Heard on ESPN radio/Van Pelt Bills interested in acquiring Cassell

[Alphadawg7]

Seems to me if the Patriots thought that Cassell was REALLY FRIGGIN' GOOD there is no way they would trade him to the Bills. And if the Patriots didn't think he was REALLY FRIGGIN' GOOD, they'd love to trade him to the Bills. So why would the Bills want him in a trade from the Patriots.

 

You lose sight of how much they have to pay Cassel and Brady...they have to trade one for financial reasons. Not to mention they will be getting a lot back in value. They are not going to keep both Cassel and Brady...so they either trade Cassel, or pay him $14 million for one year and lose him for nothing next year...

 

So the fact they are willing to trade him is NO indication on what they think of him and a silly rationale. They have the best QB in football on their team in Brady who seems to be right on track in his recovery. They have to move one or the other...Brady is young enough that its a no brainer to keep him.

[Ramius]

Cassel got sacked 47 times behind the pats* OL, widely regarded as one of the better ones in the biz. He can't throw the ball downfield.

 

Just say NO.

[Alphadawg7]

Cassel got sacked 47 times behind the pats* OL, widely regarded as one of the better ones in the biz. He can't throw the ball downfield.

 

Just say NO.

 

Pats O Line wasnt considered one of the best in football last year...it struggled all year and it battled injuries.

[Ramius]

Pats O Line wasnt considered one of the best in football last year...it struggled all year and it battled injuries.

 

Which is why i didn't say best. But i dont want a QB tat took 47 sacks behind an OL that was better than ours.

[H2o]

Everyone on this board knows I'm not a Trent lover but I would rather have him QB the Bills for the next 3 or 4 years than make this trade.

Oh no. I had called Trent "TrINT" for months, but I wold rather have him than give up that much for Cassell as well. God knows I wwould be terribly disappointed if this took place. We, AGAIN, would be helping the Pats* situation this year and setting them up for success in the future. By the way, HAVEN'T WE LEARNED FROM OUR PREVIOUS TRADES FOR PATRIOTS PLAYERS YET?!?!?!?!?! I mean Milloy, Bledsoe, and now maybe Cassell? The Patriots would keep him if they thought he would hurt them somewhere else, especially keep him out of the AFC East.

[MattM]

Pats O Line wasnt considered one of the best in football last year...it struggled all year and it battled injuries.

 

Actually, no, it didn't. If you look closely, you'll see that most of their starters played and started all 16 games this year. The only guy who missed "significant" playing time was Neal, who missed 7 games, but still played 9 IIRC. I think one other starter missed 2-3 games (Kaczur, Ithink). The other three played and started all 16.

[Beerball]

No.

 

Peters is a known commodity. His 08 season was lackluster, but the skill-set is there to be an outstanding LT.

 

OTOH, I'm not convinced of Cassel's ability to be a franchise QB. He rarely threw the ball more than 15 yards downfield and if people think Edwards' arm isn't great, they'll feel the same about Cassel. And he won't have Randy Moss and Wes Welker to throw to wherever he goes. Nor Belichick and Brady to guide him when things go wrong.

OK, I get ya. You want to retain a player who performed subpar in 2008, but you don't want a player who blew away expectations in 2008. Perfect sense now that I break it down.

[SKOOBY]

SKOOB, how did your inside sources not give you the heads up? Make some calls and let us know if this is legit.

 

LOL, been busy.

[Alphadawg7]

Which is why i didn't say best. But i dont want a QB tat took 47 sacks behind an OL that was better than ours.

 

28 of those came in first 8 games though...remember, he hadnt started since High School...takes a little time to get some feel for the pocket back. After that, he only had one real bad sack game the rest of the year and that was when he was sacked 5 times against the SB champion Steelers...

 

The sack stat on him could be better, but its another area he showed improvement on as the season progressed.

 

3700 yards, 21 TD's and only 11 INT's in his first season as a QB since High School is still relatively impressive, especially when you consider Trent Edwards has only 18 TD's and has 18INT's in his 2 seasons (24 games).

 

Cassel also had 3 games over 300 yards passing, and even 2 games over 400 yards passing. Edwards has never passed for more than 300 yards ever. Cassel also had 5 games with 3 or more TD's where Edwards has done that only once, and has only 4 games where he threw even 2 TD's yet he has played 8 more games than Cassel.

 

So, I don't get how people on here think Edwards is such a stud and lock to be great and that Cassel is such a bumb. Add in that Cassel dealt with some OL injuries and had all the injuries to his running backs and TE's, and its even more impressive.

 

Not saying he's a lock to be great, but in my eyes that is still a lot of potential.

[Alphadawg7]

OK, I get ya. You want to retain a player who performed subpar in 2008, but you don't want a player who blew away expectations in 2008. Perfect sense now that I break it down.

 

Nice...

 

Peters has had one good season in 5 (and it wasnt his most recent where he was terrible in pass coverage)

 

Cassel shattered all expectations and actually kept getting better, including 3 games over 350 yards passing (2 of which were over 400 yards) in the last half the season...

[VOR]

Which is why i didn't say best. But i dont want a QB tat took 47 sacks behind an OL that was better than ours.

Exactly. I also don't want a QB that can beat the bad teams and lose to the good teams, for $14M a year and a 1st and 3rd round pick, again with a better offense than what the Bills had.

[BillsVet]

OK, I get ya. You want to retain a player who performed subpar in 2008, but you don't want a player who blew away expectations in 2008. Perfect sense now that I break it down.

 

I earlier said Cassel benefited from playing in the NE system which featured a future HOF coach, along with receivers in Moss and Welker. He's had the ability to sit behind and learn from Tom Brady for 3 whole seasons before playing full time.

 

OTOH, an offensive left tackle will never have the table set for them in this fashion. Many times, Peters was left on an island and even though his 08 season was lackluster, he's still a cornerstone of this franchise. Given the dearth of quality LT's in today's NFL who can neutralize RDE's, trading him is a latent admission that they don't want to pay.

 

If you trade Peters and get picks, that does almost nothing to help win this year. And trading picks for Cassel to NE of all teams hurts this team long term, unless of course you like QB controversies.

[Magox]

Thank God that this trade won't ever happen. One of the area's where the Bills brass has it right in is in the QB position. I'm very looking forward in seeing what Trent does in his second full year. I'm also looking forward in what Steve Johnson develops into and I'm hopeful that we will add on to our team through FA and the draft.

[Beerball]

Thank God that this trade won't ever happen. One of the area's where the Bills brass has it right in is in the QB position. I'm very looking forward in seeing what Trent does in his second full year. I'm also looking forward in what Steve Johnson develops into and I'm hopeful that we will add on to our team through FA and the draft.

It's not going to be his second full year, he missed time in 08 so technically he's still a rookie.

[fairweather fan]

Although I am a Tom Brady fan, I believe that Edwards with a good line and a coach (any coach) will be a better keep than getting Cassel. I never remember Genus Bill drafting high for a quarterback, he seems to like line choices in the draft, even in the Browns days, which gave the Cleveland/Baltimore team a head start for the future. Cassel was the subject of speculation until the final cut day that he would not be with the Patriots in 08. What I have seen in limited instances of watching Edwards, was that he would do very well on the Patriots, given good health.

 

I admire Cassel, but I do believe that both he and Tom Brady had the one thing that Belecheck requires, a great work and practice ethic. Brady did not have the long ball his first year as a pro, yet now, with Moss receiving, is considered the most accurate in getting the ball down the field. The hundred million quarterback you got from the Patriots had a helicopter idling in the parking lot on the last game of the year in 2000, waiting to take him to a private jet going back home to Washington. I am suprized that he did not do well with Dallas, as both he and TO believed that they were calling the plays.

[Alphadawg7]

The thing I find the most interesting here is that Cassel is being called a systems QB by the same people complaining and defending Trent by saying Trent has struggled because of the system he plays in under DJ. So, wouldnt then that in turn make Trent a systems QB if he needs to be in the right system to excel?

[Magox]

The thing I find the most interesting here is that Cassel is being called a systems QB by the same people complaining and defending Trent by saying Trent has struggled because of the system he plays in under DJ. So, wouldnt then that in turn make Trent a systems QB if he needs to be in the right system to excel?

I would have to say that %50 of your posts has something negative to do with Trent. We all get that you don't like him and wish he were gone. No matter what undeniable stats he has that has shown that he is much better then the majority of qb's in their first 20 games, you will never acknowledge them. That's fine, it's your opinion. But I have a question for you. will you continue to criticize him through out the entire off season any time anyone has something positive to say about him?

[Buffaloed in Pa]

Thats just plain Stupid. Our line and receivers vs the Pats. Yeah he will look just great. Take your lumps with Trent,we would be better in the long run. Put Trent on the Pats and see his numbers vs Cassel. Take it Buffalo, another BURN job by Belicheat.

[Alphadawg7]

I would have to say that %50 of your posts has something negative to do with Trent. We all get that you don't like him and wish he were gone. No matter what undeniable stats he has that has shown that he is much better then the majority of qb's in their first 20 games, you will never acknowledge them. That's fine, it's your opinion. But I have a question for you. will you continue to criticize him through out the entire off season any time anyone has something positive to say about him?

 

I have said repeatedly that I hope Trent develops and will continue to cheer him on. Those post you refer to dealt with the question at hand of why we have not been very good the last 2 years and they were not directed at just Trent, they were post about the combined effort of our QB's.

 

Its mind boggling the lengths people will go to prove Trent hasnt been a problem, when he clearly has. I dont blame him, I mean he is a young QB. But young QB or not, it doesnt change the RESULT on the field thus far...the FACT remains, UNTIL the QB position plays better (regardless who it is), we won't be a very good team.

 

My post here was one of amazement at the irony of the very people defending Trent by blaming the system he plays in for his struggles, are now saying they dont want Cassel becuase he is a systems QB. But by blaming the system for Trents struggles in Buffalo, you are essentially labeling Trent a systems QB too...

 

I just fine it funny how a guy can come out of nowhere, put up pretty good stats, lead his team to 11 wins despite having no running game, a shaky line, and injuries to all his Tight Ends just to see the posts here say he is no good while they defend Trent to the death when Trent hasnt been very good yet...

 

And as far as your comment about not acknowledging these other QB's in the NFL historys past you say Trent has better numbers than in their first 20 games, its because it is pointless. I can name 10 QB's in the NFL right now who had better stats then Trent by a lot, even Derek Anderson. We can each make a list on both sides of that argument, although I bet you mine will be longer, but either way its pointless.

 

Its so funny how if you analyze Trents play, and draw the inevitable conclusion that to this point it hasnt been good enough, you are somehow labeled a Trent hater. Seems to me like the truth hurts a bit to people who support Trent to the death, becuase as soon as you criticize him the claws come out.

 

If you don't like it, then I suggest you call Trent and tell him to play better....

[Peter]

This makes no sense to me. I would be shocked if this happened. Although I believe that Cassell is a good QB, I also think Trent is a good one and is only going to get better. Why give up a first round draft choice for Cassell when we have far greater needs.

[flomoe]

On a seperate note...directed at pats...

 

Am I the only one who sits in aww about how the Pats frequently seem to compile extra first round and first day draft picks, despite being a top team almost ever year? Rather they trade Cassel to us or someone else, they will once again land more additional first day picks...

 

Seems they alway find a way to put something like this together...no wonder they are a top team every year...

 

 

 

If this happens, the Pats are in line for a VERY HIGH draft pick next year. With or without Cassel, the Bills are probably looking at a Top 5 pick next year based on their schedule and lack of overall depth and talent.

 

This would be a very bad move considering what Cassel's salary would do to the Bill's Cap space.

 

I don't have a problem with Cassel since he would be an upgrade at the position immensely but the Bills really have much bigger fish to fry at this point in time.

[Alphadawg7]

If this happens, the Pats are in line for a VERY HIGH draft pick next year. With or without Cassel, the Bills are probably looking at a Top 5 pick next year based on their schedule and lack of overall depth and talent.

 

This would be a very bad move considering what Cassel's salary would do to the Bill's Cap space.

 

I don't have a problem with Cassel since he would be an upgrade at the position immensely but the Bills really have much bigger fish to fry at this point in time.

 

Regardless of who the Pats trade with, I am sure they get at least one 1st round pick back for Cassel. Just amazes me how the Pats always find a way to get extra first day picks...while we seem to keep trading up and losing first day picks...

[Magox]

I have said repeatedly that I hope Trent develops and will continue to cheer him on. Those post you refer to dealt with the question at hand of why we have not been very good the last 2 years and they were not directed at just Trent, they were post about the combined effort of our QB's.

 

Its mind boggling the lengths people will go to prove Trent hasnt been a problem, when he clearly has. I dont blame him, I mean he is a young QB. But young QB or not, it doesnt change the RESULT on the field thus far...the FACT remains, UNTIL the QB position plays better (regardless who it is), we won't be a very good team.

 

My post here was one of amazement at the irony of the very people defending Trent by blaming the system he plays in for his struggles, are now saying they dont want Cassel becuase he is a systems QB. But by blaming the system for Trents struggles in Buffalo, you are essentially labeling Trent a systems QB too...

 

I just fine it funny how a guy can come out of nowhere, put up pretty good stats, lead his team to 11 wins despite having no running game, a shaky line, and injuries to all his Tight Ends just to see the posts here say he is no good while they defend Trent to the death when Trent hasnt been very good yet...

 

And as far as your comment about not acknowledging these other QB's in the NFL historys past you say Trent has better numbers than in their first 20 games, its because it is pointless. I can name 10 QB's in the NFL right now who had better stats then Trent by a lot, even Derek Anderson. We can each make a list on both sides of that argument, although I bet you mine will be longer, but either way its pointless.

 

Its so funny how if you analyze Trents play, and draw the inevitable conclusion that to this point it hasnt been good enough, you are somehow labeled a Trent hater. Seems to me like the truth hurts a bit to people who support Trent to the death, becuase as soon as you criticize him the claws come out.

 

If you don't like it, then I suggest you call Trent and tell him to play better....

 

 

Just because you say you cheer Trent on doesn't mean that you do. You clearly don't.

 

As far as that list that you are talking about it. If you wish to make a list, then let's do it. Cuz it won't be longer. Even though at the end of the day, it still won't make a bit of difference to you. BTW, so you know. Even the one example you gave in Derek Anderson. Nope, his stats overall have not been better. Win loss stats he as 10 wins 16 losses. Trent has a winning record. QB rating Derek Anderon 75, Trent 80. Completion % Derek Anderson %54 Trent Edwards %61. Yards per completion 6.7 Trent 6.7 . TD's/Int's 43/35 Trent 18/18. Int %3.8 for Derek Anderson %2.8 for Trent.

 

The only area that Derek has been more productive in has been touchdowns thrown, but that is offset with his %30 more likely hood to throw Int's. Trent has a winnning record, but Derek Anderson has less than a %40 winning record. Trent has a higher qb rating. How in the world do you justify Derek Anderson as being more productive than Trent's.

 

I've done my homework, I can go on and on and on, about other qb's and how Trent has done much better than most in this stage of his career. Mind you, for a very mediocre team.

 

As far as Cassel is concerned, I never downplayed his year. I think he did phenomenal, he is getting compensated for it, and one day, whether it's this year or in the future, he will get his shot at being a franchise qb for someone.

 

There is no doubt that playing for the Patriots helped, but hey, when he was called upon to step up, he did, and my hat's off to him.

 

But if we traded for him, it would be a colossal error, and I have no doubt, that his best year would be the year that he played for the patriots, with Belicheck, Welker and Moss.

[Alphadawg7]

Just because you say you cheer Trent on doesn't mean that you do. You clearly don't.

 

As far as that list that you are talking about it. If you wish to make a list, then let's do it. Cuz it won't be longer. Even though at the end of the day, it still won't make a bit of difference to you. BTW, so you know. Even the one example you gave in Derek Anderson. Nope, his stats overall have not been better. Win loss stats he as 10 wins 16 losses. Trent has a winning record. QB rating Derek Anderon 75, Trent 80. Completion % Derek Anderson %54 Trent Edwards %61. Yards per completion 6.7 Trent 6.7 . TD's/Int's 43/35 Trent 18/18. Int %3.8 for Derek Anderson %2.8 for Trent.

 

The only area that Derek has been more productive in has been touchdowns thrown, but that is offset with his %30 more likely hood to throw Int's. Trent has a winnning record, but Derek Anderson has less than a %40 winning record. Trent has a higher qb rating. How in the world do you justify Derek Anderson as being more productive than Trent's.

 

I've done my homework, I can go on and on and on, about other qb's and how Trent has done much better than most in this stage of his career. Mind you, for a very mediocre team.

 

As far as Cassel is concerned, I never downplayed his year. I think he did phenomenal, he is getting compensated for it, and one day, whether it's this year or in the future, he will get his shot at being a franchise qb for someone.

 

There is no doubt that playing for the Patriots helped, but hey, when he was called upon to step up, he did, and my hat's off to him.

 

But if we traded for him, it would be a colossal error, and I have no doubt, that his best year would be the year that he played for the patriots, with Belicheck, Welker and Moss.

 

I am not going to keep debating you here on Trents stats...no magic you can do can make Trents stats good. Wins and Losses are not QB stats...they are team stats, so get over that comparison for one.

 

Second, you already contradicted yourself and manipulatated the stats again to be in your favor. Your challenge is the FIRST 24 games of a QB's career to compare to Trents FIRST 24 games...you didnt do that with Derek. You chose his last 24 games to make the stats look better for you because you know he struggled in 2008 and wanted to add those games to make Trent look better.

 

If you stick to the comparison of the the first 24 games (as thats all Trent has played and Derek has played 31) as you so claimed to do, then Dereks significantly beats Trent in every significant passing category except for INT's. He has more TD's, more yards, way more games over 200 yards, way more games over 300 yards, way more games with multiple TD's, less sacks, a way better TD:INT ratio and a better qb rating. Even with the more INT's, his TD:INT ratio is still better than Trents.

 

But again, you are not interested in unbiased comparisons...you already stated this in another thread where you argued that you want to take Derek Andersons most recent 24 game stretch, then go on to compare the first 24 games of Aikman, Steve Young, etc when they played on the worst teams in football at the time to validate Trent.

 

So which is it Magox? The most recent 24 games or the first 24 games of a QB's career that you want to compare to Trent? You seem to go with whatever helps your argument. Because if its going to be the most recent, then I will destroy Trents stats by comparing the most recent 24 games of McNabb, Brady, Manning, Cutler, Brees, Warner, Romo, Rivers, etc, etc...Hell, even Cassel has outproduced Trent in almost evey category in only 16 games compared to Trents 24.

 

You manipulate stats more than anyone I have seen on here, so having an intelligent discussion with you is pointless.

 

FYI: When I compared Trents stats to D. Anderson, it was in a thread someone started on whether or not to bring in D. Anderson...

[SKOOBY]

If this happens, the Pats are in line for a VERY HIGH draft pick next year. With or without Cassel, the Bills are probably looking at a Top 5 pick next year based on their schedule and lack of overall depth and talent.

 

This would be a very bad move considering what Cassel's salary would do to the Bill's Cap space.

 

I don't have a problem with Cassel since he would be an upgrade at the position immensely but the Bills really have much bigger fish to fry at this point in time.

 

 

We're picking 3rd unless we get Cassel, then we'll pick 4th.

 

Personally, I like Trent but we have no assurance of his health and being able to hold up a full season with not even mentioning post season. I think that bringing another QB with an upside might be a great idea. Joe Montana had Steve young waiting and Jimbo had Reich when he went down and the Bills never missed a beat.

[Lurker]

That old phrase comes to mind..."Where theres smoke, theres fire"...

Huh? The old phrase I keep thinking of is "when the hell was the last time an 'inside source' on TSW was actually correct?"

[DrFishfinder]

For a 3rd this year and a 1st next year. Menthion of Wilson really liking him

If this is even remotely true, then the Bills Brain Trust is bailing on TE, at least as the starter.

[Alphadawg7]

Huh? The old phrase I keep thinking of is "when the hell was the last time an 'inside source' on TSW actually correct?"

 

Touche... lol... I will give you that...

[Magox]

I am not going to keep debating you here on Trents stats...no magic you can do can make Trents stats good. Wins and Losses are not QB stats...they are team stats, so get over that comparison for one.

 

Second, you already contradicted yourself and manipulatated the stats again to be in your favor. Your challenge is the FIRST 24 games of a QB's career to compare to Trents FIRST 24 games...you didnt do that with Derek. You chose his last 24 games to make the stats look better for you because you know he struggled in 2008 and wanted to add those games to make Trent look better.

 

If you stick to the comparison of the the first 24 games (as thats all Trent has played and Derek has played 31) as you so claimed to do, then Dereks significantly beats Trent in every significant passing category except for INT's. He has more TD's, more yards, way more games over 200 yards, way more games over 300 yards, way more games with multiple TD's, less sacks, a way better TD:INT ratio and a better qb rating. Even with the more INT's, his TD:INT ratio is still better than Trents.

 

But again, you are not interested in unbiased comparisons...you already stated this in another thread where you argued that you want to take Derek Andersons most recent 24 game stretch, then go on to compare the first 24 games of Aikman, Steve Young, etc when they played on the worst teams in football at the time to validate Trent.

 

So which is it Magox? The most recent 24 games or the first 24 games of a QB's career that you want to compare to Trent? You seem to go with whatever helps your argument. Because if its going to be the most recent, then I will destroy Trents stats by comparing the most recent 24 games of McNabb, Brady, Manning, Cutler, Brees, Warner, Romo, Rivers, etc, etc...Hell, even Cassel has outproduced Trent in almost evey category in only 16 games compared to Trents 24.

 

You manipulate stats more than anyone I have seen on here, so having an intelligent discussion with you is pointless.

 

FYI: When I compared Trents stats to D. Anderson, it was in a thread someone started on whether or not to bring in D. Anderson...

Sorry

 

your wrong again.

 

I used All of Derek Anderson's 28 games that he has played in his career. So I didnt' cherry pick anything.

 

As far as me manipulating stats, once again, there you go with your exagerations. What I did was a fair comparison. I compared Wins Losses, qb rating, yards per attempt, completion percentage, td's, int's. I did that for every quarterback that I have compared with. How is that manipulating. I think you know I'm right, but you just can't deny the stats.

 

As far as you not considering wins and losses. LOL

 

Your kidding right?

 

The truth of the matter is that you are the one that manipulates stats. When someone brings up wins and losses, you always have an excuse for it, or you downplayit. Where the reality is Alpha, that Wins and Losses is one of the most important stats.

If someone mentions how he played well in a certain game, you have an excuse, you say, it was a bad defense, or that team wasn't playingwell. Or, they won in spite of him. No disrespect, but thats a bunch of garbage.

 

The reality is that every team has had to play good teams, mediocre teams and bad teams. Trent plays for a mediocre team and has a winning record. He also has a better qb rating, yards per attempt, completion %, less sacks allowed, less int's then most qb's that have played this game in such a short career. That is a fact Alpha. No excuses, those stats I brought up are public facts. There is no fudging, no cherry picking, just hard facts.

 

You will never admit these facts, so we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

But You still havn't answered my original question. Are you going to continue to criticize Trent at just about every opportunity you get on this message board through out this offfseason?

[oak tree 12]

For a 3rd this year and a 1st next year. Menthion of Wilson really liking him

 

if they do that then they are giving up on trent and i do not believe that. if they give up a first rounder then they are not looking @ him as a backup. it just makes no sense and i dont believe it for a second.

[Alphadawg7]

Sorry

 

your wrong again.

 

I used All of Derek Anderson's 28 games that he has played in his career. So I didnt' cherry pick anything.

 

As far as me manipulating stats, once again, there you go with your exagerations. What I did was a fair comparison. I compared Wins Losses, qb rating, yards per attempt, completion percentage, td's, int's. I did that for every quarterback that I have compared with. How is that manipulating. I think you know I'm right, but you just can't deny the stats.

