitz.

 

Can it be assumed that ANY rookie QB on this roster next year would be the FOURTH most developed player by week one? And if that's the case, if we're going to eek out 4 wins this season--TOPS--don't we want that top 3 pick to be near the front of the depth chart next year?

 

The difference is what happens after those 8 games. Luck may start out as the 4th best on the roster (I don't agree...he would be at worst 3 by the times games started), but assuming that at some point any of these guys take over for Fitz, Luck would be able to take things much further (of course assuming he lives up to his potential which at this point is all we have to base him on).

 

I agree with you that due to the mess this whole team is in, QB is not the route to go with the first pick. Most of the picks should be focused on defense and a RT if a good enough one is available. But dismissing Luck because we have other young guys on the roster doesn't make sense to me. While I don't think it's the right way to go right now, there is a very valid argument that no matter what you have on your team, you never pass up on a franchise QB. I think it's better for the team to address the defense given how well Fitz is playing, but that wouldn't keep me from being very excited if he's picked.

[starrymessenger]

Luck is not the answer, especially if Pete King is talking good about him.

I would be wary of Luck. He appears to have the right intangibles, no question. However, I don't like his long ball (not as bad as Clausen's ducks at ND but of the same ilk) and his throws do not seem to me to have the tight spiral you want to see in a weather beaten place like Buffalo. His short to medium range passes are accurate but I remember Mike Mayock raving about Trent Edwards' ability to drop it in a breadbasket when he was drafted. Sure he plays in a pro set offence and is making NFL reads, but he has been intensively coached up by a former pro bowl QB, so although he may have a head start in terms of being NFL ready there is no guarantee that when at the next level his performance will be NFL excellent. Being "ready" is fine but what you want is a player who will be able to improve his game at the next level - K. Williams being a good example. I would take Sam Bradford over Luck 100% of the time (although I agree the comparison is flawed because we have seen what Bradford can do).

[Mr_Blizzard]

Amen brother. We finally have the franchise QB for the next ten years.

 

I think Fitz can lead this team to a championship if he is given the right supporting cast. That's up to the front office.

[starrymessenger]

Whenever this teanm has looked good this year, and it has looked very good at times in spite of its losing record, it has largely been due to R. Fitzpatrick (no doubt with an assist from the HC and QB coach). He is 28 years old and may be coming into his own. He knows how to read a defense. Yes, he has a strong arm. Stevie's drop was perfectly placed and in the air about 60 yards. His throws on slant patterns are so hot they got Hardy cut and earned Troy an intercept in the Steelers game. His accuracy is improving. He shows the kind of leadership you see in elite QBs, Rivers, Roethlisberger...(not saying he is in that class of QB of course) I for one would like to see if he is developing and what he could do with a better supporting cast.

[Doc]

You mean like Troy Smith? Tyrell Pryor? Art Schlichter? Joe Germaine?

 

That is a dig! This is Chan's best compliment for his QB?

Do I really need to explain it to you?