Alphadawg7 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 (edited) Not saying I agree or disagree with this article, just found it interesting read on ESPN.com http://myespn.go.com/blogs/afceast/0-4-342...man-in-KC-.html Edited November 20, 2008 by Lori title change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 I dont agree with it at all Losman is gone at the end of the season......we have to think long term here Trent Edwards IS the QB of the bills.....in the offseason we should bring in a vet to push him.....but he is the guy If we are going to miss the playoffs we are going to do it even with JP at QB......so we might as well back Trent up and let him learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devldog131 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 If you read carefully, you'll notice he never said start Losman, he just said have Edwards "on a short leash against the Chiefs." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 If you read carefully, you'll notice he never said start Losman, he just said have Edwards "on a short leash against the Chiefs." That makes no sense because Trent could learn a lot by throwing picks and dropping fumbles all over Arrowhead. Imagine how useful that experience will be in years to come. If Trent were to receive a fabricated injury however, now we're talking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EZC-Boston Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 JP! He may throw INTs but he was always good for a big pass to Lee once a game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauderswr80 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Good points and all but at the wrong time. If JP had another year on the contract maybe, just to see if we can get some trade bait. But Losman is gone after this year. May as well see if Trent is really the guy for us, let him play rest of the year with NO LEASH. Meaning air the ball out, throw more. See what he can do. Cant hold back now...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 I think the article is just written in a way to suggest that the Bills are screwed this year. He basically states how bad Trent is and has been playing, and then he states how much people don't like JP. He makes absolutely no case for JP to start. So if our starter is sucking, and our backup is a 'daring choice who is gone next season', then long story short...we're screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyT Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 If you read carefully, you'll notice he never said start Losman, he just said have Edwards "on a short leash against the Chiefs." You don't even need to read carefully. It doesn't say "start JP" anywhere in that article. It doesn't offer an opinion one way or another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devldog131 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 You don't even need to read carefully. It doesn't say "start JP" anywhere in that article. It doesn't offer an opinion one way or another. I know, but you really have to spell it out for some of the people around here. They could read "The Raven" and think Edgar Allen Poe wants JP to start. They just read whatever they want out of wherever the feel like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 You don't even need to read carefully. It doesn't say "start JP" anywhere in that article. It doesn't offer an opinion one way or another. It doesn't ? "His teammates don't have the luxury of allowing him to work through his problems on the game field. Buffalo is entering do-or-die time. Their playoff hopes are already dim. They need a spark, and Edwards has shown no indication he's ready to provide one." "The Bills are investing in Edwards as the quarterback of the future. But if they don't have him on a short leash against the Chiefs, then they're already working on 2009." Even if he didn't type those specific words, he is pretty much advocating exactly that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted November 19, 2008 Author Share Posted November 19, 2008 I know, but you really have to spell it out for some of the people around here. They could read "The Raven" and think Edgar Allen Poe wants JP to start. They just read whatever they want out of wherever the feel like. geezus...you people take things too literally...I am not going to write a paragraph description on the article in the title...I know he doesnt say bench Trent and start JP...but he does say put him on a short leash and start JP if Trent doesnt recover, maybe even at KC... So, the subscript for the title says "start JP" because he is suggesting that if Trent can not play through this after facing two horrid pass defenses, then they should make a change. So, yes, he is not saying bench Trent right now, although he suggests it is something to consider, but he is saying go with JP if Trent can not play his way out...which so far he has gotten worse each week. I am not saying I agree or disagree, just thought it was an interesting article...but most of you cant get past the title of this post to even discuss the article...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyT Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 It doesn't ?"His teammates don't have the luxury of allowing him to work through his problems on the game field. Buffalo is entering do-or-die time. Their playoff hopes are already dim. They need a spark, and Edwards has shown no indication he's ready to provide one." "The Bills are investing in Edwards as the quarterback of the future. But if they don't have him on a short leash against the Chiefs, then they're already working on 2009." Even if he didn't type those specific words, he is pretty much advocating exactly that. Alright, let's play this game and reverse it... Tim Graham says Losman shouldn't start against KC! Read what he says about him for proof! "Losman's name is met with shrieks throughout Western New York. He's maddening to watch, and there's a general perception in the weathered, blue-collar region that Losman has been a pouter since losing his job to Edwards. To insert Losman now would be daring. He's an unrestricted free agent after this season and almost certain to split on an organization he feels jilted by." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyT Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 ...but he does say put him on a short leash and start JP if Trent doesnt recover, maybe even at KC... No he doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted November 19, 2008 Author Share Posted November 19, 2008 It doesn't ?"His teammates don't have the luxury of allowing him to work through his problems on the game field. Buffalo is entering do-or-die time. Their playoff hopes are already dim. They need a spark, and Edwards has shown no indication he's ready to provide one." "The Bills are investing in Edwards as the quarterback of the future. But if they don't have him on a short leash against the Chiefs, then they're already working on 2009." Even if he didn't type those specific words, he is pretty much advocating exactly that. EXACTLY!!!!!!!! Someone just posted "sometimes you really have to spell it out for people around here" in referring to him saying the article doesnt say bench him...so thank you for spelling it out for that guy who clearly needs things spelled out for him as the article suggests several times going with JP if Trent cant play his way back (which so far he is not)... I am pulling for Trent, but I have to admit, I was screaming for JP to finish that game Mon when it was evident Trent was not going to pull the trigger...We needed that win big time, our season may have depended on it, and I wanted the guy who gave us the best chance to win at that moment...and I dont care how much you love Trent and hate JP, Trent was not that guy Monday night for most the game when he became gun shy... And enough already with the JP makes more mistakes than Trent as Trent has 3 TD's to 8 INT's in last 3 games plus fumble losses... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted November 19, 2008 Author Share Posted November 19, 2008 Alright, let's play this game and reverse it... Tim Graham says Losman shouldn't start against KC! Read what he says about him for proof! "Losman's name is met with shrieks throughout Western New York. He's maddening to watch, and there's a general perception in the weathered, blue-collar region that Losman has been a pouter since losing his job to Edwards. To insert Losman now would be daring. He's an unrestricted free agent after this season and almost certain to split on an organization he feels jilted by." you must be kidding...geezus...you are really fishing here...start being a Bills fan instead of a Trent fan and you will see this guys point by saying Trent should be on a short leash...because he earned that short leash with his terrible play the last 3 weeks. More importantly, he lost his edge and confidence Monday night...a QB who does that doesnt give his team a chance to win is not the guy that should be under center...hence the short leash... This forum is hilarious...rather than discuss the article, you all just argue the linguistics of what words he actually used because you are in such disbelief someone would even suggest playing JP... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Alright, let's play this game and reverse it... Tim Graham says Losman shouldn't start against KC! Read what he says about him for proof! "Losman's name is met with shrieks throughout Western New York. He's maddening to watch, and there's a general perception in the weathered, blue-collar region that Losman has been a pouter since losing his job to Edwards. To insert Losman now would be daring. He's an unrestricted free agent after this season and almost certain to split on an organization he feels jilted by." Sure we can. "His teammates don't have the luxury of allowing him to work through his problems on the game field." Meaning - get someone in who will allow Trent to work through his mental funk off the field. Implication = play JP "Buffalo is entering do-or-die time. Their playoff hopes are already dim. They need a spark, and Edwards has shown no indication he's ready to provide one." Meaning - Trent will not provide that spark, so get someone in who can. Implication - play JP "Losman's name is met with shrieks throughout Western New York. He's maddening to watch, and there's a general perception in the weathered, blue-collar region that Losman has been a pouter since losing his job to Edwards." Meaning - fans hate to have to think about JP in there. Implication - nothing "To insert Losman now would be daring. He's an unrestricted free agent after this season and almost certain to split on an organization he feels jilted by." Meaning - putting in JP now would be bold and different from the conservative approach, he is gone anyway. Implication - nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted November 19, 2008 Author Share Posted November 19, 2008 Sure we can."His teammates don't have the luxury of allowing him to work through his problems on the game field." Meaning - get someone in who will allow Trent to work through his mental funk off the field. Implication = play JP "Buffalo is entering do-or-die time. Their playoff hopes are already dim. They need a spark, and Edwards has shown no indication he's ready to provide one." Meaning - Trent will not provide that spark, so get someone in who can. Implication - play JP "Losman's name is met with shrieks throughout Western New York. He's maddening to watch, and there's a general perception in the weathered, blue-collar region that Losman has been a pouter since losing his job to Edwards." Meaning - fans hate to have to think about JP in there. Implication - nothing "To insert Losman now would be daring. He's an unrestricted free agent after this season and almost certain to split on an organization he feels jilted by." Meaning - putting in JP now would be bold and different from the conservative approach, he is gone anyway. Implication - nothing. Watch...as clearly as you just spelled that out some JP hater is going to post some other absurd post of how the article states nothing about playing JP... Its like they have JP HATE VISION GOGGLES on and cant for a second even consider that someone out there might just suggest putting him on the field... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 [This is an automated response] As a courtesy to the other board members, please use more descriptive subject lines. The topic starter can edit the subject line to make it more appropriate. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 If we had kept JP on a short leash in his second season, he never would have finished the second season. JP is gone at the end of the year regardless of what happens. Notwithstanding these past few weeks, Trent has shown that he can be a better QB in this league than JP will ever be. FWIW, we should stick with him. I am confident that he will work it out. He was bouncing back after throwing those picks in the last game. He is a smart kid. I am not ready to throw the baby out with the bath water. To all you JP guys that were complaining that JP just needed more time last year, don't you think that Trent should be given as much time that as we gave JP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 To all you JP guys that were complaining that JP just needed more time last year, don't you think that Trent should be given as much time that as we gave JP. I know you didn't direct this post at me but - My dissection of the article and its implication was not meant to imply my support for benching Trent. I am on the fence regarding your statement. Last year, Trent played well in the beginning and faded away during the last few games coinciding with the weather getting bad. Conventional wisdom was to stick with him and he will improve. So we said that the season is sunk anyway so why not give Trent some experience which will serve us well during this season. Well, he did appear to improve at the beginning of this year but has badly regressed. We seem to be in the same exact spot as we were at this time last year albeit a bit better on record. To stick my neck out a bit, I would start Trent against KC and if he still looks shell-shocked and confused in the first half then try putting in JP for the rest of that game (only). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts