Serious question for the JP fan club.

[Patrick76777]

Say he wins the job. Then over the first 5 weeks he proceeds to post similar results to last year. We start 0-5 he’s completing under 50% of his passes, averaging about 100 yards a game, and averaging 1 INT a game. Over these 5 games we go 0-5 and the offense looks terrible.

Would you be ready to pull the plug at this point or do you want him to play all 16 games?


And you don’t have to be a jerk in your response. I’m seriously wondering how long you guys want him out there if these are his numbers.

[Philagape]

The first five games is the toughest part of the schedule, with road games in NE, Miami and Chicago, so I wouldn't judge anyone until at least the bye week. But if we're out of the running, what's to lose by giving JP the rest of the season? The ONLY reason to start Holcomb is if the Bills are winning, so if we're 0-5, that reason disappears.

[justasportsfan]

Nah, give him the entire season. I was all for yanking him last year when we still had a chance to make playoffs. If he isn't our future we know one thing for sure ,Holcomb isn't either.

Knowing that we're not headed anywhere this year, I'm all for the team putting him in a Eli Manning type of situation in his first year. He can take his lumps together with the rest of the younguns and grow together as a team. Just like Kelly and co.

[ICE74129]

Say he wins the job. Then over the first 5 weeks he proceeds to post similar results to last year. We start 0-5 he’s completing under 50% of his passes, averaging about 100 yards a game, and averaging 1 INT a game. Over these 5 games we go 0-5 and the offense looks terrible.

Would you be ready to pull the plug at this point or do you want him to play all 16 games?


And you don’t have to be a jerk in your response. I’m seriously wondering how long you guys want him out there if these are his numbers.

he plays all 16 games. Harrington, Boller etc all got YEARS at the helm. Any QB that has been a success has had a full uninterupted season to at least see what he can and or can't be.

JP gets all 16 period.

[ICE74129]

The first five games is the toughest part of the schedule, with road games in NE, Miami and Chicago, so I wouldn't judge anyone until at least the bye week. But if we're out of the running, what's to lose by giving JP the rest of the season? The ONLY reason to start Holcomb is if the Bills are winning, so if we're 0-5, that reason disappears.

It doesn't matter, in the running or not. The kid gets 16 with no threat of being pulled. If we did that LAST year...I dont' feel there would have been any question JP would be our starter at this point.

ALL QB's must have that comfort zone that they can have bad games (even bad seasons) and not get benched.

[Philagape]

It doesn't matter, in the running or not. The kid gets 16 with no threat of being pulled. If we did that LAST year...I dont' feel there would have been any question JP would be our starter at this point.

ALL QB's must have that comfort zone that they can have bad games (even bad seasons) and not get benched.

I agree ... I was just turning the Holcombites' reason against them :D

[Earthquake Enyart]

Say he wins the job. Then over the first 5 weeks he proceeds to post similar results to last year. We start 0-5 he’s completing under 50% of his passes, averaging about 100 yards a game, and averaging 1 INT a game. Over these 5 games we go 0-5 and the offense looks terrible.

Would you be ready to pull the plug at this point or do you want him to play all 16 games?


And you don’t have to be a jerk in your response. I’m seriously wondering how long you guys want him out there if these are his numbers.
I'll tell you right now that Dick won't play JP just for the sake of playing him. If he isn't doing the job, out he'll come.

One of the reasons Dick got fired in Chicago was his stubborness not to play #1 draft pick Cade McNown.

[Don't Panic]

Say he wins the job. Then over the first 5 weeks he proceeds to post similar results to last year. We start 0-5 he’s completing under 50% of his passes, averaging about 100 yards a game, and averaging 1 INT a game. Over these 5 games we go 0-5 and the offense looks terrible.

Let's just pray this doesn't happen, or this place is going to be intolerable!

[ICE74129]

I agree ... I was just turning the Holcombites' reason against them :D

:roflmao:

[EricStratton]

One of the reasons Dick got fired in Chicago was his stubborness not to play #1 draft pick Cade McNown.



That turned out to be the right decision.

[BillsFever21]

It doesn't matter, in the running or not. The kid gets 16 with no threat of being pulled. If we did that LAST year...I dont' feel there would have been any question JP would be our starter at this point.

ALL QB's must have that comfort zone that they can have bad games (even bad seasons) and not get benched.

Mularkey stalled this process by a year. JP would've already taken his lumps. By midway through this season we would know what we had in JP had he not been jerked around last season.

But you have unrealistic homers who thought by benching JP that Holcomb was gonna lead us to the playoffs. That didn't happen and the only thing it got us was losing 4 out of the last 5 games he started when JP could've been developing them games. We were losing anyway but wasn't benefiting any towards the future of this team.

Now this year we're stuck with the same question marks when them could've already been mostly answered. Had JP had the entire year last year by the midpoint in this season and definitely towards the end of this season all the questions surrounding JP would've been answered. He either would've been the QB of the future or he would've needed replaced.

Mularkey set this team back a year by the crap he pulled last season. What's also sad is there were a fair amount of unrealistic fans who agreed with it and thought Holcomb was gonna win them other 5 games and give us a shot at the playoffs. That turned out to be a dud and here we are from scratch still.

What's even still sad is some of them same people actually think that Holcomb can lead us to the playoffs this season. He had the opportunity last year but proceeded to lose 4 out of the last 5 games he started when we needed the wins to stay in it.

[ICE74129]

Mularkey stalled this process by a year. JP would've already taken his lumps. By midway through this season we would know what we had in JP had he not been jerked around last season.

But you have unrealistic homers who thought by benching JP that Holcomb was gonna lead us to the playoffs. That didn't happen and the only thing it got us was losing 4 out of the last 5 games he started when JP could've been developing them games. We were losing anyway but wasn't benefiting any towards the future of this team.

Now this year we're stuck with the same question marks when them could've already been mostly answered. Had JP had the entire year last year by the midpoint in this season and definitely towards the end of this season all the questions surrounding JP would've been answered. He either would've been the QB of the future or he would've needed replaced.

Mularkey set this team back a year by the crap he pulled last season. What's also sad is there were a fair amount of unrealistic fans who agreed with it and thought Holcomb was gonna win them other 5 games and give us a shot at the playoffs. That turned out to be a dud and here we are from scratch still.

What's even still sad is some of them same people actually think that Holcomb can lead us to the playoffs this season. He had the opportunity last year but proceeded to lose 4 out of the last 5 games he started when we needed the wins to stay in it.

Agreed. We also had 'win now' clowns on the team its self. Funny, they got the QB they wanted and still didn't 'win now'

[TacklingDummy]

Screw the other 52 players on the team, it's all about Losman.

[Earthquake Enyart]

That turned out to be the right decision.
Indeed!

[Jan Reimers]

Play JP 16 straight games, regardless. Let's see if he's the answer. We know Holcomb isn't.

[BillsFever21]

Play JP 16 straight games, regardless. Let's see if he's the answer. We know Holcomb isn't.

Exactly. Holcomb already proved he will only win a couple more games then JP and that's when JP was at his worst and a first year starter.

Holcomb absolutely has no reason to be starting on this team. This team doesn't benefit anything by it. It doesn't benefit this year for a winning record and it doesn't benefit anything towards the future.

A good young core and QB on the rise is what attracts good young FA's and your own players re-signing with the Bills. Having an old journeyman backup as the starter on a losing team wouldn't give any player an incentive to play for the Bills. No incentive for the present or the future.

[Patrick76777]

So Say that after 10 games he's still just as bad. We're 0-10. He looks completely lost out there. The whole team has basically quit, we’re the laughing stock of the league. You guys want him to play the last 6 games so we can know for sure or go to somebody else (anybody else) just to gain an ounce of respectability?

[YardRat]

I'd give him half a year, depending on the how the rest of the players handle it. If he plays poorly, and it begins to threaten any team chemistry in the locker room, I'd yank him.

The team is more important than the individual.

[TacklingDummy]

If Losman Captain's the ship to 0-10, I say he goes down with the ship. Be no point in yanking him.

If they did pull Losman after 0-10 and the Bills went 6-0 the rest of the way. The Bills just wasted a season to see if this kid has potential. And all the Losman fans that wanted JP to start should be tarred and feathered.

[Michael82]

This is the easiest question I have ever heard. No matter what, leave JP Losman in. He should get the whole season to see if he has the stuff. Mularkey screwed him and us over last year by not making it his tryout year. This is it. One year, if he doesnt improve and look better by the end of the season, then it's time to find another QB. Until then, JP Losman needs the time on the field to be able to develop into a solid QB. Don't pull a Mularkey or else we'll run your ass out of here, Jauron!!! :mad:

[Earthquake Enyart]

So Say that after 10 games he's still just as bad. We're 0-10. He looks completely lost out there. The whole team has basically quit, we’re the laughing stock of the league. You guys want him to play the last 6 games so we can know for sure or go to somebody else (anybody else) just to gain an ounce of respectability?
Sure. Let JP play out the string. Then we can draft Brady Quinn.

[Jan Reimers]

And all the Losman fans that wanted JP to start should be tarred and feathered.
Tarred and feathered for wanting to see a fast, mobile, big-armed first round draft pick get an opportunity to develop, rather than watching a 33 year old journeyman throw 2 yard passes to oblivion?

Please.

[Kerr]

Give him the whole season. You have to see if he's resiliant enough to pick himself up and produce. Last year, last chance.

[Michael82]

Give him the whole season. You have to see if he's resiliant enough to pick himself up and produce. Last year, last chance.
:bf1:

[OpIv37]

If Losman Captain's the ship to 0-10, I say he goes down with the ship. Be no point in yanking him.

If they did pull Losman after 0-10 and the Bills went 6-0 the rest of the way. The Bills just wasted a season to see if this kid has potential. And all the Losman fans that wanted JP to start should be tarred and feathered.

This post is moronic.

If that did happen, who's to say the Bills still wouldn't have gone 0-10? Remember, new systems on both sides of the ball, plus the first two games are on the road against tough division opponents. There are going to be growing pains no matter who the QB is.

The fact is JP Losman may be a franchise QB, and he may not be. Until we find that out, we're just spinning our wheels. This team is going nowhere this year anyway. As long as we're losing, at least we can find out if we have a QB or if we need to be looking elsewhere by this time next year.

If Holcomb starts, or if Losman starts and turns out to be a complete failure, this franchise is so many levels beyond ****ed that I can't even think of words to describe it.

[Bill Cody]

This post is moronic.

If that did happen, who's to say the Bills still wouldn't have gone 0-10? Remember, new systems on both sides of the ball, plus the first two games are on the road against tough division opponents. There are going to be growing pains no matter who the QB is.

The fact is JP Losman may be a franchise QB, and he may not be. Until we find that out, we're just spinning our wheels. This team is going nowhere this year anyway. As long as we're losing, at least we can find out if we have a QB or if we need to be looking elsewhere by this time next year.

If Holcomb starts, or if Losman starts and turns out to be a complete failure, this franchise is so many levels beyond ****ed that I can't even think of words to describe it.

It's this kind of thinking that convinces me beyond any doubt that Lossman has to start all 16. 0-10 isn't enough for the dyed in the wool Losmaniac. It'll take a full year before there will be a consensus to spit up this hair ball. I say so be it.

[TacklingDummy]

It's this kind of thinking that convinces me beyond any doubt that Lossman has to start all 16. 0-10 isn't enough for the dyed in the wool Losmaniac. It'll take a full year before there will be a consensus to spit up this hair ball. I say so be it.

And I agree.

That's why I said if the Bills did start 0-10 Losman should remain starter. He was captain of the sinking ship, he can go down with it.

[OpIv37]

It's this kind of thinking that convinces me beyond any doubt that Lossman has to start all 16. 0-10 isn't enough for the dyed in the wool Losmaniac. It'll take a full year before there will be a consensus to spit up this hair ball. I say so be it.

I don't have any particular allegiance to Losman, but right now he's the only thing on this roster with any vague outside chance of being a franchise QB. Holcomb is at best a stopgap solution- he's 33, lacks arm strength, and lacks mobility. He's got 2-3 good years left, especially if he's starting and getting knocked around every game. He is not the long-term answer for this team. And Nall just sucks.

The fact is that all QB's take time to develop. Without time, we have no idea what we have.

If Losman starts all 16 games, and does not improve significantly by the end of the season, he should be cut and the Bills should be looking for a new QB via draft or FA. But if Losman starts all 16 games and by the end of the season, he looks like a real NFL QB, we'll know we have our guy. Either way, it takes the full 16 to find out.

[Jan Reimers]

It's this kind of thinking that convinces me beyond any doubt that Lossman has to start all 16. 0-10 isn't enough for the dyed in the wool Losmaniac. It'll take a full year before there will be a consensus to spit up this hair ball. I say so be it.
In case you missed it, Bledsoe doesn't play here anymore. He has taken his mediocre act to Dallas, where he is leading the Cowboys to oblivion. And it was his less than stellar play with the Bills that forced us to take a QB in the first round.

So your bitterness is completely misplaced.

[OpIv37]

And I agree.

That's why I said if the Bills did start 0-10 Losman should remain starter. He was captain of the sinking ship, he can go down with it.

You just don't get it. You'd rather dump Losman and start the 2-3 year QB development process all over again. Those of us with more than half a brain would like to see if the 2 years we put into developing Losman paid off before we start the process all over again-starting over means tacitly accepting another 2-3 years of mediocrity.

[TacklingDummy]

If Holcomb starts, or if Losman starts and turns out to be a complete failure, this franchise is so many levels beyond ****ed that I can't even think of words to describe it.

At the beginning of the year when every team is 0-0 the player who gives you the best chance to win THIS year should be the starter. (Be it Holcomb, Losman)

When it becomes obvouis during the season that things are not going well, then you play for the future or next year.

Giving up before the season even starts just to see if a QB has potential is wrong. If JP beats out Holcomb in camp, its not because he has more potential then Holcomb has, it's because he was the best QB in camp and gives the Bills the best chance to win now.

[OpIv37]

At the beginning of the year when every team is 0-0 the player who gives you the best chance to win THIS year should be the starter. (Be it Holcomb, Losman)

When it becomes obvouis during the season that things are not going well, then you play for the future or next year.

Giving up before the season even starts just to see if a QB has potential is wrong. If JP beats out Holcomb in camp, its not because he has more potential then Holcomb has, it's because he was the best QB in camp and gives the Bills the best chance to win now.

and if that happens, will you accept it or will you continue to bash JP?

You're right- if Holcomb wins he's the best chance to win now, but that's not saying much because Holcomb is short term. It will be 1-2 seasons then we'll need to develop someone else and we're screwed.

[OpIv37]

There is nothing to gain by starting Holcomb except maybe 2-3 wins solely for the sake of saying we won 2-3 more games. It's not gonna get us in the playoffs.

[TacklingDummy]

and if that happens, will you accept it or will you continue to bash JP?

You're right- if Holcomb wins he's the best chance to win now, but that's not saying much because Holcomb is short term. It will be 1-2 seasons then we'll need to develop someone else and we're screwed.

I will accept it. But that doesn't mean I won't crictize Losman if he plays like crap. And I will give him credit when he plays well, like the 1st Qtr of the Houston/Miami game and the 2 nice passes in the KC game.

I agree Holcomb is a short term QB, I've never have said he was the Bills long term answer at QB. Facts are he's a old, average QB, but if he gives the Bills the best chance to win when the season starts, Holcomb starts. Who knows, maybe the Bills will surprise people and start 5-0, but maybe they won't and start 1-4/0-5. Then switching to Losman and giving him the last 10-11 games would be the right thing to do. (that's if Holcomb wins the starting job)

Sitting on the bench not starting will not hurt Losman. It actually helped him last year when he was benched.

[TacklingDummy]

There is nothing to gain by starting Holcomb except maybe 2-3 wins solely for the sake of saying we won 2-3 more games. It's not gonna get us in the playoffs.

You don't know that anymore then I don't know that starting Losman the Bills could be 16-0.

New season, everyone is 0-0, start the player that you think gives you the best chance to win this year.

[PromoTheRobot]

Say he wins the job. Then over the first 5 weeks he proceeds to post similar results to last year. We start 0-5 he’s completing under 50% of his passes, averaging about 100 yards a game, and averaging 1 INT a game. Over these 5 games we go 0-5 and the offense looks terrible.

Would you be ready to pull the plug at this point or do you want him to play all 16 games?


And you don’t have to be a jerk in your response. I’m seriously wondering how long you guys want him out there if these are his numbers.

The answer is "all freakin' season long!" Part of developing a young QB is lettng him play without worrying about getting the hook after every incomplete pass. If you can't live with that, then cut him now and go with your boy-ee Holcomb. Of course, I could ask you the same question about #10...what would you do if Holcomb goes 0-5?

PTR

[TacklingDummy]

Of course, I could ask you the same question about #10...what would you do if Holcomb goes 0-5?

PTR

If the coaches think Holcomb gives the Bills the best chance to win now and they do start 0-5, I'd bench Holcomb and let JP start the rest of the year.

[Michael82]

The answer is "all freakin' season long!" Part of developing a young QB is lettng him play without worrying about getting the hook after every incomplete pass. If you can't live with that, then cut him now and go with your boy-ee Holcomb. Of course, I could ask you the same question about #10...what would you do if Holcomb goes 0-5?

PTR
Good post! :clap:

[Bill Cody]

In case you missed it, Bledsoe doesn't play here anymore. He has taken his mediocre act to Dallas, where he is leading the Cowboys to oblivion. And it was his less than stellar play with the Bills that forced us to take a QB in the first round.

So your bitterness is completely misplaced.

If you say so.

[TacklingDummy]

The answer is "all freakin' season long!" Part of developing a young QB is lettng him play without worrying about getting the hook after every incomplete pass. If you can't live with that, then cut him now and go with your boy-ee Holcomb. Of course, I could ask you the same question about #10...what would you do if Holcomb goes 0-5?

PTR

Bad Post.

Week 1 of the NFL you play the player that gives you the best chance to win this year. Week 1 is not for developing a QB.

Practice and being out of it (Week 1 is not out of it) is when you develop a QB.

[X-Era]

Say he wins the job. Then over the first 5 weeks he proceeds to post similar results to last year. We start 0-5 he’s completing under 50% of his passes, averaging about 100 yards a game, and averaging 1 INT a game. Over these 5 games we go 0-5 and the offense looks terrible.

Would you be ready to pull the plug at this point or do you want him to play all 16 games?


And you don’t have to be a jerk in your response. I’m seriously wondering how long you guys want him out there if these are his numbers.

All 16 games.

Last year he should have started all year too. Anyone with half a brain saw about 3 games in that this team wasnt a playoff team. The DEFENSE was horrible, forget the offense. So in a non-playoff year, we have NOTHING to lose with starting your 1st round guy who has shown lots of potential.

Had we of started Losman all year without any controversy, who knows maybe we could actually be talking about sneaking into the playoffs.

But now, we have a proven loser in Holcomb, and a youngster as green as the hills.

We basically wasted an entire year and are in the same exact boat we were in at the QB spot one year ago.

The only place he will develop further into a quality starter is ON the field.

We have seen enough of Holcomb in his MANY years on the field to know he buys us nothing. I was clear when they put KH in last year that he buys you maybe 2 more games and that would be the difference between a 4 and 12 team and a 6 and 10 team.

I dont see this year too much different, so why not develop the young guy who can actually get better and may turn into something.

[feelthepain]

It doesn't matter, in the running or not. The kid gets 16 with no threat of being pulled. If we did that LAST year...I dont' feel there would have been any question JP would be our starter at this point.

ALL QB's must have that comfort zone that they can have bad games (even bad seasons) and not get benched.

Well this isn't fantasy land in in the real world "if" JP does put up those same kind of #'s there is no way in hell he reamins the starter, not for 16 games. There is this thing called accountability in the NFL. He will have to pull his own weight. "If" JP is putting up those kind of #'s you can't justify leaving him in. It would be unfair to the rest of the team and the longer he stays in and puts up those kind of #'s the less output you'll get from the team. It's like a doulbe edge sword.

That sword can be positive too, "if" he plays well the team improves because the team see improvement, they know they are giving of themselves for a cause and the whole team gets better. But "if" he's losing and putting up horrible numbers like last year it will be in the teams best interest to make a change. You have to understand the whole world doesn't want JP to succed at the cost of the team, most people would hope for the oposite. Not that they want JP to fail, but he should be sacrificed long before the team.

[X-Era]

So Say that after 10 games he's still just as bad. We're 0-10. He looks completely lost out there. The whole team has basically quit, we’re the laughing stock of the league. You guys want him to play the last 6 games so we can know for sure or go to somebody else (anybody else) just to gain an ounce of respectability?

If the entire team has quit except for Losman, I still would play him. Losmans growth is important to any future we may have. If the whole team quit, whats to lose?

Besides, theres not a chance in hell that he will look completely lost out there for 10 games. He'll have good ones and bad ones. Houston was a decent game, the KC game throwing TD's to Evans. And 3 TD's to Evans against Miami looked pretty good.

If your expecting him to be big Ben, forget it. But could he be last years Kyle Orton? Eli even? maybe.

At any rate, whats the point in pulling a Detroit and playing a proven loser like Jeff Garcia who is actually better than Holcomb? How well did that work out?

[G. Host]

And you don’t have to be a jerk in your response. I’m seriously wondering how long you guys want him out there if these are his numbers.

I am wondering how many of them will be buying tickets if Bills are 0-10 after playing Texans. Unless Bills sell out of tickets early the Bills need to maximize revenue - ask those who proclaimed that Bills need to maximize revenue even if it means raising ticket prices, selling team and moving to LA/Oklahoma (no difference - both are NFL hells).

[X-Era]

Tarred and feathered for wanting to see a fast, mobile, big-armed first round draft pick get an opportunity to develop, rather than watching a 33 year old journeyman throw 2 yard passes to oblivion?

Please.

Ohh no, are you sure you dont want to dink and dunk all over the field all day and head into the lockeroom at the half up on the Pats 3 to 0? Thats how you win games....OOPS!!!

[X-Era]

You just don't get it. You'd rather dump Losman and start the 2-3 year QB development process all over again. Those of us with more than half a brain would like to see if the 2 years we put into developing Losman paid off before we start the process all over again-starting over means tacitly accepting another 2-3 years of mediocrity.

Ohh no its worse than that. Who exactly is this youngster with loads of potential out there that TD is claiming we are idiots for not signing and starting right away instead of Losman?

If he has some guy he wanted in the draft, its over and hes just plain silly for holding the damn grudge this long. Thats his head problems that he has to fix. Facts are facts, we arent getting any new youngster this year to start and develop in place of Losman.

This might be tthe dumbest arguement ever. We suck, we have a young QB that needs to play to see what we got, and a vet that sucks, has sucked, and will continue to. Its SO EASY!

[BillsFever21]

You just don't get it. You'd rather dump Losman and start the 2-3 year QB development process all over again. Those of us with more than half a brain would like to see if the 2 years we put into developing Losman paid off before we start the process all over again-starting over means tacitly accepting another 2-3 years of mediocrity.

Yeah, lets dump Losman and draft another QB. Then when he sucks 3 out of his first 4 games we can yank him for another journeyman backup. Then that journeyman backup can lose two in a row and get injured.

Then our rookie can come in and play significantly better then his first 4 games and throw 7 TD's over a 5 game span along with leading the team to a victory the game he came in for after the journeyman got injured. Then when our worthless pathetic team keeps losing with the rookie like they were with the journeyman we can pull him again for the journeyman after the rookie was showing signs of improving and then lose 2 of the next 3 games with the journeyman to end the season.

Then when our rookie finishes the season with 8 TD's and 8 INT's and 1 less victory then the journeyman QB we can declare him a bust after them 8 games and start the process over once again.

This sounds like a great plan to me. I can't wait for it to all unfold once again.

[X-Era]

Well this isn't fantasy land in in the real world "if" JP does put up those same kind of #'s there is no way in hell he reamins the starter, not for 16 games. There is this thing called accountability in the NFL. He will have to pull his own weight. "If" JP is putting up those kind of #'s you can't justify leaving him in. It would be unfair to the rest of the team and the longer he stays in and puts up those kind of #'s the less output you'll get from the team. It's like a doulbe edge sword.

That sword can be positive too, "if" he plays well the team improves because the team see improvement, they know they are giving of themselves for a cause and the whole team gets better. But "if" he's losing and putting up horrible numbers like last year it will be in the teams best interest to make a change. You have to understand the whole world doesn't want JP to succed at the cost of the team, most people would hope for the oposite. Not that they want JP to fail, but he should be sacrificed long before the team.

But Marv himslef brought up Aikmans first year and Peytons first year. Forget year, lets call it 16 starts. Peyton led Indy went 3 and 13, he went: <table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" height="52" width="737"><tbody><tr class="bg2"><td>1998</td><td>Indianapolis Colts</td><td>16</td><td>16</td><td>575</td><td>326</td><td>56.7</td><td>3739</td><td>6.50</td><td>78</td><td>26</td><td>28</td><td>22/109</td><td>42</td><td>8</td><td>71.2</td></tr></tbody></table>

[BillsFever21]

Bad Post.

Week 1 of the NFL you play the player that gives you the best chance to win this year. Week 1 is not for developing a QB.

Practice and being out of it (Week 1 is not out of it) is when you develop a QB.

Then why did you still want Holcomb starting the final 4 weeks last year even though we were out of it?

When Losman came back after being benched he played against quality teams. By far better competition then Holcomb faced all season. Plus Miami and New England were also playing better then they were at the start of the season.

Against 2 playoffs teams and 3 teams that won 9 games and just missed the playoffs, Losman put up 7 TD passes in 134 passes and was averaging 7.08 ypa against them teams.

During the season Losman played against 3 playoff teams and 4 teams who missed the playoffs by one game.

Holcomb on the other hand played the pitiful Jets twice, a Miami team at the start of the year who was on a 3 game losing streak, and am awful Raiders team. The best defense Holcomb faced all season was the Jets who was ranked #13 in the league.

Losman on the other hand was going up againt Tampa Bay, Carolina, San Diego and a healthy New England defense who had Teddy Bruschi and others also back.

Losman played against far superior of opponents as a 1st year starter and still only finished the season with 2 less TD's. Holcomb also had 2 more TO's then Losman so them performances were a wash.

Holcomb only lead the team to 1 more victory then Losman and also lost 4 of his last 5 games. All this against a majority of crap ass opponents.

How was Holcomb so much more successful? Because his completion percentage was padded due to multiple 3 yard dumpoffs that didn't do the team any good?

For how the Losman haters talk around here you would've thought Holcomb's stat line and wins would've blown Losman's away. The fact is against better opponents Losman and Holcomb was just about a wash at seasons end. One was a 1st year starter and the other was a 10 year vet.

[BillsFever21]

But Marv himslef brought up Aikmans first year and Peytons first year. Forget year, lets call it 16 starts. Peyton led Indy went 3 and 13, he went: <TABLE height=52 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=1 width=737 border=0><TBODY><TR class=bg2><TD>1998</TD><TD>Indianapolis Colts</TD><TD>16</TD><TD>16</TD><TD>575</TD><TD>326</TD><TD>56.7</TD><TD>3739</TD><TD>6.50</TD><TD>78</TD><TD>26</TD><TD>28</TD><TD>22/109</TD><TD>42</TD><TD>8</TD><TD>71.2</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Losman was far more successful then 70% of first year starters. There are just too many homeristic fans with expanded expectations for this team to have objective thoughts on the subject.

To these people they feel that if not for Losman this team would've been major contenders last year.

[TacklingDummy]

Losman was far more successful then 70% of first year starters. There are just too many homeristic fans with expanded expectations for this team to have objective thoughts on the subject.

To these people they feel that if not for Losman this team would've been major contenders last year.

Are you saying Losman had a better 2nd year then Manning had rookie year?

If JP put up the numbers Manning did his rookie year, I would be a member of the JPD.

[TacklingDummy]

Then why did you still want Holcomb starting the final 4 weeks last year even though we were out of it?


I did? Last time I checked I said JP should of been the starter at the end of the year.

Holcomb should of been the starter at the beginning of the year.

[TacklingDummy]

If your expecting him to be big Ben, forget it. But could he be last years Kyle Orton?

LMAO, Kyle Orton? Tell me you did not just say that?

[Nighthawk]

You've got to give him a full season. We need to know what we have in him and if he doesn't produce, then we know we have to go in another direction in next year's draft. If he blows really bad then we have a top draft choice and a shot at Brady Quinn, so we win either way. I don't see a down side.

[Dozerdog]

I'll tell you right now that Dick won't play JP just for the sake of playing him. If he isn't doing the job, out he'll come.

One of the reasons Dick got fired in Chicago was his stubborness not to play #1 draft pick Cade McNown.

...And what is Cade McNown doing these days, anyway?

[Earthquake Enyart]

...And what is Cade McNown doing these days, anyway?
Parking in a handicapped spot somewhere. :ill:

[LifetimeBillsFan]

I am utterly amazed at how narrowly everyone here is addressing this question: I just read every post on this thread and the one name that was never mentioned was that of Craig Nall.

Nall is struggling now, but that does not necessarily mean that he will continue to struggle at a level of performance lower than Holcomb's all season. Look at Holcomb as being the floor, the bottom, the lowest level of performance that Jauron and Fairchild will expect to get from their starting QB this season. If Losman beats out Holcomb for the starting QB job in the preseason--or at anytime early in the season--he will already have surpassed the level of performance that the coaches think that they will get out of Holcomb and they will give him at a minimum 6-8 games to show what he can do, knowing that he will have his ups and downs.

If Losman is 0-6, 0-8, 0-10 as a starter, why should they automatically look to Holcomb first? They went out and got Nall because they thought he had the potential to beat out Holcomb in the first place. I think they will look to see how Nall is doing in practice all of those weeks that JP is starting. If Nall shows them that he has passed Holcomb, in terms of performance in practice--and, just because he may not have done so in the preseason, who is to say that he won't be able to do so by that point in the season--the team would be better off if they replaced Losman with Nall, rather than Holcomb, to see whether Nall would be able to play better on Sundays than JP. If the team is, to use the example that has been given, 0-10 under Losman, what do the Bills have to lose by giving Nall a shot? Nothing. By playing Nall at that point rather than Holcomb, they will have a chance to find out what they have in Nall. Being younger, Nall has more of a future than Holcomb and, if he plays well, he just might show that he is able to give them the level of QB play that they want. They know what they have in Holcomb, they don't really know what they have in Nall. So, if Nall looks even close to as good as Holcomb in practice at that point, they have nothing to lose and everything to gain by going with Nall.

The only reason to play Holcomb is to protect Losman at the beginning of the season or if neither Losman or Nall can crack through that lower threshold of play that they know that Holcomb will give them at some point in the season. The Bills have to find out if they have a guy who can be a quality starting QB in the NFL on their roster now or if they have to go out and get one before next season, so it makes no sense not to play the two young guys over Holcomb if they can match his level of play and one of them does not totally seize control of the job.

If Nall can't play up to the level of Holcomb, the Bills might continue to stick with Losman, even if he continues to lose, if he shows them progress that is not reflected on the scoreboard on Sundays. The only way I can see them playing Holcomb late in the season is if neither young guy shows anything to the coaches to that point or if one or both of the young QBs gets injured.

As much as I would like to see JP Losman get all 16 starts, that's what I would expect the Bills to do and, so, I wouldn't be all that upset if that were to be, in fact, what they did do if JP Losman struggled that much.

[ddaryl]

If JP wins the job we stick with him.

if he goes 0-5 then we stick with him and see if he can dig himself out of it, and end on a positive.

if he sucks all year then we will be in great shape to draft a QB in 2007, which will be what we need ot do if he does suck it up.

I'm sick of musical QB's and want to see what our 1st rd QB can do. If and when he wins the job in camp we all need to accept the fact he won the job.

[Patrick76777]

I am wondering how many of them will be buying tickets if Bills are 0-10 after playing Texans. Unless Bills sell out of tickets early the Bills need to maximize revenue - ask those who proclaimed that Bills need to maximize revenue even if it means raising ticket prices, selling team and moving to LA/Oklahoma (no difference - both are NFL hells).
I understand giving JP a shot, but I don’t understand sacrificing, the owner, the coaches, the GM, the season ticket holders the other players and all of the other fans, just to give JP 16 games.

I’m just trying to get a number. Why does it need to be 16? I hope he’s showing signs by week 4 or 5. But if he’s not showing signs by week 10, I think it would be time to cut bait. And by saying not showing any signs, I mean that he just hasn’t improved.

Why set everybody back just to get this guy 6 more starts? This whole, JP ahead of EVERYBODY idea just doesn't float with me.

And this is just a theory. It’s simply based on JP showing little to know improvement.

I guess I just don’t understand why 16 is the magic number. We should be able to tell long before 16 games if this guy has something or if it’s time to bail on him. .

[Mr. Cynical]

If the QB roster stays as is with JP, KH and Nall, then you play JP all 16 games no matter what. If they pick up another unknown, then give JP 10 games....if he truly is awful beyond any shadow of a doubt, then give the unknown the reigns.

The ONLY situation I would play KH is if JP is doing well and gets hurt.

[Michael82]

Then why did you still want Holcomb starting the final 4 weeks last year even though we were out of it?

When Losman came back after being benched he played against quality teams. By far better competition then Holcomb faced all season. Plus Miami and New England were also playing better then they were at the start of the season.

Against 2 playoffs teams and 3 teams that won 9 games and just missed the playoffs, Losman put up 7 TD passes in 134 passes and was averaging 7.08 ypa against them teams.

During the season Losman played against 3 playoff teams and 4 teams who missed the playoffs by one game.

Holcomb on the other hand played the pitiful Jets twice, a Miami team at the start of the year who was on a 3 game losing streak, and am awful Raiders team. The best defense Holcomb faced all season was the Jets who was ranked #13 in the league.

Losman on the other hand was going up againt Tampa Bay, Carolina, San Diego and a healthy New England defense who had Teddy Bruschi and others also back.

Losman played against far superior of opponents as a 1st year starter and still only finished the season with 2 less TD's. Holcomb also had 2 more TO's then Losman so them performances were a wash.

Holcomb only lead the team to 1 more victory then Losman and also lost 4 of his last 5 games. All this against a majority of crap ass opponents.

How was Holcomb so much more successful? Because his completion percentage was padded due to multiple 3 yard dumpoffs that didn't do the team any good?

For how the Losman haters talk around here you would've thought Holcomb's stat line and wins would've blown Losman's away. The fact is against better opponents Losman and Holcomb was just about a wash at seasons end. One was a 1st year starter and the other was a 10 year vet.
Another good post, man! :hi5:

[X-Era]

LMAO, Kyle Orton? Tell me you did not just say that?

I did just say that.

Its amazing how you can be so blind.

Kyle Orton played decent but wasnt the reason that the Bears went to the playoffs. It was their defense. Strikingly similar to what we all thought our team would have done last year.

My point is this. If young Kyle Orton can get the Bears to the playoffs, Why cant a Losman led team? We wont have the defense, so we are in NO contention for the playoffs, so it matter little who starts. All things being equal, find out what you have in your youngster. Holcomb is a known quantity and isnt good enough.

[TacklingDummy]

I did just say that.

Its amazing how you can be so blind.

Kyle Orton played decent but wasnt the reason that the Bears went to the playoffs. .

Kyle Orton played like *****. As soon as Grossman was healthy Orton sat the bench.

Do you like bad QBs or something? Losman 33rd ranked QB last year and the only one worse then him was Orton, 34th.

[X-Era]

Kyle Orton played like *****. As soon as Grossman was healthy Orton sat the bench.

Do you like bad QBs or something? Losman 33rd ranked QB last year and the only one worse then him was Orton, 34th.

Dont ever tryout for Archery, you miss the mark every time.

The point is, the young QB being a problem is NO problem for a great team, or a really bad team.

An Orton led Bears went to the playoffs, you dont give up the playoffs from starting you youngster, I dont buy it. Eli, Big Ben, Palmer. It can be done.

A crappy team (like us) has nothing to lose. Why not.

Its only when your full of Mularkey and think you have some incredibly small shot at the playoffs that you can justify not "risking" your team to a youngster.

Mularkey was full of sh_t and every damn fan who knew anything knew it. Last years team was terrible and you could see after the NO game they were going NO WHERE regardless of who played QB. It immediately shifted the situation into the "we suck so why not play the youngster" category.

Same situation this year.