 

As far as you not considering wins and losses. LOL

 

Your kidding right?

 

The truth of the matter is that you are the one that manipulates stats. When someone brings up wins and losses, you always have an excuse for it, or you downplayit. Where the reality is Alpha, that Wins and Losses is one of the most important stats.

If someone mentions how he played well in a certain game, you have an excuse, you say, it was a bad defense, or that team wasn't playingwell. Or, they won in spite of him. No disrespect, but thats a bunch of garbage.

 

The reality is that every team has had to play good teams, mediocre teams and bad teams. Trent plays for a mediocre team and has a winning record. He also has a better qb rating, yards per attempt, completion %, less sacks allowed, less int's then most qb's that have played this game in such a short career. That is a fact Alpha. No excuses, those stats I brought up are public facts. There is no fudging, no cherry picking, just hard facts.

 

You will never admit these facts, so we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

But You still havn't answered my original question. Are you going to continue to criticize Trent at just about every opportunity you get on this message board through out this offfseason?

 

Ok, this is my last response to any of these posts...one, you are wrong. Derek has played in 31 games not 28 which makes me wonder if you even looked at his stats, and you are also wrong as you compared S. Young, Aikman, etc FIRST 24 games...so if you are going to use an equal section of games for one, you gotta do it for the other. The only way Trent comes close to Derek is if you add in the extra games as you know he struggled some in 2008. So stop...its embarrassing.

 

Wins and Losses? Geezus dude...QB is the most important position on the team, but its not the only thing that determines wins and losses and its DEFINITELY not a gauge of how well a QB played. You bring up wins and losses as if Trent was responsible for all our wins...come on, you either dont watch football or you are so obessesed with Trent that you delusionally think he is somehow single handedly winning us games. And we are 7-9 and 7-9, so calm down on the wins...his record isnt that good.

 

And for the last dam time...my posts of Trent have been in regards to threads about why we have not been that good in 2007 and 2008. I have NEVER said he wont be good in the future, but you Trent lovers get so butt hurt when you see his lowly stats or any criticism of his play as IF he was actually playing as good as you THINK he MIGHT be one day.

 

My point about Trent in this thread was the irony of how well Cassel played, yet Trent lovers still knock him as if he is career backup and prop Trent up as the next Brady or Montanna even though he's played to a subpar level and actually regressed in 2008 and was grossly outplayed by Cassel. FYI: Cassels record is better than Trents too...now watch you respond and say Cassel plays on a better team even though you just posted all that matters is wins and losses...

[/dev/null]

Isn't this close to what we gave the Pats for Drew?

 

We only gave the Pats* a first for Drew

 

A first and third, that's closer (1st and 4th) to what we gave to the Jaguars for he who's name should never be spoken

[Alphadawg7]

We only gave the Pats* a first for Drew

 

A first and third, that's closer (1st and 4th) to what we gave to the Jaguars for he who's name should never be spoken

 

 

Just thinking about that is sickening...gawd, remember his stupid head bands?

[Magox]

Ok, this is my last response to any of these posts...one, you are wrong. Derek has played in 31 games not 28 which makes me wonder if you even looked at his stats, and you are also wrong as you compared S. Young, Aikman, etc FIRST 24 games...so if you are going to use an equal section of games for one, you gotta do it for the other. The only way Trent comes close to Derek is if you add in the extra games as you know he struggled some in 2008. So stop...its embarrassing.

 

Wins and Losses? Geezus dude...QB is the most important position on the team, but its not the only thing that determines wins and losses and its DEFINITELY not a gauge of how well a QB played. You bring up wins and losses as if Trent was responsible for all our wins...come on, you either dont watch football or you are so obessesed with Trent that you delusionally think he is somehow single handedly winning us games. And we are 7-9 and 7-9, so calm down on the wins...his record isnt that good.

 

And for the last dam time...my posts of Trent have been in regards to threads about why we have not been that good in 2007 and 2008. I have NEVER said he wont be good in the future, but you Trent lovers get so butt hurt when you see his lowly stats or any criticism of his play as IF he was actually playing as good as you THINK he MIGHT be one day.

 

My point about Trent in this thread was the irony of how well Cassel played, yet Trent lovers still knock him as if he is career backup and prop Trent up as the next Brady or Montanna even though he's played to a subpar level and actually regressed in 2008 and was grossly outplayed by Cassel. FYI: Cassels record is better than Trents too...now watch you respond and say Cassel plays on a better team even though you just posted all that matters is wins and losses...

 

Alpha you should really think before you write. Games Started, not games played. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/A/AndeDe00.htm You see GS means games started and G means games. I just wanted to clarify that for you. Alpha, you should also be lucky that I didn't include his first 3 games started, it would of made the stat line even worse for your argument. Look at the stats again. So your the one who needs to look at the stats again.

 

And when did I say that Wins and Losses was the ONLY area of importance. Come on ALpha, your slippin. I said it was an important part, and you downplayed it. I only bring up facts Alpha, as opposed to where you don't, or at least not ones that are right any way.

 

As far as Cassell is concerned. I give him credit. I won't say that. A win is a win and stats are stats. you are the sortof person that would say something like that.

 

Facts please

 

just facts

[atlbillsfan1975]

I hope no one gives the Pats squat for Cassell. Would it not be great if the rest of the league realized that cassell is an ok qb but by no means worth what you have to give up. Then the Pats get stuck with two qbs makeing over 25+ million a year. I dont believe for a second the Bills want Cassell, sounds like a mind game by the Pats. They stir up this story. Shakes relations up Between Edwards and Buffalo. I aint saying but i am saying.

[Alphadawg7]

Alpha you should really think before you write. Games Started, not games played. Also Alpha, you should be lucky that I didn't include his first 3 games started, it would of made the stat line even worse for your argument. Look at the stats again. He played in 31 games not 31 games started. So your the one who needs to look at the stats again.

 

And when did I say that Wins and Losses was the ONLY area of importance. Come on ALpha, your slippin. I said it was an important part, and you downplayed it. I only bring up facts Alpha, as opposed to where you don't, or at least not ones that are right any way.

 

As far as Cassell is concerned. I give him credit. I won't say that. A win is a win and stats are stats. you are the sortof person that would say something like that.

 

Facts please

 

just facts

 

Dude I already posted facts about D. Anderson and Trent...Derek kicked his ars in every one of these categories that indicate PRODUCTION and most are the very categories we looked at to gameplan for opposing offenses when I played in college.

 

TD's (Derek, by a lot actually)

INT's (Trent by 13)

Sacks (Derek)

Multi TD games (Derek by a lot)

Games over 200 yards (Derek by a lot)

Games over 300 yards (Derek by a lot)

TD:INT Ratio (Derek)

(We also looked at rushing yards, but that was more of a factor in college than in this discussion, so I left it out)

 

Those are ALL FACTS

 

Those areas result in points on the board...Trent has a much higher completion ratio, but that is helped by Trents tendency for the safe short throw and Dereks more aggressive push to get the ball down field. I dont care if Trent goes 18 out of 24 if he only amasses 180 yards and no TD's. I would rather have a guy go 18 out of 32 who passes for 280 yards and 3 TD's.

 

This is pointless...not even what this thread is about...agree to disagree and we will move on...

 

PS: Trents stats suck...hahaha, couldnt resist...

[ChasBB]

No more ex-Patriots.

[Tcali]

For a 3rd this year and a 1st next year. Menthion of Wilson really liking him

We are going to outsmart the Patriots on this one...............cough....choke..spit...cough...

[bills_fan]

Can we offer NE our 1st, 2nd and 3rd for Brady? They can keep Cassel.

[Peter]

I hope no one gives the Pats squat for Cassell. Would it not be great if the rest of the league realized that cassell is an ok qb but by no means worth what you have to give up. Then the Pats get stuck with two qbs makeing over 25+ million a year. I dont believe for a second the Bills want Cassell, sounds like a mind game by the Pats. They stir up this story. Shakes relations up Between Edwards and Buffalo. I aint saying but i am saying.

 

Well said.