VABills Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 Just for fun: Week 4 against the lowly Rams, Trent was 15 of 25 for 197 yds with 1 TD, 1 INT, and 4 sacks. Rams had 380yds in total offense and 28minutes of possession time. Week 5 against the mediocre Cards, JP was 15 of 21 for 220 yds with 1 TD, 1 INT, and 5 sacks. Cards had 373yds in total offense and 36 minutes of possession time. Superficial, I know. But, what was the real difference between these 2 games? Rams game we had 2 forced fumbles, 1 int. And the Rams scored on 2 of 8 drives in the first half. Cards game we had 0 forced fumbles, 0 int. And the Cards scored on 4 of 4 drives in the first half. So what should this tell us? JP, although he looked erratic at times and made a some mistakes, did not lose this game. The defenses failure to stop the Rams on 3rd down, allowing them to drive down the field and score, lost us this game. Does this mean I want JP to start? No. Does this mean Trent should be our starter? No. Does this mean it's nonsensical talking about QB play when the defense refused to stop the slant pass? Yes. About 8 minutes of TOP and about 70 yards of plays that didn't all come on 1 play. Thus sustaining drives and helping the defense out by keeping them off the field. That's the big difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebug Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 But Trent gets the L for the Cards game. Yep, pretty sure there wasn't much he could do about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 About 8 minutes of TOP and about 70 yards of plays that didn't all come on 1 play. Thus sustaining drives and helping the defense out by keeping them off the field. That's the big difference. That's one way to spin it. Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 That's one way to spin it. Yes. If by spin, you mean presenting facts, then yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 ok im done.... Finally!! I don't get it fellow Bills fans. JP is a one trick pony, the long ball king. He'll hit one, maybe two a game then get sacked five times and throw to the other team. Yes the defense sucked, but JP couldn't keep our offense on the field. They got gassed pretty quickly. You can't blame him for losing the game, but you can understand why he's on the bench. I don't think there would have been as many sacks with TE in there. His quicker release would have nullified some. I do blame him for holding the ball too long and not having good field awareness. These guys want to say he did great for 3 quarters. BFD, it's the fourth quarter that matters and evidently Royal's fumble seems to have some great significance here. I guess his fumble is the reason JP sucked in the fourth quarter. As I pointed out before he just can't handle the pressure. Last years Jacksonville game was a make or break game for him, and he knew it. This game was really important for him if he wanted to get a chance to start somewhere next year. He had a lot to gain from a great performance instead he chokes in the fourth quarter and turns his back walks away from Schonert on the sideline. Nice way to make your case. I'm not saying it was totally his fault I'm saying he was a big factor in the loss. IMO, the game would have been closer with Edwards in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 If by spin, you mean presenting facts, then yes. No I presented the facts. You formed an opinion based on those facts. Your opinion was that the big difference was "about 8 minutes of TOP and about 70 yards of plays that didn't all come on 1 play. Thus sustaining drives and helping the defense out by keeping them off the field." My opinion based on those facts was "the defenses failure to stop the Rams on 3rd down, allowing them to drive down the field and score, lost us this game". Essentially you're saying that our defense is best when they're not on the field? After yesterday's game, I would be inclined to agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 Ok, lets see if anyone agrees with this: TE makes faster reads and gets the ball out more quickly. IMO, that would have led to fewer sacks and more completions that would have made the defense back off the line and make the RB's more productive. It also would have kept the D off the field more. It would have been a shootout because the D wasn't playing well but TE would have kept up with the points better and wouldn't have choked in the fourth quarter. If you accept that then it's not out of the question to give JP a lot of blame for this loss. His pass to Evans isn't anything TE couldn't have done in fact he's done it with Lee several times this year. IMO, with JP in there the Cards were able to stack the line and pass rush continuously and that also helped in stopping the run. [sarc]Anyone who doesn't agree with me is a retard who knows nothing about football because my intellect is soooooo superior to anyone else's here. [/sarc] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 If you accept that then it's not out of the question to give JP a lot of blame for this loss. His pass to Evans isn't anything TE couldn't have done in fact he's done it with Lee several times this year. It's as stupid now, as when it was said yesterday. Wrap it up any way you want, the D (and The Senator, of course) lost this game. Move on, for Christ's sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 It's as stupid now, as when it was said yesterday. Wrap it up any way you want, the D (and The Senator, of course) lost this game. Move on, for Christ's sake. We'll have to agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 Ok, lets see if anyone agrees with this: TE makes faster reads and gets the ball out more quickly. IMO, that would have led to fewer sacks and more completions that would have made the defense back off the line and make the RB's more productive. It also would have kept the D off the field more. It would have been a shootout because the D wasn't playing well but TE would have kept up with the points better and wouldn't have choked in the fourth quarter. If you accept that then it's not out of the question to give JP a lot of blame for this loss. His pass to Evans isn't anything TE couldn't have done in fact he's done it with Lee several times this year. IMO, with JP in there the Cards were able to stack the line and pass rush continuously and that also helped in stopping the run. [sarc]Anyone who doesn't agree with me is a retard who knows nothing about football because my intellect is soooooo superior to anyone else's here. [/sarc] After replaying the game, it looked obvious to me that any QB in there would have been getting his butt up off the turf several times yesterday. If Trent had played the whole game, we'd probably be talking today about the lousy game he had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 After replaying the game, it looked obvious to me that any QB in there would have been getting his butt up off the turf several times yesterday. If Trent had played the whole game, we'd probably be talking today about the lousy game he had. Obviously I disagree and point to the play TE was injured on to show the difference between the speed of his decision making vs. JP's. If that happened while JP was in there there is no question in my mind he would have taken a sack. I guess some people are making good points on both sides of this and as I said we'll have to agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRW Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 It also would have kept the D off the field more. It would have been a shootout because the D wasn't playing well but TE would have kept up with the points better and wouldn't have choked in the fourth quarter. The D wasn't playing well? If by "not playing well" you mean "performed so abysmally that only a Jim Kelly-led Bills offense could keep up with the scoring" then I agree with you. If that's not what you mean then I think we were watching different games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizell Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 It's as stupid now, as when it was said yesterday. Wrap it up any way you want, the D (and The Senator, of course) lost this game. Move on, for Christ's sake. in some people's minds, trent can turn water into wine, walk on water, and cure cancer. it's no use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyPage Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 Obviously I disagree and point to the play TE was injured on to show the difference between the speed of his decision making vs. JP's. If that happened while JP was in there there is no question in my mind he would have taken a sack. I guess some people are making good points on both sides of this and as I said we'll have to agree to disagree. I think everyone agrees that that is why Edwards is in there as the starter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 Obviously I disagree and point to the play TE was injured on to show the difference between the speed of his decision making vs. JP's. If that happened while JP was in there there is no question in my mind he would have taken a sack. I guess some people are making good points on both sides of this and as I said we'll have to agree to disagree. I give Trent Credit for completing his last pass under pressure. On that play, Hardy is wide open over the middle right in front of Trent. Not the case on most of the plays where Losman was sacked, although on one play JP missed a hot read receiver open to the right. Trent would have taken a beating yesterday as well IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 I think everyone agrees that that is why Edwards is in there as the starter. It is too bad Trent got injured yeaterday. The game was played in a Dome & Trent would most likely had a good game. The way the defense played though the Bills would still have lost most likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 The first fumble. The Bills were in a hole to start. Indirectly... The false start penalty and delay of game penalty... And numerous barely got it off plays. JPL does NOT bring stability to the game. He is like a broken metronome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyPage Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 JP played himself into the #3 spot. I would rather see Hamden in there. He'a obviously is done in Buffalo. If it wasn't decided already this game was the straw that broke the camel's back. And the question that I would ask Losman is....You implied that it was the former offensive coordinators JP? Not that he himself lost the game, but he looked like the exact same player he has always been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 The first fumble. The Bills were in a hole to start. Indirectly... The false start penalty and delay of game penalty... And numerous barely got it off plays. JPL does NOT bring stability to the game. He is like a broken metronome. Holy sh*t, you're actually going to blame that fumble on JP? It was Melvin Fowler's fault, JP was being tackled before he could even hand the ball off to Marshawn. This is ridiculous. I guess we have our official scapegoat, and it's unfortunate because JP is a nice guy and, more importantly, an above average backup QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 He'a obviously is done in Buffalo.If it wasn't decided already this game was the straw that broke the camel's back. And the question that I would ask Losman is....You implied that it was the former offensive coordinators JP? Not that he himself lost the game, but he looked like the exact same player he has always been. If Trent can't go week 6, or is injured again later in the year, JP will play despite what you HATERS think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts