Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
  On 9/7/2014 at 8:38 PM, PastaJoe said:

Still throws off target too much and is saved by his WRs making acrobatic catches.

 

The Bills WRs are the first ones in the history of the league to make acrobatic catches because EJ is the first QB to not throw it perfectly every single time.

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
  On 9/7/2014 at 10:12 PM, YoloinOhio said:

National media weighs in ...

 

@AlbertBreer: Bills have more talent than a lot of people realize. They don't need EJ Manuel to be a superstar. They need him to be steady.

I love seeing that
Posted
  On 9/7/2014 at 8:38 PM, PastaJoe said:

Still throws off target too much and is saved by his WRs making acrobatic catches. It's going to burn him vs good D's.

The one to Williams at the end look like a wouunded duck. For some reason he can not throw a hard line drive type of pass despite hise size and strength and size of his hands. Looks very Joe Kapp-ish to me if anyone rememebrs how how he threw..

Posted
  On 9/7/2014 at 8:38 PM, PastaJoe said:

Still throws off target too much and is saved by his WRs making acrobatic catches. It's going to burn him vs good D's.

 

Then again you might also want to mention a perfectly thrown ball to Chander that was dropped. Or are we not counting good throws where the receiver doesn't make the catch?

Posted
  On 9/7/2014 at 10:23 PM, The Dean said:

Then again you might also want to mention a perfectly thrown ball to Chander that was dropped. Or are we not counting good throws where the receiver doesn't make the catch?

 

The one 5 feet behind him? I'm not saying that Chandler couldn't have caught it (he should have), but it was less egregious than dropping one right in the numbers. Chandler contained the pass rush on EJ's keeper TD, he was fine today.

Posted
  On 9/7/2014 at 10:12 PM, YoloinOhio said:

National media weighs in ...

 

@AlbertBreer: Bills have more talent than a lot of people realize. They don't need EJ Manuel to be a superstar. They need him to be steady.

 

This is the reason I feel Whaley should survive the ownership regime change

Posted
  On 9/7/2014 at 10:12 PM, YoloinOhio said:

National media weighs in ...

 

@AlbertBreer: Bills have more talent than a lot of people realize. They don't need EJ Manuel to be a superstar. They need him to be steady.

 

Breer is stealing my lines. I've been beating this drum since the draft.

Posted

I missed the first quarter when EJ put up nice stats, so I can't speak to that, but from what I saw he looked okay, but not great. He made some plays when we needed them, didn't have many egregious mistakes, and if he can do that consistently we have a good shot at a winning season. That said, pretty much all the passes I saw required the receiver to break stride and/or contort to catch them. If he can't correct that he may be a serviceable game manager, but will never be great.

Posted
  Quote
[@kfishbain: EJ Manuel was a 58.8% passer as a rookie. He notched a career-high 72.7% completion rate against the Bears on Sunday

 

 

Hmmmm..... so a QB can improve? very interesting!

Posted
  On 9/7/2014 at 10:23 PM, The Dean said:

 

 

Then again you might also want to mention a perfectly thrown ball to Chander that was dropped. Or are we not counting good throws where the receiver doesn't make the catch?

 

That pass was behind Chandler. But it should have been caught.

Posted
  On 9/7/2014 at 8:38 PM, PastaJoe said:

Still throws off target too much and is saved by his WRs making acrobatic catches. It's going to burn him vs good D's.

 

You can say the same about many QBs. Lynn Swann comes to mind.

Posted

EJ had a good game against the Bears. We didn't win in spite of him but he wasn't the main reason we won. He managed the game. He threw a couple ducks that guys like Woods made great plays on. He wasn't spectacular but he was good enough to win. That's not a knock on EJ but the objective truth.

Posted (edited)
  On 9/8/2014 at 12:33 PM, The_Dude said:

EJ had a good game against the Bears. We didn't win in spite of him but he wasn't the main reason we won. He managed the game. He threw a couple ducks that guys like Woods made great plays on. He wasn't spectacular but he was good enough to win. That's not a knock on EJ but the objective truth.

 

That's objective? Well, that's just like, your opinion, man.

Edited by MDH
Posted
  On 9/7/2014 at 10:36 PM, FireChan said:

 

 

The one 5 feet behind him? I'm not saying that Chandler couldn't have caught it (he should have), but it was less egregious than dropping one right in the numbers. Chandler contained the pass rush on EJ's keeper TD, he was fine today.

 

Chandler was HORRIBLE!! The INT that EJ threw was initially intended for Scott Chandler but he fell down, again

×
×
  • Create New...