We have nothing to Lose Starting JP, and evrything to lose starting Holcomb. [Archive] - BillsZone.com

Bufftp

06-01-2006, 05:42 PM

Holcomb will never lead us to the playoffs

This team is not going anywhere this year, it is not a win now team.

All young qbs that devolp were given time to devolp- a couple of seasons without fear of being yanked. And the usualled were awful the first full season.

J.P. Has potential and was no worse last year than many rookie/first year starting Q.B.s. Evrybody who has wanted Holcomb to start was under the illusion this team had the talent to win back then. It didn't, and doesn't now.

Take our lumps now, let J.P. get a full season under his belt and it will pay dividends down the road.

Start Holcomb and all we get is lost time and more questions.

Michael82

06-01-2006, 05:48 PM

Excellent post! :bf1:

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 05:57 PM

Holcomb will never lead us to the playoffs

Take our lumps now, let J.P. get a full season under his belt and it will pay dividends down the road.

So Holcomb will never lead the Bills to the Playoffs but JP getting a full 3rd season under his belt will pay dividends down the road?

Would you happen to know the lottery numbers for tonight?

Bufftp

06-01-2006, 06:02 PM

So Holcomb will never lead the Bills to the Playoffs but JP getting a full 3rd season under his belt will pay dividends down the road?

Would you happen to know the lottery numbers for tonight?
:roflma: How did I know this would be the response.
Correction it would be J.P.'s first full season starting. That is what I am talking about. J.P. had no chance in last year’s circumstances with that line and incompetent coaching staff. Out his first year injured.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
So what makes you think Kelly can any team to the playoffs let alone this team. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Maybe instead of you buying a lottery ticket I could sell you some properties……

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 06:20 PM

Since you can't answer my question or tell me the lottery numbers for tonight, how about you tell me who's gonna win the Sabre game tonight?

Bufftp

06-01-2006, 06:33 PM

Since you can't answer my question or tell me the lottery numbers for tonight, how about you tell me who's gonna win the Sabre game tonight?
I love when posters live up to their usernames.

I pointed out he didn't have 3 full seasons starting. He hasn't had one.
The value is the one.

Now in all fairness make a case for Holcomb leading this team to the playoffs. His history and the current talent on the team?

I am all ears brother!

YardRat

06-01-2006, 06:39 PM

Craig Nall is the foundation for this team's future...start him and let him get a year under his belt with these players in this system.

Why delay the inevitable?

Bufftp

06-01-2006, 06:48 PM

Craig Nall is the foundation for this team's future...start him and let him get a year under his belt with these players in this system.

Why delay the inevitable?
That may be a legitamate point and I am open to that.

ICE74129

06-01-2006, 07:07 PM

ICE74129

06-01-2006, 07:08 PM

I love when posters live up to their usernames.

I pointed out he didn't have 3 full seasons starting. He hasn't had one.
The value is the one.

Now in all fairness make a case for Holcomb leading this team to the playoffs. His history and the current talent on the team?

I am all ears brother!

Outstanding post brother

Ultra Chimp 1

06-01-2006, 07:14 PM

Correction it would be J.P.'s first full season starting. That is what I am talking about. J.P. had no chance in last year’s circumstances with that line and incompetent coaching staff. Out his first year injured.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
Correction.

JP Losman was last year's opening day starter. He had his chance. He was handed the reigns. And Losman blew it.

He was so bad, even an awful coaching staff like Mike Mularkey's knew when to pull the plug.

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 07:32 PM

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 07:34 PM

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
Correction.

JP Losman was last year's opening day starter. He had his chance. He was handed the reigns. And Losman blew it.

He was so bad, even an awful coaching staff like Mike Mularkey's knew when to pull the plug.

But but tbut the coach staff, but but btu the play calling..but but but the o-line but but but the Vets didn't like him..but but but he was basically a 2nd year rookiebut but but he played good in the 1st Qtr against Miami but but but He has potential but but but Blah blah Blah with your buts.

JP sucks until JP can prove otherwise.

