stuckincincy Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 I like Thurman Thomas's comment on WGR " The only problem with Trent Edwards in Buffalo is......he is not Jim Kelly, and fans will always hold every QB in Buffalo to that standard" He's right. TE doesn't act like a gunslinger, that will now and then air it out despite the odds against, despite what the sidelines called. I don't get to see many Bills games - but TE's abilities to date, and the Bills' passing strategies seem to be fairly easy to scheme against. Perhaps Thomas delivered a backhand compliment?...dunno. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Michael Koenen's mom called my brother and told him that the Falcons were going to franchise tag her son because she remembered he was a Bills fan from a chance meeting at the Ferndale Starbucks. I guess there weren't many guys named Oedipus in the phone book. Oedipus was 9th string on the Trojans too. Funny stuff. Doubt it's gonna earn AlpoDawg's "Great Post" Seal of Approval, but who the f%3K cares? It made me laugh out loud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted February 12, 2009 Author Share Posted February 12, 2009 Funny stuff. Doubt it's gonna earn AlpoDawg's "Great Post" Seal of Approval, but who the f%3K cares? It made me laugh out loud. lol, another typical post from the "The Janitor"...it was only a matter of time...surprise it took you this long to chime in, work must have had you all tied up cleaning up a Category 5 mess in the crapper... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 I don't care if we put an orange cone at QB! Fix the lines and the rest will follow. That's not what history (at least recent) shows. For most every unsuccessful team in the sal ca era the common denominator is poor QB play. And the reasons are obvious. Your QB touches the ball on every single play on offense so therefore has the greatest impact on success (or failure) on that side of the ball. Further, getting a top QB is the single toughest chore facing a NFL franchise. Getting a stud OL isn't going to make a lousy QB suddenly good. If it were so then all of those crappy franchises over the years that suffered with lousy QB play would simply have drafted and/or signed top OL and be finished with the losing. Now, don't get me wrong, a top OL can improve upon a QB's performance but it won't polish a QB turd (or orange cone) into a jewel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grammer_police Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Oh look, it's another Trent bash thread from Betadog. Yawn. No, it's a well imformed, researched post. Unlike your's. Dick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grammer_police Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 First, my name is "BillsVet" because I am a military veteran and obviously a Bills fan. The only season since 1988 that I missed was 2004 when I was deployed. You got yourself off to a bad start on this board by quoting sources that you attempted in vain to prove. So much so that it came down to your "proof" being a pilot television show and whether or not it was on IMDB. Pretty lame if you ask me. Your inside source was allegedly Matt Cassel's mother, which isn't much of a source on anyone but her son. Regardless of whether you like it, Trent Edwards is the QB of this team. He doesn't miss on draft picks, he doesn't sign free agents, he doesn't hire lame duck coaches who never should have been hired after failing in Chicago. He doesn't hire OC's who've never been in the position and who never would have been without Buffalo. He doesn't put the game plan together, but he is an integral part of this team. You want a QB with less than 2 seasons of NFL starts to play like an All Pro. When you refer to QB play, you're making a veiled reference against TE and we all know it. In the short time you've been here, you've managed to alienate a lot of people, particularly those who don't wholeheartedly agree with your tired rationale. I'll be critical of TE when he has a bad game. The first quarter of the Cleveland MNF game was about as bad as a QB can play. He had a lack of confidence, but his rookie OC and rookie QB coach did nothing to react to the Browns defense. People criticize TE as the checkdown man, and there were guys open, but try playing QB with 6-7 guys in coverage on every down. I didn't care for the way you introduced yourself onto this board. Get over yourself. So just because you "served" in the war you have a right to be an ass? I dont "care" for the way you represent the troops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Ok...I've given it some thought...IT'S NOT THE QB. Actually its not the TE or defensive rush. Its not the safety or coach. Listen....ITS THE SCOREBOARD!!!! YEAH...after most of the games its the same thing. The frigging scoreboard gives the other team more points. Lets get a new scoreboad and there are eight wins right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Ok...I've given it some thought...IT'S NOT THE QB. Actually its not the TE or defensive rush. Its not the safety or coach. Listen....ITS THE SCOREBOARD!!!! YEAH...after most of the games its the same thing. The frigging scoreboard gives the other team more points. Lets get a new scoreboad and there are eight wins right there. LOL..great post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPicc2114 Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Stats dont always tell the true story dude... What if Trent had some wide receivers?? What if he had a TE?? What if he not gotten a concussion?? It is multiple factors contributing into a collective effort for Crappiness. Tom Brady wasnt throwing for 50 TDs when Wes Welker and Randy Moss werent there. So my suggestion is go find something else to do than to waste your time digging up useless stats that mean nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebug Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 So just because you "served" in the war you have a right to be an ass? I dont "care" for the way you represent the troops. Just, Just, you say just, show some respect face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 well, at least we don't have to put up with JP "Lost"man anymore!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timba Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 That's not what history (at least recent) shows. For most every unsuccessful team in the sal ca era the common denominator is poor QB play. And the reasons are obvious. Your QB touches the ball on every single play on offense so therefore has the greatest impact on success (or failure) on that side of the ball. Further, getting a top QB is the single toughest chore facing a NFL franchise. Getting a stud OL isn't going to make a lousy QB suddenly good. If it were so then all of those crappy franchises over the years that suffered with lousy QB play would simply have drafted and/or signed top OL and be finished with the losing. Now, don't get me wrong, a top OL can improve upon a QB's performance but it won't polish a QB turd (or orange cone) into a jewel. I'm pretty sure that's why they've remained crappy for so long. They keep looking for the one position fix, the QB, when they needed to spend the money and draft picks on decent linemen! For example, you pick up a rookie QB who, over the course of his first nfl season, has less than 2 seconds to throw on every down due to virtually no blocking. He's not going to have very good numbers. It will lead to the defense not respecting the pass because receivers don't have time to get open. Which in turn can lead to defenses stopping the run by packing a bunch in the box as there is no pass offense. That sounds kind of familiar doesn't it? The entire offense seems to be in disarray, but the line is the problem! Poor QB play is a symptom of the bigger problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 well, at least we don't have to put up with JP "Lost"man anymore!! hahaha...LOL...great post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Ok...I've given it some thought...IT'S NOT THE QB. Actually its not the TE or defensive rush. Its not the safety or coach. Listen....ITS THE SCOREBOARD!!!! YEAH...after most of the games its the same thing. The frigging scoreboard gives the other team more points. Lets get a new scoreboad and there are eight wins right there. I blame the field. The scoreboard wouldn't have to give the other team more points if the end zones didn't let them in so often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 I blame the field. The scoreboard wouldn't have to give the other team more points if the end zones didn't let them in so often. I'm smelling a lawsuit on grounds of discrimination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 I blame the field. The scoreboard wouldn't have to give the other team more points if the end zones didn't let them in so often. When did the jumbotron go in? 1996. When was our last playoff win? 1995. It's the jumbotron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stenbar Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 I will go along with part of this..No doubt if we had a Peyton Manning Tom Brady our record would indeed be better..They could overcome the coaching an talent deficiencies of this poorly run franchise..I hope Trent turns into that but the cards are stacked against him..He isnt blessed with superior physical talent and doesnt seem to have the football sense of Peyton..He looks like he is gonna be a average NFL qb who could win with a well oiled machine from top too bottom..Problem is this franchise is a joke from our (lol) hall of fame owner to our idiotic coaching staff include that with our mental midget scouting staff and you have a disaster..Trent cant overcome all that he could howeverstep into a well run team and succeed.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 That's not what history (at least recent) shows. For most every unsuccessful team in the sal ca era the common denominator is poor QB play. And the reasons are obvious. Your QB touches the ball on every single play on offense so therefore has the greatest impact on success (or failure) on that side of the ball. Further, getting a top QB is the single toughest chore facing a NFL franchise. Getting a stud OL isn't going to make a lousy QB suddenly good. If it were so then all of those crappy franchises over the years that suffered with lousy QB play would simply have drafted and/or signed top OL and be finished with the losing. Now, don't get me wrong, a top OL can improve upon a QB's performance but it won't polish a QB turd (or orange cone) into a jewel. So, by this theory Daunte Culpepper is the guy that held the Lions back to 0-16 but was also the guy that was good enough to lead the Vikings to a #1 seed in the salary cap era. Trent Dilfer was the guy that held the Bucs back but led the Ravens to a Super Bowl victory. Brett Favre won a Super Bowl in Green Bay but also held them back in seasons they stunk as he held back the Jets. Jeff Garcia has been to 4 Pro Bowls and led the 49ers to the playoffs as well as Tampa but held back 5 teams including the 49ers and Tampa. Rex Grossman dragged the Bears to a Super Bowl and has also held the Bears back ever since. Neal O'Donnell led the Steelers and held back the Jets. Bledsoe led the Patriots and held back 3 teams including the Patriots. Kurt Warner led the Rams and Cardinals to the Super Bowl but held the New York Giants back. I can go on... Football is a team game. The modern game is about coaching as much as it is about players. In the old NFL, teams lined up 11 on 11 and the better team prevailed. If you had Jim Brown, you had a guy that was physically dominant, you gave him the ball, he ran over everyone, and you won games and championships. Now, talent is much more evenly distributed and evolved. (If you don't believe it look at all the worst-to-firsts, late season runs, and teams that nobody predicts doing very well over the last few years -- indeed, the Bills are the anomaly in that they are one of the few dysfunctional organizations that seems to find a way to blow it each and every year.) Modern football is about match-ups, exploiting weaknesses, game planning, systems, play calling, sets, formations, packages, clock management, proper technique, keeping the team focused. And, guess what? The QB doesn't do any of that. That's why you see guys like Grossman, Johnson, Delhomme, Gannon, Dilfer, Collins, Chandler, McNair, Bledsoe, O'Donnell, and Humphries "drag their teams" all the way to the Super Bowl in the salary cap era. It's why winning teams and franchises that stay in the hunt invest in and pay for good front offices and coaches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 So just because you "served" in the war you have a right to be an ass? I dont "care" for the way you represent the troops. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries. Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time. That's how soldiers handle people like yourself. At least from the top of castles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 That's not what history (at least recent) shows. For most every unsuccessful team in the sal ca era the common denominator is poor QB play. And the reasons are obvious. Your QB touches the ball on every single play on offense so therefore has the greatest impact on success (or failure) on that side of the ball. Further, getting a top QB is the single toughest chore facing a NFL franchise. Getting a stud OL isn't going to make a lousy QB suddenly good. If it were so then all of those crappy franchises over the years that suffered with lousy QB play would simply have drafted and/or signed top OL and be finished with the losing. Now, don't get me wrong, a top OL can improve upon a QB's performance but it won't polish a QB turd (or orange cone) into a jewel. Yep, excellent post. The lack of importance place on the qb position on this board is mind boggling. I have often said, find a good young qb that you could build your team around. But everybody around here likes to make excuses for our dismal qb performances over the years. Oh, we dont have a dominant line, we do not have a top flight #2 receiver, we do not have a back that can rush for 2,000 yards blah, blah, blah. It is a qb driven league. I think we have a good one in Edwards. I hope so because if he plays like he did for the most part in 08, we have no chance of a winning record next year. I have seen enough good things in him to lead me to believe he will improve this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts