Flbillsfan#1 Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 Pretty much. Anything less would be terrible. 3500 yards is 220 a game.... while 3051 is 191. If we aren't throwing close to 220 yards a game with our loaded receiving corps... Well, then something is wrong. I agree, but my main concern is points on the board. I could live with 190 YDs with 3 TD's per game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 I agree, but my main concern is points on the board. I could live with 190 YDs with 3 TD's per game. 3500 should be ridiculously easy to achieve. If you assume Evans and T.O. get their 1000 yards, Josh Reed gets his 600, then that's only 900 between the other receivers, TEs, and RBs. Besides, points come from the passing game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 I agree, but my main concern is points on the board. I could live with 190 YDs with 3 TD's per game. So you expect 48 tds from Trent? At least you're reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 So you expect 48 tds from Trent? At least you're reasonable. No I don't expect it, but I would love to see it. If the line comes together, the Bills for the first time in years, have weapons for Trent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Posted May 11, 2009 Author Share Posted May 11, 2009 Whether or not we extend Edwards has nothing to do with his stats to me in regards to TD's and yardage. If he can look anything like he did in those first 4 games last year, then I'll keep him around. He didn't blow anyone out, but he didn't lose the games for us either. Right now, I'll take that over the past decade. I do admit that with his current weapons, most QB's should be able to put up big numbers in the right scheme, but that isn't what this is about. This is about what time would make sense to extend him. What do you need to see from him to either lock him up, or start looking in other directions. For Dick Jauron's team, a game manager who doesn't lose games seems to be the end goal. Trent has proved himself capable of it, but only half the time. If he can do atleast that for a full season, and without missing more than a game to injury, then I say lock him up. But if we see 0-6 Trent against the AFC East or the Trent who gets injured when he sneezes too hard, then I hope there is something out there in the offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 Once trent goes out there and leads this talented team to a post season we can talk abouit extensions. Not yet tho i like the kid alot but he hasnt won anything yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djcalvin79 Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 So you expect 48 tds from Trent? At least you're reasonable. 3-4 TDs per game, between the passing and running games is a more reasonable expectation.. it's really difficult to win games when you score under 20 points, unless this defense really gets a monster passrush going Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 After he takes up to the playoffs and wins one or two of them. THEN .... depending on the salary cap... Load the contract up with incentives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 Pretty much. Anything less would be terrible. 3500 yards is 220 a game.... while 3051 is 191. If we aren't throwing close to 220 yards a game with our loaded receiving corps... Well, then something is wrong. Agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VJ91 Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 I think this is a very interesting topic for the Bills FO. Obviously in a contract year, a player is doing everything in their power to drive up their value and the longer a team waits, the higher that price tag goes up. And obviously, if you wait too long, you could lose the player all together. *edit* as it has been pointed out, it's not a contract year for him. so that's my bad. However, I still think this is going to be an interesting topic of conversation over the course of the next season. However, with Trent playing so hot and cold, what when would you look for the Bills to extend him. After last year's start and how there was MVP talk about Trent, he's created a huge buffer for himself in regards to when we can really evaluate him. If he has a great first half, how comfortable would you feel locking him up long term knowing he could self-destruct again like last year. The problem for me is, if you wait much longer past Week 9, then his agent is probably going to tell him to hold out till the offseason. But if we jump the gun, we could potentially get really screwed over. I'm not saying Trent it is or isn't our guy. I really have no idea which Trent is the real one. I'm just wondering how you all would handle it? Personally, I would let the entire season run it's course and if he pans out, Franchise him and hope to work out a deal. Franchise him? That is always the worst way to go, especially with a QB! Look at that trade the Pats had to make just to dump Cassell's one year 12 Mil. contract. They "tossed" in a terrific veteran linebacker with a couple of good years still in him in Vrabel, and still didn't even get a #1 pick back from KC. Why? Because the Chiefs had to deal with that insane contract of course, that's why. Besides, the Bills have not used the franchise tag since.....wow, I don't remember the last time they used it. Have they ever used it? They could have and should have used it on Nate Clements. Not that Nate has lived up to his contract he ended up signing with in SF, the Bills still could have