ganesh Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Wow. I'm agreeing with the Dawgg. But he's right. Some guys are better at making the plays that win games than others. When bledsoe got replace by Brady, Bledsoe was a far superior statistical QB than Brady. However, Brady managed the game and didn't take the negative plays (sacks/ turnovers) that DB did. And I apologize in advance for bringing him up, but that is the problem with Losman. He has all the tools but takes negative plays at the worst times. Edwards, while not possessing the athleticism of JP, is better at making the plays that win games. however, a valid concern of this is that Trent is too smart and careful. It may realize in him getting gun shy if he makes a mistake (the Cleveland game, though I was at the game and somehow missed every INT he threw). He needs to realize that making a bad paly happens and to have a short term memory. The fact that the guy threw THREE interceptions in the 1st half alone indicates that he was not shy to throw the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Before Tom Brady got Moss and Walker he didn't have great recievers . But he had a fantastic defense and a great coaching staff that knew how to put them in position to make plays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanoverbills Posted April 13, 2009 Author Share Posted April 13, 2009 I'm with Dean on this. You win as a team, you lose as a team. Good football teams find ways to win, whether it's orchestrating a game winning drive, running out the clock, nailing a last second field goal, making a big stop on defense, or forcing a turnover. Don't believe me? Just ask Jay Cutler. He threw for 4,500 yards. He had a great O-Line and great receivers but no defense to rely on. Naturally, they finished 8-8. Mind you, having a good QB helps. A lot. But a QB needs a decent run game to counter balance the pass attack, he needs an O-Line to keep him on his feet and give him time to throw and he needs reliable receivers to run good routes, get open and make catches. Trent has only played two seasons of football, with only one full offseason and one full regular season as a starter. He's gonna get better and be the answer at QB. When we were 5-1 everyone was saying "he's the guy, he's the guy," and "we've found our QB," etc. He showed flashes, now if he can be more consistent, utilize his new weapons and have a reliable O-Line he will succeed. We haven't had a good offensive line in the last 10 years, same with receivers. And I would say that the play calling has been pretty bad too. He showed flashes againts some pretty bad teams. He is also one of the first QBs at Buffalo in the last ten years that could have 5 bad games in a row and not worry about loosing his job. Seems like most QBs in Buffalo have 2 bad games in a row and get benched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 The fact that the guy threw THREE interceptions in the 1st half alone indicates that he was not shy to throw the ball. Those were the last ints he had for the rest of the season, fellas. Byron Leftwich. hahahahahahahahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 ... or he doesn't play and you never know who he is. Who was UCLA's starting Qb when Edwards was in college? Exactly. I love how people think TE doesn't have a lot of talent. By a lot of accounts, he was the 2nd best high school QB in Cali (I think they have good hs football there) and one of the best Qb in the entire country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizell Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Yeah, this doesn't make sense to me. And if he went to UCLa or Michigan, they would have won games because he would have played with players who were actually drafted in the NFL. during the time edwards was @ stanford, stanford had more players drafted into the NFL than UCLA did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 during the time edwards was @ stanford, stanford had more players drafted into the NFL than UCLA did. Link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizell Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Link? http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft...amp;type=school http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft...amp;type=school Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft...amp;type=school http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft...amp;type=school Are you serious with this? Stanford had 1 3rd TE drafted, a bunch of 6th round o-linemen, and the rest were defensive players. Besides Edwards, 2 of these guys are starters in the NFL. UCLA had a 1st round TE, 2 receivers, and 2 running backs drafted in the same time, including Jones-Drew who is a borderline star player. And this was during a down period for UCLA. If you are arguably that this is similar talent levels at SU and UCLA, you are out of your mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizell Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Are you serious with this? Stanford had 1 3rd TE drafted, a bunch of 6th round o-linemen, and the rest were defensive players. Besides Edwards, 2 of these guys are starters in the NFL. UCLA had a 1st round TE, 2 receivers, and 2 running backs drafted in the same time, including Jones-Drew who is a borderline star player. And this was during a down period for UCLA. If you are arguably that this is similar talent levels at SU and UCLA, you are out of your mind. I'm just sayin'... you said "Edwards played with a bunch of people who weren't even drafted." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Murray Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Why do coaches? It is not like they can miss a FG, throw an interception or miss a tackle. Oh and a LOT of people thought the world was flat - never made it true despite campaigns to prove it. But the coaches choose to attempt that FG into the wind on 4th and short. The coaches choose to throw a fade route into the end-zone on 3rd and 1 rather than try and punch it in for a 3rd straight play. The coaches have wins / losses because their decisions determine whether a team wins or loses, whether it be individual situational decisions, or overall game plan strategy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dog14787 Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 I'm with Dean on this. You win as a team, you lose as a team. Good football teams find ways to win, whether it's orchestrating a game winning drive, running out the clock, nailing a last second field goal, making a big stop on defense, or forcing a turnover. Don't believe me? Just ask Jay Cutler. He threw for 4,500 yards. He had a great O-Line and great receivers but no defense to rely on. Naturally, they finished 8-8. Mind you, having a good QB helps. A lot. But a QB needs a decent run game to counter balance the pass attack, he needs an O-Line to keep him on his feet and give him time to throw and he needs reliable receivers to run good routes, get open and make catches. Trent has only played two seasons of football, with only one full offseason and one full regular season as a starter. He's gonna get better and be the answer at QB. When we were 5-1 everyone was saying "he's the guy, he's the guy," and "we've found our QB," etc. He showed flashes, now if he