Pinkerton Security

06-01-2006, 07:53 PM

I may be wrong but the reason for this thread is to show that Holcomb is worthless, except as a backup. There is little difference between the 2, except for about 8 years of age. No one in this thread so far has said JP is a great QB. No one has even said he is a good QB. But starting someone who is 8 years older and has a weaker arm, albeit with better accuracy, on a rebuilding team? That would be bad coaching.

naugem

06-01-2006, 08:19 PM

:bf1:

I may be wrong but the reason for this thread is to show that Holcomb is worthless, except as a backup. There is little difference between the 2, except for about 8 years of age. No one said JP is a great QB. No one has even said he is a good QB. But starting someone who is 8 years older and has a weaker arm, albeit with better accuracy, on a rebuilding team? That would be bad coaching.

The_Philster

06-01-2006, 08:19 PM

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
Correction.

JP Losman was last year's opening day starter. He had his chance. He was handed the reigns. And Losman blew it.

He was so bad, even an awful coaching staff like Mike Mularkey's knew when to pull the plug.
Maybe the Colts should've benched their rookie starter in 98 when he played lousy in their first four games :rolleyes: Might wanna try thinking before you post...look where posting without thought has gotten TDummy :idunno:

ICE74129

06-01-2006, 09:13 PM

Still no answers, Im waiting.

You Lomsanites are pathetic.

We have been waiting months now for you to come up with a legit reasoning for your hate toward JP and your non willingness to allow him the chance to develop.

We are still waiting...

ICE74129

06-01-2006, 09:14 PM

<o:p></o:p>
Correction.

JP Losman was last year's opening day starter. He had his chance. He was handed the reigns. And Losman blew it.

He was so bad, even an awful coaching staff like Mike Mularkey's knew when to pull the plug.

Correction, he played well for a first year starter on a crap team with crappy coaching.

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 09:16 PM

We have been waiting months now for you to come up with a legit reasoning for your hate toward JP and your non willingness to allow him the chance to develop.

We are still waiting...

Oh I've given plenty of reason based on Fact why I think JP sucks. You and other just choose to ignore them. And say Im wrong without giving facts to back up your opinions why Im wrong.

Actually, I do believe I said twice JP should start all year next year. I don't recall saying KH should start.

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 09:19 PM

Correction, he played well for a first year starter on a crap team with crappy coaching.

More but but buts..excuses.......Losmanites sure the heck don't run out of them. I wonder if they just recycle the same ones they used for Rob Johnson.

The last buffalo fan

06-01-2006, 09:19 PM

I'm sick and tired, about TD ****. Maybe, he is Tom Dona****, and has the same football mind of that acehole.

JP need to play at least one full season, just to get the title of "starter". JUst a little note on JP and KH play, last season. See the D and the coaches, both played against, and then make your ****ing own better idea, on what are you talking about.

But hey, thanks for your time on posting, bull****, but posting anyway.

The_Philster

06-01-2006, 09:21 PM

Oh I've given plenty of reason based on Fact why I think JP sucks. You and other just choose to ignore them. And say Im wrong without giving facts to back up your opinions why Im wrong.We've done it countless times already. :rolleyes: Why don't you try not ignoring them?

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 09:29 PM

We've done it countless times already. :rolleyes: Why don't you try not ignoring them?

See what I mean. :rolleyes:

The_Philster

06-01-2006, 09:30 PM

See what I mean. :rolleyes:
yeah..we see your ignorance quite well :up:
Mr. I'd-sit-Peyton-Manning-in-1998

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 09:32 PM

yeah..we see your ignorance quite well :up:
Mr. I'd-sit-Peyton-Manning-in-1998

Who said that? Only one I've seen who said that is YOU. Nice try putting words in other peoples mouths. DuH!!

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 09:34 PM

I didn't know Manning was on a team 1 win away from the Playoffs the previous year.

The_Philster

06-01-2006, 09:35 PM

Who said that? Only one I've seen who said that is YOU. Nice try putting words in other peoples mouths. DuH!!
Peyton started his career looking like crap...JP started his career looking like crap...except that he didn't look quite as bad as Peyton did...so are you saying that if JP had played even worse than he did in the first part of last year, you'd keep playing him?

The_Philster

06-01-2006, 09:36 PM

I didn't know Manning was on a team 1 win away from the Playoffs the previous year.
and that's JP's fault, huh? It's JP's fault that the defense couldn't stop a high school running back too? Give it up and go back to Madden

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 09:49 PM

Peyton started his career looking like crap...JP started his career looking like crap...except that he didn't look quite as bad as Peyton did...so are you saying that if JP had played even worse than he did in the first part of last year, you'd keep playing him?

Do you even know what your talking about? Peyton Manning a #1 draft pick his rookie year had 3739 yards, 26 TDs and 28 INTs his rookie year. Progressing through out the year.

Lets compare What JP did after his 1st 4 starts to what Manning did after his 1st 4 starts...

Manning...23 TDs, 17 INts, 2412 yards, not Once did Manning throw for less then 100 yards his rookie year and had 2 300 yard games his rookie year. On a team that was much worse the prevouis year then what the Bills were.

Losman (2nd year QB, not a rookie) after his first 4 games....7 TDs, 6 INTS, 907 yards.

Keep comparing JP to Manning, Fool.

The_Philster

06-01-2006, 09:55 PM

Do you even know what your talking about? Peyton Manning a #1 draft pick his rookie year had 3739 yards, 26 TDs and 28 INTs his rookie year. Progressing through out the year.

Lets compare What JP did after his 1st 4 starts to what Manning did after his 1st 4 starts...

Manning...23 TDs, 17 INts, 2412 yards, not Once did Manning throw for less then 100 yards his rookie year and had 2 300 yard games his rookie year. On a team that was much worse the prevouis year then what the Bills were.

Losman (2nd year QB, not a rookie) after his first 4 games....7 TDs, 6 INTS, 907 yards.

Keep comparing JP to Manning, Fool.
Couple things...
I don't give a **** about stats...those are a crutch for those who don't understand what they are watching...they can be twisted in so many ways and they don't give an accurate portrayal of how a player plays..no stat is earned by the player on his own...it's the ultimate team game.
Second..I didn't compare them and drop the personal attacks...there's a set of rules called the TOS you agreed to follow when you posted here...how's about honoring your agreement?

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 10:00 PM

It's JP's fault that the defense couldn't stop a high school running back too?

Nope. but it is JPs fault for leading the Bills to 12 PPG and not sustaining drives during the game to keep his defense off the field. Common sense tells you that if your Defense is on the field most of the game they are gonna get worn down and be able to be run on.

Classic example is the Tampa Bay game last year. The Defense was playing fine for most of the game. But they were on the field most of the game because of the Bills offense had drives of

3 plays: Punt
4 plays: Punt
5 Plays: Punt
3 Plays: Punt
3 Plays: Safety
5 Plays: FG
3 Plays: Punt
13 Plays: Punt
3 Plays: Punt

ToP: 21:10 8, 1st downs.

If it wasn't for Losmans saftey and easy TD after the safety and Losman leading the Bills to basically nothing on offense that game, the Bills could of won that game.

PcA125

06-01-2006, 10:01 PM

P Losman was last year's opening day starter. He had his chance. He was handed the reigns. And Losman blew it.

Yeah...he had his chance for 4 games...wow not everyone is Big Ben

ALso, If we had any kind of o-line to give him time to throw the ball i bet he would have done a ton better.

The_Philster

06-01-2006, 10:01 PM

Damn..and here I thought the QB had 10 other guys on offense with him :rolleyes:

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 10:08 PM

Couple things...
I don't give a **** about stats...those are a crutch for those who don't understand what they are watching...they can be twisted in so many ways and they don't give an accurate portrayal of how a player plays..no stat is earned by the player on his own...it's the ultimate team game.
Second..I didn't compare them and drop the personal attacks...there's a set of rules called the TOS you agreed to follow when you posted here...how's about honoring your agreement?

1) You don't care about stats. because they don;t back up your arguement. Like they do mine.

2) Yes, you DID compare them or Manning wouldn't of been brought up.

3) I wasn't calling you a fool, was calling your JP vs Manning comparison, foolish.

4) Want some cheese with that whine?

Want some cheese with that whine?:blowkiss:

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 10:10 PM

Damn..and here I thought the QB had 10 other guys on offense with him :rolleyes:

And the other 10 guys were being dragged down by the 1 guy. Could be why JP was pulled in 2 games and benched, twice.

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 10:12 PM

I am tired of putting the Losmanites in their place.

Nighthawk

06-01-2006, 10:15 PM

Listen, the Bills need to bite the bullet and just let JP play. They're not going anywhere with Holcomb and at least they will know what they have in JP after a full year under center.

goodkarma

06-01-2006, 10:40 PM

Craig Nall is the foundation for this team's future...start him and let him get a year under his belt with these players in this system.

Why delay the inevitable?

Yeah, he's got so much promise the Packers had no problem letting him go knowing they're about to lose the franchise QB. JP deserves a full year (or close to it), Nall should only play when we've given up on JP.

billsburgh

06-01-2006, 11:22 PM

But but tbut the coach staff, but but btu the play calling..but but but the o-line but but but the Vets didn't like him..but but but he was basically a 2nd year rookiebut but but he played good in the 1st Qtr against Miami but but but He has potential but but but Blah blah Blah with your buts.

JP sucks until JP can prove otherwise.
but you're not willing to give him the chance to prove otherwise are you? you're the one who seems to know that he will never improve.

TacklingDummy

06-01-2006, 11:41 PM

but you're not willing to give him the chance to prove otherwise are you? you're the one who seems to know that he will never improve.

Actually billsburgh, I think this is the 4th time I said Losman should start all year.

billsburgh

06-01-2006, 11:52 PM

Actually billsburgh, I think this is the 4th time I said Losman should start all year.
is that because you want to see him fail? I'm confused, just about every post of yours is stating how aweful JP is, but yet you want him to start all year.

Philagape

06-02-2006, 01:29 AM

billsburgh

06-02-2006, 02:18 AM

The_Philster

06-02-2006, 04:57 AM

1) You don't care about stats. because they don;t back up your arguement. Like they do mine. I don't care about stats because they don't prove anything...show me one post I've ever used stats to back up my side of an argument...you can't because it's never been done. I use what I see on the field as my way of telling how a player is playing...like real professionals do. Why do you think so much attention is paid to game film?

2) Yes, you DID compare them or Manning wouldn't of been brought up. Its called a history reference...not a comparison

3) I wasn't calling you a fool, was calling your JP vs Manning comparison, foolish. No :liar:...you broke the TOS with name-calling...you called me a fool because you knew you were losing the debate. That shows desperation...only someone losing an argument has to resort to name-calling

The_Philster

06-02-2006, 04:58 AM

For those of you that don't have the JP hater on ignore, has he answered why first-year-starting stats are relevant to future years, considering the historic gap between them? Does he also say toddlers suck at talking?
Of course not...he's never introduced one fact that's relevant to his side of the debate..and he probably never will

YardRat

06-02-2006, 05:34 AM

Originally Posted by Ultra Chimp 1
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
Correction.

JP Losman was last year's opening day starter. He had his chance. He was handed the reigns. And Losman blew it.

He was so bad, even an awful coaching staff like Mike Mularkey's knew when to pull the plug.

Maybe the Colts should've benched their rookie starter in 98 when he played lousy in their first four games :rolleyes: Might wanna try thinking before you post...look where posting without thought has gotten TDummy :idunno:

I actually agree with Chimp.

Comparisons between Manning and Losman are ridiculous...why bother?

His post at least is based on historical facts...Losman started, he sucked for four games, and he was benched. Period.

For someone so quick to jump on the "WAAAAAHHH! You called me a name and violated the TOS" bandwagon you certainly don't mind insinuating someone else is mindless.

Bill Cody

06-02-2006, 09:29 AM

More but but buts..excuses.......Losmanites sure the heck don't run out of them. I wonder if they just recycle the same ones they used for Rob Johnson.

And they won't run out. The problem is when a new coach comes to town he wants to win as many games as possible, even if it's not getting the team near to the playoffs- you know setting the tone, building a foundation, blah blah blah. So I'm afraid that Jauron will be reluctant to allow JP to run this team into the ditch for too long without trying other options. Which means the Losmanites will still be able to run out the same laundry list of excuses NEXT year if Losman only gets 4-5 games this year to suck. "He needs more time....Manning sucked too...he's got great potential..." It's depressing.

I can live with one more full year of the Waterboy but after that no. So I want him to play all 16 games this year so we can all agree as a fan base he's not the guy. But I fear it won't happen and these Rob II discussions will be back next year like a kanker sore that won't heal.

Ultra Chimp 1

06-02-2006, 03:11 PM

Joey Harrington's stats in his rookie season were considerably better than Losman's.

Think on that for a bit before you compare Losman's numbers with anyone else's.

The_Philster

06-02-2006, 03:42 PM

I actually agree with Chimp.

Comparisons between Manning and Losman are ridiculous...why bother?

His post at least is based on historical facts...Losman started, he sucked for four games, and he was benched. Period.

For someone so quick to jump on the "WAAAAAHHH! You called me a name and violated the TOS" bandwagon you certainly don't mind insinuating someone else is mindless.First of all, no one made that comparison..it's called historical reference. Can you give one valid reason that you think that JP has no chance of improving like so many others have done before? The fact that many QBs have improved after starting off terribly negates any relevance JP's poor first 4 games have on his future. Unless you're saying he has to have a certain name to be able to improve. Should JP change his last name to Manning or something? :idunno:
As far as my insinuation, maybe you should actually read my post better before you stick your foot in your mouthhttp://www.billszone.com/fanzone/user_pics/11-1148235801.gif. I insinuated that his post showed that no thought went into it. I attacked the post, not the poster as he did with the name-calling. He could be a very intelligent guy...I don't know...and I never insinuated otherwise...but his posts are purely idiotic.

Joey Harrington's stats in his rookie season were considerably better than Losman's.

Think on that for a bit before you compare Losman's numbers with anyone else's.Yeah...and all that proves is exactly what the rest of us have been saying...you don't know based on a guy's first year starting how he's gonna turn out. Sounds like you're of the mindset that Peyton Manning should've been benched his rookie year and given up on...or did he get a free pass because his name is Manning? :rolleyes:

Ultra Chimp 1

06-02-2006, 03:56 PM

Sounds like you're of the mindset that Peyton Manning should've been benched his rookie year and given up on...or did he get a free pass because his name is Manning?

Wow. You know Nothing about football.

Payton was not pulled his first season because Payton Manning got 3,700 yards, 26TD's, broke a record and showed promise. His only downside was his 28 interceptions that he drastically cut the year after.

Losman got pulled because he sucked so bad, his coaches thought they had better options and didn't like their chances of winning with JP leading.

I saw the way he played. He dserved to get pulled. It was a no brainer.

I tell you even the Colt coaches back in Payton's first season would have yanked Losman had JP been there instead of Manning.

That's how obvious of a good move it was to pull Losman last season.

Anyone in any era would have done it.

Well...I guess..tee hee...except you.

Doesn't bode well for your football knowledge, does it?

Yeah...and all that proves is exactly what the rest of us have been saying...you don't know based on a guy's first year starting how he's gonna turn out.

More garbage. And also terrible reading comprehension on your part.

Joey Harrington sucked his rookie year. Losman was even worse than Harrington.

Look at what harrington is now....a guy who is slightly better than Losman.

Well, thats not saying much.

Losman is crap. Your "points" are crap. Your reading comprehension kills are crap. And last. You're hope for a better future with Losman as a starter is an illusion...

...and

crap.

Pull yourself together.

Obviously the Indy coaches never felt like the Buffalo coaches did about Losman towards Manning.

The_Philster

06-02-2006, 04:03 PM

You know how to look up stats..big deal...did you actually watch Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Carson Palmer, or any other QB who struggled their first years play...or is your opinion based purely on the stat line.
As far as my reading comprehension, I got it down pretty well..Harrington played a little better in his rookie year than JP did in his and he's been pretty much a flop ever since. Sorry, but I've seen QBs like the Manning brothers struggle early on and improve. Some QBs mature faster than others. Some never do. I fully admit, and have all along, that JP may never pan out...but we've yet to see any clear cut proof that he won't.

As far as the Indy coaches, they showed they had more of a clue about QB development than Mularkey showed us..Rome wasn't built in a day and QBs rarely are great right out of the gates

X-Era

06-02-2006, 04:05 PM

But but tbut the coach staff, but but btu the play calling..but but but the o-line but but but the Vets didn't like him..but but but he was basically a 2nd year rookiebut but but he played good in the 1st Qtr against Miami but but but He has potential but but but Blah blah Blah with your buts.

JP sucks until JP can prove otherwise.

Something an entire season as the starter this year will prove.

All you need to do is watch and learn. Holcomb has and always will suck, at least Losman has upside.

Nall cant throw to save his life, he throws the football likle its a shot put, maybe we should use Nerf's he MIGHT be able to throw that.

Mr. Pink

06-02-2006, 06:47 PM

I, too, want Losman to start. Whether he succeeds or fails...that way we know what we have. I'm not confident in his ability to succeed going by "historical perspective" as Phil put it.

If he succeeds great, we don't have to search for a QB for the future. The way things have played out if he fails that's also great, seeing we can actually go out and get a GUY to be the face of this franchise. The charade that's being played out is lame and beyond stupid at this point.

For every example "historically" of a QB that succeeded after being junk you can rebuff with a guy that stayed junk. Kyle Boller, Tim Couch, Akili Smith, Ryan Leaf, Jim Druckenmiller, Dan McGwire, Heath Shuler, David Klingler, Chris Redman, Alex Wright, Quincy Carter, Joey Harrington, etc. You get the idea.

So who's historical opinion is right? We don't know. That's why I want JP to play. Either way we'll find out and know what direction to go in for the future. Which in my opinion is a good thing, that way we don't sit here next year having this same very conversation.

The_Philster

06-02-2006, 07:14 PM

I'm not confident in his ability to succeed going by "historical perspective" as Phil put it.
I'm not 100% confident either...I'm just not giving up on him because of historical perspective. We have no reason to believe he will or won't succeed yet is what I and many have been saying all along.

YardRat

06-02-2006, 07:16 PM

First of all, no one made that comparison

Ahem...

"Maybe the Colts should've benched their rookie starter in 98 when he played lousy in their first four games :rolleyes:"

"Peyton started his career looking like crap...JP started his career looking like crap...except that he didn't look quite as bad as Peyton did"

As for this...

I attacked the post, not the poster as he did with the name-calling.

I read this...

yeah..we see your ignorance quite well :up:
Mr. I'd-sit-Peyton-Manning-in-1998

Would you be offended if I stated...

"Yeah..we see your whining quite well.
Mr. The-TOS-is-my-mommy-and-I-run-crying-to-her-everytime-someone-opposes-my-viewpoint."

Wouldn't that be considered name-calling?

As for this...

Can you give one valid reason that you think that JP has no chance of improving like so many others have done before? The fact that many QBs have improved after starting off terribly negates any relevance JP's poor first 4 games have on his future. Unless you're saying he has to have a certain name to be able to improve. Should JP change his last name to Manning or something? :idunno:

No...I can't say whether or not JP will improve over time, or if he will eventually be labeled a bust. That's up to him. I'm of the opinion that his inability to read defenses, to pick out the open receiver, to properly go through his reads, to accurately throw the short-to-medium passing routes (inside and outside), his reliance on scrambling, and on and on were more a detriment to his teammates than their performance were a detriment to him.

He has a chance this year to earn his spot on the roster instead of just being labeled the saviour and have it handed to him, probably the biggest mistake the organization made all of last year.

Finally...his name has nothing to do with it...that's an idiotic comment. Period.

The_Philster

06-02-2006, 07:28 PM

Ahem...

As for this...

I read this...

Would you be offended if I stated...

"Yeah..we see your whining quite well.
Mr. The-TOS-is-my-mommy-and-I-run-crying-to-her-everytime-someone-opposes-my-viewpoint."

Wouldn't that be considered name-calling?

As for this...

No...I can't say whether or not JP will improve over time, or if he will eventually be labeled a bust. That's up to him. I'm of the opinion that his inability to read defenses, to pick out the open receiver, to properly go through his reads, to accurately throw the short-to-medium passing routes (inside and outside), his reliance on scrambling, and on and on were more a detriment to his teammates than their performance were a detriment to him.

He has a chance this year to earn his spot on the roster instead of just being labeled the saviour and have it handed to him, probably the biggest mistake the organization made all of last year.

Finally...his name has nothing to do with it...that's an idiotic comment. Period.My head hurts from explaining it over and over...it's a historical reference. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it...ever heard that saying? It's merely pointing out that there are players who struggled in their first years as starters who went on to have solid, and sometimes spectacular, careers.
The ignorance quote...yes, out of line...but I don't accuse someone of breaking the TOS unless they actually do. If you can't debate without name-calling, you've lost the argument because you're frustrated. I know I'm frustrated because I despise repeating myself over and over and over and over. Apparently, there are some who are blinded by hatred and refuse to get it..which is why I put TDummy on ignore. I'm tired of repeating myself to him.
As far as the name, I agree...it is idiotic...but that's the only difference so far between JP Losman's performance and the early performance of so many QBs who went on to play well

YardRat

06-02-2006, 07:44 PM

You have to admit, phil...for every Peyton Manning or Tom Brady, there are dozens of Ryan Leaf's and Todd Marinovich's. Literally. The odds are vastly against Losman becoming a solid QB in this league, let alone a spectacular one.

I hope the guy succeeds and wish him the best, but if he can't even prove to be the best QB on the squad in practice then he doesn't deserve to be the starter just because he's young and has 'potential', and that's why I'm against the 'he needs a full year under his belt to prove whether he can play or not' philosophy.

You put the best players on the field, period, and give your team the best opportunity to succeed. Potential be damned.

The_Philster

06-02-2006, 07:59 PM

The odds are against any QB becoming a solid or spectacular QB and not once have I ever said that JP WILL become a spectacular QB...only that he might. It would be beyond foolish to make statements about the future like that...unless you have psychic abilities..so anyone making bold predictions based on what little time JP's been given had better be wealthy off the lotto or else their opinion has no merit whatsoever.

As far as how he is compared to the other QBs on the roster, I have no clue on Nall but I am pretty confident JP can beat out Holcomb. And as for not letting him develop on the field I agree with that...to a point. You don't sacrifice your season to develop one player....unless the team is already not going to be good enough for a run through the playoffs anyway...like last season.
But a question on that...if you don't play him to develop him, how do you develop him? Practice isn't even close to the same thing as game action. Rob Johnson was a great practice QB...but sucked in game action. That's something it took live games to find out. Thing is, you have to develop young talent sometime. Not every team can load up the team around the QB so that he can still look good to the untrained eye...like with Big Ben. He was anything but spectacular his rookie season...but Pittsburgh had enough help around him in player talent and game-planning that almost any QB would've succeeded.

YardRat

06-02-2006, 08:29 PM

Ben got his job via injury...same as Brady. Both New England and Pittsburgh in those cases still began the season with their best QB at the time in the starting line-up, Bledsoe and Maddox.

Neither Belicheck nor Cowher made the conscious decision to start Brady or Rothlisberger because they were young and had the potential to be the future of the franchise. They ended up starting out of necessity.

If playing your best players is good enough for coaches that have won four out of the last five Super Bowls, why shouldn't it be good enough for Buffalo?

YardRat

06-02-2006, 08:38 PM

a post full of lies and stupidity...you should be proud of yourself :up:

:roflmao:

Call me stupid if you wish....but never call me a liar :D

The_Philster

06-02-2006, 08:50 PM

With the talent we have on this team..both in 2005 and now in 2006..we need a really good QB to help us win...and we don't currently have one on the roster.

Let's look at each of those situations
New England...solid starting QB in Bledsoe (no matter what anyone says, he was pretty good...naysayers will point to the help he had during his best seasons yet they ignore the fact that there has NEVER been a QB lead a team to anything without help) and a decent supporting cast and strong system. They only needed a QB who fit the system and Brady was that guy..Bledsoe really wasn't.

Pittsburgh..they've had what, one down season since Cowher became coach? O'Donnell, Stewart, Maddox, Big Ben...definitely looks like it's a QB-friendly place and with the strong running game and great defense...a QB would have to be a major screwup not to at least have moderate success there.

The necessity of those two teams was injuries to their top guys. Ours? The starting QB going into this offseason is a journeyman-type who has limited arm strength and questionable judgement as well as a limited amount of time he has left he can play.
Personally, I wanted the McNair model...bring in JP slowly. Have him play a few games his rookie year...a few more his sophomore year and hopefully he would've shown enough that he could take over as starter his 3rd season. The leg injury and then cutting Bledsoe kept that from happening though.

The_Philster

06-02-2006, 08:52 PM

:roflmao:

Call me stupid if you wish....but never call me a liar :D
To say I made a comparison when I only brought up a historical reference to back up my point is actually a lie..false accusation.....or a reading skills problem :D

YardRat

06-02-2006, 09:14 PM

To say I made a comparison when I only brought up a historical reference to back up my point is actually a lie..false accusation.....or a reading skills problem :D

I'm not going to get into a pissing match with you over semantics, but if this isn't an obvious statement of comparison...

"Peyton started his career looking like crap...JP started his career looking like crap...except that he didn't look quite as bad as Peyton did"

...then I can't help you.

Read it again real carefully, phil...

Not a lie, not a false accusation, not a reading problem.

That shows desperation...only someone losing an argument has to resort to name-calling

The_Philster

06-02-2006, 09:22 PM

Apparently, you just read into it what you want to. If it were a comparison, bringing up Peyton's rookie season would've been accompanied by a prediction that JP would turn out like Peyton...and we'll both be dead and buried before anyone can find me saying anything of the sort

YardRat

06-02-2006, 09:42 PM

No, phil, that would be a hypothetical conclusion as drawn from the comparison.

Philagape

06-02-2006, 10:18 PM

Mr. Pink

06-02-2006, 10:23 PM

Philagape

06-02-2006, 10:26 PM

Problem is a poor first year starting does not necessarily mean a good career either.

No one is insisting he'll have a good career. There's optimism, but no one's outright predicting it.

And go figure you'd want his first year to be irrelevant, it doesn't help further he has potential line. I got accused of having a Wys like philosophy because of doing this with Belichicks' career, I don't know this Wys guy...but isn't that a Wys statement? Throw out data that doesn't fit your argument?

My argument is directly related to his first year, so it's not the same. I'm not arguing anything about his future other than a first year is not telling.

evol4276

06-02-2006, 10:30 PM

thank you very much for this thread...... you are absolutely right. the team, which i hate to say isnt going to be much this year, so why not just start the possible future for the year, get him some confidence? i see no reason at all why we shouldn't

The_Philster

06-03-2006, 04:40 AM

X-Era

06-03-2006, 09:10 AM

The purpose of using past QBs as examples is to make the following points:

1. A poor first year starting does not necessarily mean a poor career.

and therefore

2. One cannot predict JP's future based on his first year.

and therefore

3. His first year is irrelevant, as are references to him in the present tense.

To me this whole issue is unbelievably easy.

Since this team is NOT in contention for anything, we are free to choose our own course at QB.

Now, we have three options:

1) Holcomb- a guy who has never done anything and proved last year on THIS team that he cant be trusted to run the team (4 ints against the lowly Jets). Hes a seasoned vet, lack of experience, therefore is NO excuse. His lack of tangible production and his average past performances point to a high probability of more of the same.

2) Nall- a youngster who has upside but also has played in games and hasnt done anything yet. With upside, he could turn into something. However, if you look at his abilities, we should have great concern about his true potential. He throws the ball like a shot put and has lowsy mechanincs. Furthermore, he has struggled so far to grasp the system. I dont mind the lack of production so far, hes young. But the lack of skills is cause for concern and cant be ignored. The mountain he has to climb is taller than Losman.

3) Losman- Had a terrible first few games, but also showed signs of great talent. 3 TD throws against Miami, winning the KC game with TD throws to Evans. Hes young, and hasnt played much yet. So, any discussion on him is based on potential. Now, his tangibles are the best out of the QB's. He has a rocket for an arm, to the point where Moulds asked him to take some speed off his fast balls. He can make all the throws. He has scamble-ability which can get him out of jams and he has shown he can throw on the run.

After saying all that, heres where the choice is easy:

Holcomb = vet who hasnt done anything, and wont in the future
Nall = a youngster with limited potential due to limited ability, or at the very least has a huge mountain to climb
Losman = a youngster with the most potential

Why go with Holcomb if hes just giving you more of the same? Why go with Nall if he needs to try to OVERCOME his limited ability?

Why not play your guy with the best potential when you have the least to lose anyways (a non-playoff year).

ublinkwescore

06-05-2006, 12:46 PM

Jan Reimers

06-05-2006, 01:23 PM

None of us know what kind of QB JP will ultimately become. Those of us who favor him starting simply feel that he has not had enough starts to know one way or the other, but that he has the potential to warrant the same chance that Elway, Manning and several other really good QBs were given.

Conversely, we can see that after 10 years - including a number of very average starts last year - Holcomb is not a quality NFL starter, nor a guy who will take us anywhere for either the short or long term.

JP is a gamble, but one worth taking given his physical ability. Holcomb is a sure thing - a mediocre journeyman with absolutely no upside.

Bufftp

06-05-2006, 01:33 PM