Do you think this is true?

[Ickybaluky]

From Michael Silver of Yahoo Sports:

A source close to J.P. Losman says he was told the quarterback was kept on the bench after returning from a knee injury in favor of rookie Trent Edwards because Bills owner Ralph Wilson wanted to save money (on a potential playing-time bonus for Losman and on future contract payments). So how did Losman respond when Edwards left Sunday's road game against the Jets in the third quarter with a wrist injury? He led Buffalo on consecutive scoring drives, including an 85-yard touchdown pass to Lee Evans with 3:38 remaining, to give the Bills a 13-3 victory that improved the team to 3-4.

I know this has been a rumor, but seeing it in print is somewhat startling.

Do you guys really think Wilson forced the decision to start Edwards to save money? Do you really think he would spend all the money he has on players this offseason, only to bench his QB to save a couple million?

It is pretty amazing to think that might happen.

[Bufftp]

Re: Do you think this is true?

Yes. I believe it to be true. I have been a fan of the bills for over 38 years. This is a Wilson style move. Not surprising. What would be surprising is if he didn't do it.

[clumping platelets]

Re: Do you think this is true?

[TacklingDummy]

Re: Do you think this is true?

"A source close to J.P. Losman says he was told the quarterback was kept on the bench after returning from a knee injury in favor of rookie Trent Edwards"

Ahh, so JP started this rumor. What a cancer.

[acehole]

Re: Do you think this is true?

Try 15 million about for his signing bonus for the extention.
He does that to a guy that embraced the city of Buffalo and worked his ass off in the offseason and season to come early leave late and study game film.It is no wonder we cant attract good FA'a and coaches. It is no wonder we have not even smelled the playoffs in quit some time. While you guy are getting Randy Moss begging to be a Patriot we get M jenkins who nobody else will sign.

From Michael Silver of Yahoo Sports:



I know this has been a rumor, but seeing it in print is somewhat startling.

Do you guys really think Wilson forced the decision to start Edwards to save money? Do you really think he would spend all the money he has on players this offseason, only to bench his QB to save a couple million?

It is pretty amazing to think that might happen.

[HHURRICANE]

Re: Do you think this is true?

Mortenson reported this yesterday and as much as I think Wilson is the cheapest SOB on the planet I think the story is completely bogus.

I told you over the summer that I have a friend in the FO that said that there were real concerns about JP's ability to lead this team.

JP was already on a short leash so his terrible start, Trent's early success and praise, and the fact that JP wasn't 100% led to his benching.

This is when the press should be forced to divulge a source.

[RockStar36]

Re: Do you think this is true?

Part of it is probably true.

The minute the AP story about Edwards came out it had a paragraph detailing JP's contract status and the bonus. That was before any source came out.

It's known league wide that Ralph is a penny pincher.

[TacklingDummy]

Re: Do you think this is true?

This is when the press should be forced to divulge a source.

They did, "A source close to J.P. Losman" . The source is JP whining and crying thinking his benching had something to do with money.

Sorry JP but if you performed the first 2 weeks you probably would still be the starter and probably would have reached your incentives. Please don't blame anyone but yourself.

[acehole]

Re: Do you think this is true?

You have to addmit that T Edwards got more then his share in the pre season...before the slow start...before the injury. That makes the whole claim more billevable.

Mortenson reported this yesterday and as much as I think Wilson is the cheapest SOB on the planet I think the story is completely bogus.

I told you over the summer that I have a friend in the FO that said that there were real concerns about JP's ability to lead this team.

JP was already on a short leash so his terrible start, Trent's early success and praise, and the fact that JP wasn't 100% led to his benching.

This is when the press should be forced to divulge a source.

[trapezeus]

Re: Do you think this is true?

it's probably partially true. if i am the owner, JP hasn't proved to be worth $5MM this year or $15 for additionaly years. Why take that hit, when your brain trust is telling you, "we have this rookie who's the real deal, and even if he isn't, we can't use JP. He doesn't get it."

Is it cheap to say, "i'm not spending that much on broken parts."

[Ickybaluky]

Re: Do you think this is true?

I could believe it if the Bills had been really cheap in the offseason.

However, they spent millions on their OL and DE's. Why do that if you are going to go cheap? A couple of million Losman might earn pales in comparison to what they spent on Dockery, Walker, Kelsay and Schobel. It is hard to imagine.

[HHURRICANE]

Re: Do you think this is true?

I could believe it if the Bills had been really cheap in the offseason.

However, they spent millions on their OL and DE's. Why do that if you are going to go cheap? A couple of million Losman might earn pales in comparison to what they spent on Dockery, Walker, Kelsay and Schobel. It is hard to imagine.

Exactly. They were on CBS saying that the Bills would save 3 million in incentives by not having Losman play.

Peerless Price makes 2.5 million a year, and Denney makes almost 2 million a year and these guys suck and aren't even playing right now.

Give me a break.

[User Manuel]

Re: Do you think this is true?

From Michael Silver of Yahoo Sports:



I know this has been a rumor, but seeing it in print is somewhat startling.

Do you guys really think Wilson forced the decision to start Edwards to save money? Do you really think he would spend all the money he has on players this offseason, only to bench his QB to save a couple million?

It is pretty amazing to think that might happen.

I don't see where it is true. He could play JP all the way and then say JPs too expensive after the year.

Ralph has a tendency to fall in love with certain players and i think that was the case here. I think it is almost hard to remember how bad JP was those first few games. I think anything was a relief to Ralph.

Here is what I do know:

Bills are basically 3-1 since Trent was the starter.

Trent has not been very good either since, but we have at least held the ball and the defense has been significantly better.

JP looked like last years end of season JP yesterday.

JP looked HORRIBLE the first two games.

The Jets are truly awful.

What does this all mean?

I have no idea, but I think injury or not JP is at least back in the conversation.

[OpIv37]

Re: Do you think this is true?

I don't think the money was the sole reason for playing Edwards, however, it's been reported several times that Ralph was involved in the decision.

Given that neither QB has really distinguished themselves, I do think the money played into the decision- ie, Ralph said something to the effect of "If we're going to suck, we might as well suck with Edwards because it costs a few million less than sucking with JP."

[User Manuel]

Re: Do you think this is true?

Exactly. They were on CBS saying that the Bills would save 3 million in incentives by not having Losman play.

Peerless Price makes 2.5 million a year, and Denney makes almost 2 million a year and these guys suck and aren't even playing right now.

Give me a break.

I am not sure he would reach any incentives the way it was going.