can be more consistent, utilize his new weapons and have a reliable O-Line he will succeed. You can say a QB doesn't win or lose games, but yet that same QB's career is going to based on wins and losses. TE's got a good QB rating, high completion percentage, hes a smart , gutsy QB yet many folks even now say he's not the guy, or this is a make or break year and why is that? I'll tell you why, wins and losses. Sure there are good defenses and bad defenses and it is a team sport, but when you get two good opponents, two good defenses, two good special teams, they X each other out and it comes down to individual players making big plays. When two equals meet on the football an above average QB is going to win out over an average QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 We haven't had a good offensive line in the last 10 years, same with receivers. And I would say that the play calling has been pretty bad too. He showed flashes againts some pretty bad teams. He is also one of the first QBs at Buffalo in the last ten years that could have 5 bad games in a row and not worry about loosing his job. Seems like most QBs in Buffalo have 2 bad games in a row and get benched. Where are you going with that? Wrt to your question, I think he wouldn't be considered a bust, but this is entirely subjective. Edwards led the team to some wins. This is something that sadly, eluded his predecessor for the most part. Limitations and inexperience notwithstanding, this absolutely must count for something. The prior 2 quarterbacks were entirely different types of athletes. Bledsoe was one of the best throwers I ever saw in terms of arm strength. He didn't have to wind up that much at all to throw a 60 yard bomb. JP had a deep arm too, and he could throw a 20 yard fastball like a major league pitcher. Talent like this is fun to watch but as we know, it may or may not translate to wins. The less sophisticated fans can't get past this. Wrt Trent, let's pretend for the sake of your post that he was drafted at #8, like Donte Whitner. I think the consensus here is that Whitner is far from a bust, even after his latest off field incident. I happen to think that Trent has contributed at least as much as Whitner to the team winning games. That said, I would have expected, or at least hoped for more from Trent at that slot. If Trent was the #22, who also cost a 2nd and 5th, I would have also hoped for more. Finally, if Trent was drafted late in round 1, and it wasn't the result of a trade up, I think I would be pretty satisfied with his production to date, and hope that he improves. He does have to improve to get to the next level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 We haven't had a good offensive line in the last 10 years, same with receivers. And I would say that the play calling has been pretty bad too. He showed flashes againts some pretty bad teams. He is also one of the first QBs at Buffalo in the last ten years that could have 5 bad games in a row and not worry about loosing his job. Seems like most QBs in Buffalo have 2 bad games in a row and get benched. I guess you must have blocked out the Losman era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 You can say a QB doesn't win or lose games, but yet that same QB's career is going to based on wins and losses. TE's got a good QB rating, high completion percentage, hes a smart , gutsy QB yet many folks even now say he's not the guy, or this is a make or break year and why is that? I'll tell you why, wins and losses. Sure there are good defenses and bad defenses and it is a team sport, but when you get two good opponents, two good defenses, two good special teams, they X each other out and it comes down to individual players making big plays. When two equals meet on the football an above average QB is going to win out over an average QB. I'm not saying a good/great QB doesn't make a HUGE difference to the fortune of his team, not at all. And, yes there are those who judge QBs by wins, or rings, or QB rating, or passing yardage...etc. My point is, it's a team game, QBs are not, and should not be, personally assigned Wins or Losses. Judging a QB based solely on the success (or lack thereof) of his team, is usually foolish...maybe more foolish than relying only on his QB rating (often pretty foolish, too, IMO). It's complicated...sorry. I refuse to try to force a poor categorization on a situation, simply because it is common, or easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 #1 overall pick Jamarcus Russel #22 overall pick Brady Quinn #40 overall pick John Beck #43 overall pick Drew Stanton #92 overall pick Trent Edwards #103 overall pick Isiah Stanback #151 overall pick Jeff rowe #174 overall pick Troy Smith #205 overall pick Jordan Palmer If Trent Edwards is a bust, then these guys must be contemplating suicide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 I'm not saying a good/great QB doesn't make a HUGE difference to the fortune of his team, not at all. And, yes there are those who judge QBs by wins, or rings, or QB rating, or passing yardage...etc. My point is, it's a team game, QBs are not, and should not be, personally assigned Wins or Losses. Judging a QB based solely on the success (or lack thereof) of his team, is usually foolish...maybe more foolish than relying only on his QB rating (often pretty foolish, too, IMO). It's complicated...sorry. I refuse to try to force a poor categorization on a situation, simply because it is common, or easy. Why not? John Kruk said wins were more important than ERA when Clemens had a 1.8 ERA but the Astros couldn't hit worth a damn and he was something like 16-11. (note the heavy sarcasm) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Are you serious with this? Stanford had 1 3rd TE drafted, a bunch of 6th round o-linemen, and the rest were defensive players. Besides Edwards, 2 of these guys are starters in the NFL. UCLA had a 1st round TE, 2 receivers, and 2 running backs drafted in the same time, including Jones-Drew who is a borderline star player. And this was during a down period for UCLA. If you are arguably that this is similar talent levels at SU and UCLA, you are out of your mind. Trent has the makings of a top 10 QB in the NFL. Let him play and he'll get there. I just wish the team signed a veteran backup who has won NFL games, one that Trent can actually learn from, rather than a Ryan Fitzpatrick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 I just wish the team signed a veteran backup who has won NFL games, one that Trent can actually learn from, rather than a Ryan Fitzpatrick. Like who? Leftwich has a career record of below .500, and what would Garcia teach him? To run around and make ill-advised plays that somehow work out? If 2005 Vinny Testaverde was around I'd be all for it, but he wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Trent has the makings of a top 10 QB in the NFL. Let him play and he'll get there.I just wish the team signed a veteran backup who has won NFL games, one that Trent can actually learn from, rather than a Ryan Fitzpatrick. Agreed but I alos think Fitz probably knows a hell of a lot about the game of football. It will be a big advantage over having a bitter, not helping, lack of defense reading backup we had last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts