Hapless Bills Fan Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 What's on my mind is someone who has proven he can "get the job done" in the NFL, but may be a bit "off the radar" as a FA and might be relatively inexpensive. Neither of these guys is "the man" or "the answer", but either could potentially be a quality choice as a stopgap to help us maneuver out from under Fitz' 2014 Cap Hit if we keep him this year because the FA market looks pretty thin. David Garrard Downside: 1)hasn't played in 2 years. Reason: herniated disk 2011, was signed by the 'phins then cut when he would require arthroscopic surgery Herniated disc can be something it takes more than 1 year to recover from (see Manning's 2 operations) but if a guy is recovered, payoff could be good. 2) age. He's 35. 3) Need to look carefully at his health and state of fitness. (see 1) Upside: 1) when he played, he was a steady to good QB playing for a crap team most of his career. Underappreciated QB IMO. 2) almost 2:1 TD:INT ratio. Doesn't make the dumb mistakes of TJax (~1:1 TD:INT ratio) or Fitz 3) average 7 ypa to make Edward's Arm happy 4) Big guy (6'1", 240 lbs) but not a statue back there - over age 30, rushed for >200 yds most recent 3 seasons he played 5) 1 playoff appearance, 1 probowl (diff years) - knows something about what it takes Because he hasn't played for 2 years, competition for his services could be lower and he might be willing to accept a lower price to stay in the game (low risk/high reward) If we decide to cut Fitz and get rid of the 2014 Cap Curse and we want another vet around in case TJax doesn't cut it/our rookie not ready to play, we could do worse Jets are said to be interested, and Garrard is said to be interested in Jets but "deal not imminent". Seneca Wallace Downside 1) out of the league last year after being cut by Browns just before opening day. Limited playtime 2 yrs before that. 2) age. He's 32. 3) Small guy. 5'11", 196 lb (but tough - has also played WR) 4) <7 ypa so Edward's Arm won't like him Upside: 1) best season in Seattle (2008), started 8 games, threw for 1532 yds, 11 TD, 3 INTs. QBR 87 2) almost 2:1 TD:INT ratio. Again, doesn't make the stupid mistakes 3) nimble - doesn't get sacked much, can extend a play 4) versitile - played WR a bit for Seattle and since he actually can throw decently, any trick play with Wallace in there has to be taken seriously as a pass threat 5) apparently still wants it - per Nelson article, Nelson was taking throws from Seneca Wallace. I think both are WC system QB, so the lingo and route trees Pettine may introduce shouldn't be strange to them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 No and No. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 This topic brings up an interesting point though that I've been pondering for a few weeks. Marrone is reputed to use a West Coast variant, sometimes referred to as the Gulf Coast Offense. Hackett's Dad was a strict practitioner of the West Coast offense. Yet I've seen very little conversation about what available quarterbacks, pro and college, would project to fitting the Bills new offense. Occasionally some people have made the point that Barkley and Nassib are obvious fits for the Bills offense and while not liking either player that much, I agree with the thinking. Are the Bills like many teams, going to adopt some elements of the read option (using Brad Smith)? Does a statuesque pocket passer (Glennon, Landry Jones, Tyler Bray) fit into what we anticipate the Bills offense to look like? How about a rangy athletic QB like Manuel? Back to the OP, IF the Bills were in the market for a veteran placeholder/eventual backup certainly Seneca Wallace would seem to be a good fit. However I feel like the Bills are gonna add a QB in the draft and not pursue any free agent QBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snorom Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 there is no such thing as a FA sleeper QB. You either are good enough or you are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Anderson's Lunch Pail Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 there is no such thing as a FA sleeper QB. You either are good enough or you are not. Haha, yup. Can't think of too many unknown Joe Montana's that sign with teams in free agency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcbillsfan Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 i would rather bring in cambell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Add Matt Moore to the list. He hasn't been figured out yet, and he could be serviceable as a backup should we cut Fitz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Add Matt Moore to the list. He hasn't been figured out yet, and he could be serviceable as a backup should we cut Fitz. He was re-signed by the Dolphins, 2 years and $8,000,000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted March 9, 2013 Author Share Posted March 9, 2013 (edited) Add Matt Moore to the list. He hasn't been figured out yet, and he could be serviceable as a backup should we cut Fitz. Negative. Not because he's not decent, but because he's been resigned by the 'Phins Reportedly for $8 million, which is a bit much for the niche I was describing: an extra insurance card for a rookie who may not be ready to play, who might be better than TJax or who at least doesn't have the TJax/Fitz achilles' heel of throwing too may INTs. Haha, yup. Can't think of too many unknown Joe Montana's that sign with teams in free agency. That makes you sound cute, but it's totally missing the niche I was describing - did you even read the OP? "What's on my mind is someone who has proven he can "get the job done" in the NFL, but may be a bit "off the radar" as a FA and might be relatively inexpensive. Neither of these guys is "the man" or "the answer", but either could potentially be a quality choice as a stopgap" Where do you read that and come up with "unknown Joe Montana"? Edited March 9, 2013 by Hopeful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Trooth Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Garrard & Wallace? How are either an upgrade over fitz? There's absolutely no benefit. Why chase a FA qb at all? It's a waste of money and cap space as well as senseless. Fitz is staying put for at least this season, unless a clearly (clearly) better (better) option is available for a lot (a lot) less money... which right now DOES NOT EXIST!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 I think Matt Moore is a quality backup. I guess we'll disagree. Been a little busy to see he resigned with the fish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted March 9, 2013 Author Share Posted March 9, 2013 i would rather bring in cambell Campbell is IMO another under-rated QB, but he's in no way "off the radar" in the NFL right now. He played last year and played well in the 1 game he started. Reportedly, Chicago would like to re-sign him and he would like to re-sign with Chicago and the hangup is his $3.5 million 2012 salary. Moore just signed for $8 million/2 yrs, making Campbell arguably the "pick of the FA litter" right now - no reason Campbell should go for a 1 yr deal as a bargain back-up plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaysports36 Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 No and No. Thank you. I love when people respond with intellectual responses, truly shows how much they know about the game....ohh wait, never mind, I guess the same goes for the opposite as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted March 9, 2013 Author Share Posted March 9, 2013 (edited) Garrard & Wallace? How are either an upgrade over fitz? There's absolutely no benefit. Why chase a FA qb at all? It's a waste of money and cap space as well as senseless. Fitz is staying put for at least this season, unless a clearly (clearly) better (better) option is available for a lot (a lot) less money... which right now DOES NOT EXIST!!! I wrote "either could potentially be a quality choice as a stopgap to help us maneuver out from under Fitz' 2014 Cap Hit if we keep him this year because the FA market looks pretty thin." Let me try to break it down and be clearer 1) Cut Fitz: leaves us with TJax and a rookie who may well not be ready to start. TJax has the same tendency as Fitz to throw INTs and TDs in almost equal quantities, which tends to lose games. 2) Don't cut Fitz/ no restructure, that leaves us paying him $7.25 million this year ($10.5k cap hit), and taking a $10 million cap hit in 2014 when we're trying to resign Wood and fill in remaining gaps in FA. Nasty. I suggest alternative 3) Cut Fitz, and bring in a low financial risk/high potential reward kind of QB, someone who has shown in the past they can get it done, but is not in demand. I went point by point about why I think either of those two, if healthy, could potentially be better than Fitz. Let me try to summarize: Garrard: better lifetime completion percentage, completion percentage 64% and 7.3 Y/A most recent 4 years he's played, lifetime TD% 3.9, lifetime INT% 2.4 - much less prone to INTs. Probowl and playoff. Wallace: similar to Fitz in completion percentage and Y/A, TD% 4.1, INT % 2.4. About as likely to throw a TD, and significantly less likely to toss INTs at the wrong time. Compare to Fitz in Buffalo TD % 4.6, INT %3.7 - more TDs, and more throwing the game away with costly INTs at bad times. Think you'll like TJax better? Lifetime he's thrown TDS and INTs in almost a dead heat, TD% 3.6, INT% 3.3. He's an OK QB, and gnashing teeth will gnash with him behind center. Now, if Fitz restructures, the salary cap thing goes away. But otherwise, just sayin'. Edited March 9, 2013 by Hopeful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 (edited) I love when people respond with intellectual responses, truly shows how much they know about the game....ohh wait, never mind, I guess the same goes for the opposite as well Does one need to write out a thesis for every single response just to obtain favor from people who may possibly question their intelligence or "football I.Q."? No. Thank you. Edited March 9, 2013 by H2o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted March 9, 2013 Author Share Posted March 9, 2013 I think Matt Moore is a quality backup. I guess we'll disagree. Been a little busy to see he resigned with the fish. One of the best of the FA QB lot, which is why he got $8 mill/2 yrs from the Phish. Campbell IMO will get something similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#34fan Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 (edited) I'm In with Garrard. He will EASILY beat out the rookie plus whatever other scrubs are on our roster come September. He won the Job in Miami before getting hurt! Guy makes good decisions and knows how to move the chains in ANY situation. Only question is how much he's got left in the tank. If he stays healthy, and someone else doesn't grab him, that's my guy in FA. Garrard & Wallace? How are either an upgrade over fitz? There's absolutely no benefit. Why chase a FA qb at all? It's a waste of money and cap space as well as senseless. Fitz is staying put for at least this season, unless a clearly (clearly) better (better) option is available for a lot (a lot) less money... which right now DOES NOT EXIST!!! On Garrard's WORST day, He is more efficient, makes better decisions, and has (minimum) twice the arm strength of Fitzchumstick. My only knock on Garrard is his age, which brings into question his durability. He's also a consumate PRO... Lotsa good things for a rookie scrub to key in on, and learn from. Even at 35, we can get better production out of him than Fitz. -That's JMWO. Edited March 10, 2013 by #34fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Trooth Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 I'm In with Garrard. He will EASILY beat out the rookie plus whatever other scrubs are on our roster come September. He won the Job in Miami before getting hurt! Guy makes good decisions and knows how to move the chains in ANY situation. Only question is how much he's got left in the tank. If he stays healthy, and someone else doesn't grab him, that's my guy in FA. On Garrard's WORST day, He is more efficient, makes better decisions, and has (minimum) twice the arm strength of Fitzchumstick. My only knock on Garrard is his age, which brings into question his durability. He's also a consumate PRO... Lotsa good things for a scrub rookie to key in on, and learn from. Even at 35, we can get better production out of him than Fitz. -That's JMWO. Reality. Garrard is done. He ain't gonna give you any more than fitz even if he was healthy and 30. What you gain in arm strength doesn't surpass fitz football brain. Fitz is adequate in a transition year on a team that will be hard pressed to finish .500. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hotpockets28 Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 (edited) Fitz sucks good god cant wait to see him gone...just knowing that fitz is still a bill is giving me migraines.... Edited March 10, 2013 by Hotpockets28 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#34fan Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 (edited) Reality. Garrard is done. He ain't gonna give you any more than fitz even if he was healthy and 30. What you gain in arm strength doesn't surpass fitz football brain. Fitz is adequate in a transition year on a team that will be hard pressed to finish .500. I can understand why you'd think he was done... I'm just saying "not so fast" DG's last year starting in the league he threw 23 TD's and rushed for five. He's never thrown more that 15 INT's in a season. -Fitz can have that many by November. This is a guy who won the starting job in 2007 over a seemingly entrenched Byron Leftwich. That same year he went 11-5 and made to the playoffs. Last season (at 34) he went to MIA and won the job over a talented rookie and yet ANOTHER entrenched starter. So, I'm not sure what your observations are based on... Are we talking about the same Dave Garrard? Edited March 10, 2013 by #34fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts