Article: When do you quit on a franchise QB

[berndogg]

TEN, HOU, NE, NYJ, MIA, MIA, JAX, IND, SEA, STL...The way I see it, to get to six losses from that bunch, we'd have to drop the second game against NYJ and get swept by Miami. No way we finish worse than 8-8.

 

I wouldn't go that far. Put it this way, when Seattle and St. Louis fans try to predict their record for the rest of the season, do you think most of them consider Buffalo a win or a loss? I mean, even this week we're only 3 point favorites and I'm not exactly rushing to put my house on the Bills. Don't get me wrong, I think we CAN win all of those games besides Houston and NE, but we're also more than capable of losing every single one of them. But back to the topic at hand, it really would be a shame if the coaching staff's faith in T.Jack is so low that they wouldn't make a switch in order to try to salvage a playoff run and the only option is wait to fail, then clean house.

[The Big Cat]

I wouldn't go that far. Put it this way, when Seattle and St. Louis fans try to predict their record for the rest of the season, do you think most of them consider Buffalo a win or a loss? I mean, even this week we're only 3 point favorites and I'm not exactly rushing to put my house on the Bills. Don't get me wrong, I think we CAN win all of those games besides Houston and NE, but we're also more than capable of losing every single one of them. But back to the topic at hand, it really would be a shame if the coaching staff's faith in T.Jack is so low that they wouldn't make a switch in order to try to salvage a playoff run and the only option is wait to fail, then clean house.

 

I didn't count Seattle as a win.

 

To get to 7-9 we'd have to lose six of the following games (bolded for plausibility):

 

TEN

HOU

NE

MIA

IND

JAX

STL

SEA

MIA

NYJ

 

So, by my count, 7 of our last 10 games are quite winnable (and yes, I'm counting the Jets). That would put us at 10-6. I don't believe (as things stand today injury-wise) we forfeit an additional three.

[ThurmasThoman]

What frustrates me most about the WTF are still playing Fitz for crowd is that Gailey/Nix have shown absolutely no hesitation in parting ways with other players that weren't working out (Edwards, Lynch, Moorman, Poz, Whitner).

 

Why would Fitz all of a sudden be different? Easy, because they have no confidence, whatsoever, in the guys backing him up.

 

That leads me to believe that they will be targeting AT LEAST one other guy to come in and compete for the job next year. And I say that because I trust Gailey/Nix know that Fitz isn't working out the way he should...

 

the difference is - they tied their wagon to fitz. they gave him a starter contract, with starter years, and anointed him "untouchable" going into camp this year.

 

there exists the possibility that gailey/nix arent infallible, and may have made a mistake here.

 

they havent cut bait yet, because its too early.

 

but you have to think gailey knows this is his last shot at a head coaching job. one or 2 more weeks of fitz looking like garbage, and he'll be benched.

 

I didn't count Seattle as a win.

 

To get to 7-9 we'd have to lose six of the following games (bolded for plausibility):

 

TEN

HOU

NE

MIA

IND

JAX

STL

SEA

MIA

NYJ

 

So, by my count, 7 of our last 10 games are quite winnable (and yes, I'm counting the Jets). That would put us at 10-6. I don't believe (as things stand today injury-wise) we forfeit an additional three.

 

i think 8-8 may get a 6 seed this year. call me crazy, but mediocrity is the story of the nfl this year.

[The Big Cat]

the difference is - they tied their wagon to fitz. they gave him a starter contract, with starter years, and anointed him "untouchable" going into camp this year.

 

there exists the possibility that gailey/nix arent infallible, and may have made a mistake here.

 

they havent cut bait yet, because its too early.

 

but you have to think gailey knows this is his last shot at a head coaching job. one or 2 more weeks of fitz looking like garbage, and he'll be benched.

 

And I'm saying you're foolish to think it's that cut and dry. Fitz hasn't cost us any games this year, period. So if we win with him "looking like garbage," he WON'T be benched.

[sllib olaffub]

It may be the case that most coaches do not survive a failed Franchise QB - but, this is no normal NFL franchise. All things considered - unless Ralph were to hand down the order himself, that Gailey be held accountable for that contract - I think if Fitz were dropped after this season, they could say they paid an NFL average for an average NFL QB these last 2 years, and go get a rookie sensation (he'd have to be highly touted, say, one of the top 3 coming out), then Gailey could go into next season with a relatively fresh team. A new QB after this year would give Gailey a new lease on his tenure.

 

Nix, on the other hand, has more to change to get off the hot seat. He's got to worry about the QB, about Mario Williams production, about Dave Wannstedt's defense, and about Gailey's ability to lead a winning team. Nix has a lot more factors involved, a lot more IF's to figure to keep his job safe.

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

The last people I would listen to about franchise QB's are billick, dilfer, and casserly.

[vincec]

I don't see Gailey moving on from Fitz at this point. If they do draft a QB next season (which isn't a given), then it will surely take a couple of years for him to become productive and Gailey will either have started winning with Fitz in the meantime or will be gone by then. So, at this point it's easy to see why Gailey is 100% behind Fitz.

 

The only scenario I see around this is if they pick up a veteran via trade or FA in the off season.

[mrpunchy]

TEN, HOU, NE, NYJ, MIA, MIA, JAX, IND, SEA, STL...The way I see it, to get to six losses from that bunch, we'd have to drop the second game against NYJ and get swept by Miami. No way we finish worse than 8-8.

 

You Sir are crazy. The Bills will get swept by Miami and will lose to the Jets and Stl. We may win against JAX but I wouldn't hold my breath. If we win more than 2 games the rest of the year I will be surprised. I wonder if you will still come and defend Fitz then?

Edited October 17, 2012 by mrpunchy

[sllib olaffub]

I don't see Gailey moving on from Fitz at this point. If they do draft a QB next season (which isn't a given), then it will surely take a couple of years for him to become productive and Gailey will either have started winning with Fitz in the meantime or will be gone by then. So, at this point it's easy to see why Gailey is 100% behind Fitz.

 

The only scenario I see around this is if they pick up a veteran via trade or FA in the off season.

 

I do not agree that a QB would take 2 years or so to ready for the NFL. I could easily see Gailey SAYING he needs time, but look no further than Miami - I know, people wrote them off early, but good organizations are made by good coaches, and Miami has one from Green Bay, now, that Green Bay is missing - their rookie QB was not supposed to be able to play for a year or two, productively, at least. Look at Seattle. A 3rd rounder. Luck. Griffin. It doesn't need to take that long anymore. Especially with a QB "Guru" laden team, like Buffalo (Gailey and Lee) - I mean, is anyone here willing to admit they don't think a rookie QB worth a pick, even in the seventh round, couldn't make all the throws Fitz is making?

 

I happen to think the only thing that will buy Gailey time, and could save his chance at a positive legacy, is going all in on a highly rated rookie QB next year. Nothing else, to me, could save him.

[cantankerous]

Spot on. They are going to draft one next year, and they will be tied to that guy.

 

They get to draft one of their own. Fitz and Edwards were what Gailey and Nix found lying around when he arrived.

 

The current trajectory of this season (8-8, 9-7, maybe 10-6) will not get either Nix or Gailey fired. 7-9 or worse might cost Gailey his job but it would take at least that bad, even though I would be badly disapointed with less than 9-7.

 

So you think drafting a QB next year will buy them 3 more years or so? They could've drafted one in the previous 3 drafts...They chose not to draft one. They made their bed and now must lay in it.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

And I'm saying you're foolish to think it's that cut and dry. Fitz hasn't cost us any games this year, period. So if we win with him "looking like garbage," he WON'T be benched.

 

Wow, I can't quite agree here, Cat. He played very poorly indeed against the Jets. When a team's first two offensive series end in INTs that give the other team a short field and turn into TDs, spotting the other team a 14-0 lead, I think it can be argued that the QB cost us the game. I can't hold the so called "fumble" against Fitz, but the pick-6 on the 3rd play of the 2nd half iced the game. There was plenty of blame to go around, but I have to say I think Fitz led the stench there.

 

The other losses, you can make a case for your point. He didn't carry the team, but he wasn't the biggest problem either.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Hopeful

[sllib olaffub]

I'd go farther and say Fitz negatively effected our losing games - even on the defensive side. A defense has to believe if they go out there and shut down a team, get a 3 and out, that the offense is going to take advantage of the stop, go and put some points up, give the defense a little rest, and also an edge, in the form of a lead. However, when a defense plays well, and the offense goes out and turns it over, or goes 3 and out, it negates what the defense did. Sure, some great defenses carried a team in the past, but I believe our players aren't nearly there yet, and if our offense isn't scoring, it demoralizes the defense. This can in no way be proven, of course, but I think had we had a much better QB, our defense would have played better, too - it wouldn't have been on the field for so long, and it would have had something to play for. We all saw the game - the Jets, the 49ers, the Patriots last half - our defense KNEW even if they stopped the opposition, our offense wasn't going to score. That is on Fitzpatrick, Gailey, and Nix - Fitzpatrick is so awful the offense has to play to his only strengths, which good defenses can take away. On Gailey and Nix, well, they should have known better.

 

I will say, though, that given the right coaching and a good young QB, this team looks like its right on the cusp of being a serious team for quite a while. The future isn't lost - only our hopes as long as Fitz is the active QB.

[Never NEVER Give-up]

I'd go farther and say Fitz negatively effected our losing games - even on the defensive side. A defense has to believe if they go out there and shut down a team, get a 3 and out, that the offense is going to take advantage of the stop, go and put some points up, give the defense a little rest, and also an edge, in the form of a lead. However, when a defense plays well, and the offense goes out and turns it over, or goes 3 and out, it negates what the defense did. Sure, some great defenses carried a team in the past, but I believe our players aren't nearly there yet, and if our offense isn't scoring, it demoralizes the defense. This can in no way be proven, of course, but I think had we had a much better QB, our defense would have played better, too - it wouldn't have been on the field for so long, and it would have had something to play for. We all saw the game - the Jets, the 49ers, the Patriots last half - our defense KNEW even if they stopped the opposition, our offense wasn't going to score. That is on Fitzpatrick, Gailey, and Nix - Fitzpatrick is so awful the offense has to play to his only strengths, which good defenses can take away. On Gailey and Nix, well, they should have known better.

 

I will say, though, that given the right coaching and a good young QB, this team looks like its right on the cusp of being a serious team for quite a while. The future isn't lost - only our hopes as long as Fitz is the active QB.

 

 

BINGO!! Winner, Winner Chicken Dinner!! Harumph!! Harumph!! Harumph!! Harumph!!! "Hey, I didn't get a Harumph outta that guy!!"

 

EXACTLY! Couldn't say it better myself.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

I'd go farther and say Fitz negatively effected our losing games - even on the defensive side. A defense has to believe if they go out there and shut down a team, get a 3 and out, that the offense is going to take advantage of the stop, go and put some points up, give the defense a little rest, and also an edge, in the form of a lead. However, when a defense plays well, and the offense goes out and turns it over, or goes 3 and out, it negates what the defense did.

 

I've read this viewpoint before. What would Darryl Talley say about this? (tappity tappity tappity)

 

I'm not sure, but I think it might be something to the effect that it's the D's job to make the opponent's office Eat D**k on every snap. And that this is the biggest weasel-a**ed pile of sh** excuse for pathetic limp defensive play that he's ever heard (Darryl wasn't given to weasel-wording unless on camera). If the O bombs, keep giving the d*mn ball back to them until they get it right and play like men.

 

Tell me, under this wonderful wise theory, just how do you explain the O having given the D a nice 14 point lead against NE only to watch the D p*** it away by letting NE march the length of the field three times? Under this theory, is the offense ever allowed to go 3-and-out (this does happen, you know, even to good teams)? Must the O score on ever drive? How many times in a row can they go 3 and out before they trigger the limp d**k defense excuse? Is it OK for the D to bomb if the QB slips below 58% completion but off-limits if he's >62% like a good (not great) QB? Fitz completed ~62% in one of our losses and 53% in one of our wins, would that make it OK for the D to play like sh** when we're winning because the QB sucks, but off limits when we're losing because the QB had decent completions? I'm so confused!

 

It's stump-easy folks. Our got Handled, plain and simple. Dominated. Handled by NE in the 2nd half, and Handled by SF. Can they avoid getting Handled by the next decent team they play? I don't know. I hope so. But sorry, I just don't "buy" that the defense's troubles are all on Fitz. If they are, that's on the coaches. There's manhood, and pride, and professional reputation, and earning one's salt all on the line.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Hopeful

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I've read this viewpoint before… I don't know, but sorry, I just don't "buy" that the defense's troubles are all on Fitz. If they are, that's on the coaches. There's manhood, and pride, and professional reputation, and earning one's salt all on the line.

 

Hopeful, you know I love you and agree with you 99% of the time but would you entertain that the poor play of the QB might have some detrimental effect on the defense?

 

p.s.- regardless of whether it should or not?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Hopeful, you know I love you and agree with you 99% of the time but would you entertain that the poor play of the QB might have some detrimental effect on the defense?

 

p.s.- regardless of whether it should or not?

 

Let me put it this way. I think if it does, these guys have no business cashing their big paychecks as professional NFL athletes.

 

And I think this explanation fails the "red face" test of explaining the facts.

 

I think the whole team got demoralized and gave up against the Jets. I think we went in there believing all the media, pictures of Jets in a clown car and so forth, and got our a**es handed to us on both sides of the ball. In that circumnstance, I think QB mistakes do demoralize the team - when we came out at halftime and Fitz threw a pick-6 straight off, I think the whole team slumped. When the QB throws a duck, followed by a dropped pass that hits a guy right in the numbers like last week - if that's not seen as a team thing, not a QB thing, there's a Big Problem with where the heads of the team is at. If nothing else, in real time there's no sure way for the team to tell if the QB was inaccurate or the pass was tipped.

 

We won in KC and against the Browns, and were leading NE by 2 TD. The drive was Fjax, no gain, penalty, tipped pass, 16 yd screen, Fjax run for 4, nice pass to D Jones with long YAC, TD 21-7 lead. Exactly what is so freakin' demoralizing about that, to justify the D folding like a set of cheap lawn chairs on the next 3 NE drives? How many incompletions is the QB allowed? How many 3 and outs is the offense allowed, before the D gets to play this "oh poor us, the QB is affecting our play" card?

 

That is not a championship attitude. How many ducks and incompletions did the Texans have to overcome with TJ Yates at QB last year? Yet their D stayed stout and they went to the playoffs. If this *is* the problem on our D, we are even further away than I thought.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Hopeful

[MRW]

That is not a championship attitude. How many ducks and incompletions did the Texans have to overcome with TJ Yates at QB last year? Yet their D stayed stout and they went to the playoffs. If this *is* the problem on our D, we are even further away than I thought.

I agree with you 100%. We aren't talking about a defense getting worn down and demoralized and giving up a drive or two at the end of a game here, we're talking about complete collapses. And if the D is phoning it in because they feel Fitz is not good enough, I don't have any confidence in them being a part of a winning team if we do get a better QB.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I was talking more generally and not so much with regards to specific parts of games.

 

My point is more that if a team has zero or near zero confidence in the QB, that it would have a negative effect on the entire team, defense included.

 

Also as you undoubtedly noted, I did say that this shouldn't be the case, but I feel that it sometimes is.

[reddogblitz]

If our D can't stop the other team because they are demoralized and don't believe in our QB then they are bunch of pussies. They need to turn in their man cards and fat paychecks.

 

I remember in the 1999 season, the last time the Bills made the playoffs, we won 2 games 9-6. How did our D manage to stay motivated when our O was obviously laying eggs?

 

Nice try.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

If our D can't stop the other team because they are demoralized and don't believe in our QB then they are bunch of pussies. They need to turn in their man cards and fat paychecks.

 

I remember in the 1999 season, the last time the Bills made the playoffs, we won 2 games 9-6. How did our D manage to stay motivated when our O was obviously laying eggs?

 

Nice try.

 

Like I said, I don't think piss poor quarterbacking should affect a defense but I believe it sometimes can.

 

BTW, are you sure we won two games 9-6 in 1999? I don't think that's the case.

 

But regardless, there's a difference between when an offense is not scoring and when an offense is not scoring AND is turning the ball over.

Edited October 18, 2012 by San Jose Bills Fan