used his talent for at least one more season, and ended up spending less then the 49ers gave him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 Franchise him? That is always the worst way to go, especially with a QB! Look at that trade the Pats had to make just to dump Cassell's one year 12 Mil. contract. They "tossed" in a terrific veteran linebacker with a couple of good years still in him in Vrabel, and still didn't even get a #1 pick back from KC. Why? Because the Chiefs had to deal with that insane contract of course, that's why. Besides, the Bills have not used the franchise tag since.....wow, I don't remember the last time they used it. Have they ever used it? They could have and should have used it on Nate Clements. Not that Nate has lived up to his contract he ended up signing with in SF, the Bills still could have used his talent for at least one more season, and ended up spending less then the 49ers gave him. They used it on Clements, and Cassel's salary is $14.65 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 The Bills used the franchise tag on Peerless Price, before dealing him to Atlanta for a 1st rounder. One of Donna Hoe's more savvy moves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 3500 should be ridiculously easy to achieve. If you assume Evans and T.O. get their 1000 yards, Josh Reed gets his 600, then that's only 900 between the other receivers, TEs, and RBs. Besides, points come from the passing game. Pretty big assumption. How many teams have 2 1000 yd receivers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Renko Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 Not Really? Those numbers are pretty damn close. So you are saying the numbers you quoted are the absolute MINIMUM Trent would need. The key is that while Losman did have a good 2006, he was under contract for two more years at the time. The Bills were waiting for a good 2007 before extending him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 3-4 TDs per game, between the passing and running games is a more reasonable expectation.. it's really difficult to win games when you score under 20 points, unless this defense really gets a monster passrush going I was just commenting on how he phrased it. It made it seem like he want 3 tds passing per game from Trent. But i agree 3 tds is more than fair for the offense (though the Bills did average 21 points last year). But personally, I could care less if Trent has 3 tds passing and Lynch/ Jackson run for 45 combined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 I say let's let Trent play well against a team that doesn't have a bottom-8 defense before we give him the world. I mean, it's nice to see him play well against Seattle, Oakland, St. Louis, Kansas City, and Denver (oh yeah, and San Diego, who fired their defensive coordinator the next week), but wouldn't you guys like to see him play well against, say, New England, Miami, and the Jets? Maybe even--and I know I'm asking for a lot here--Cleveland? I just don't understand this board sometimes. It's not ok to give a new contract to a two-time pro bowler at LT that most of the league believes is one of the top players at his position, but let's go out and throw big money at a QB that hasn't had even one good season in the NFL and can only play well against the defensive bottom-feeders...what gives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 I would extend Trent Edwards when and if he proves that he is indeed the answer for this organization at QB, and not just the next in one door and out the other as a failed savior. This is truly a make or break year for Edwards, if he doesn't prove it this year, next summer there will be a rookie or an established veteran on the roster pushing Edwards out the door (ala Losman). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 With Wood and Levitra firmly placed at the core of the line I feel that Edwards cannot help but be extended. The offense will enjoy orgiastic success in the coming season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Dan's Revenge Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 Pretty much. Anything less would be terrible. 3500 yards is 220 a game.... while 3051 is 191. If we aren't throwing close to 220 yards a game with our loaded receiving corps... Well, then something is wrong. Yep, in order for our offense to be a success this year, unless we are a VASTLY improved team running the football, Trent needs to approach those numbers next season. If the offensive line can give him enough time at any kind of a consistent level, there's no question that the weapons are going to be there for Edwards to work with. We have the best group of skilled players (Lynch, Jackson, Rhodes, Nelson, Fine, Owens, Evans, Reed, Parrish, Johnson) that should contribute this season in the passing game in the AFC East, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heels20X6 Posted May 11, 2009 Share Posted May 11, 2009 I would extend Trent Edwards when and if he proves that he is indeed the answer for this organization at QB, and not just the next in one door and out the other as a failed savior. This is truly a make or break year for Edwards, if he doesn't prove it this year, next summer there will be a rookie or an established veteran on the roster pushing Edwards out the door (ala Losman). Agreed. I want him to earn an extension because of his play on the field, not because "he's not JP" which for some on the board seems to validate his greatness..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts