Interesting stuff to duscuss

[Yasgur's Farm]

I decided to calculate what each QB did per drive to see if there can be a better comparison. Part of this is because some people on the board only point to the won loss percentage of the Bills when the QBs were starting. This is a very flawed measure because in the New England start JP was injured the first drive and in the Jets start, JP scored a majority of the points. It is also flawed because it considers the accomplishments of special teams and defense as accomplishments of either QB. While Offense and Defense may be inter-related to a degree, JP doesn't go up to Roscoe and say "Run this one back kiddo" and then Roscoe gets all fired up and runs it back. Neither does Trent go to George Wilson and say, "Get a couple of INTs for the Trentski," and then Wilson obeys. Rationally, many things that the defense and special teams accomplish is independent of what the QB is doing (this is true of offense as well, but at least Trent and JP had mostly the same offensive personnel each game and were integral to offenses functioning).

Some useful information is here. Two big gaps are the quality of Buffalo's defense and special teams play (mostly for field position) and the quality of defenses the two played (it looks to be equal aggregately, but I've only looked at PPG of defenses faced). I will probably write some stuff up on that later but I have a final to write and then moving preparations.

The stats were all accumulated from nfl.com. The drives, plays per drive, pass plays per drive, run plays per drive, scrambling first down, and any stats that are gathered from the first New England game or the second Jets game are counted from the play by play section of nfl.com. All other stats are based off of either the box scores of the games on nfl.com or the player stat pages on nfl.com.

"Drives" counts all drives the offense had a play so it doesn't include kickoff or punt returns for TDs but EVERYTHING else.

Plays count all plays from scrimmage excluding plays nullified by penalty. This is why if you add pass plays and run plays, it will not equal total plays because of field goals and punts.

A called run play for a QB (a sneak) is considered a run play while a scramble is considered a pass play. nfl.com distinguishes between the two in their play by play so the judgment call on whether a play was a designed QB run play or a scramble via decision by the QB is theirs. I did this because it gives more insight into the decision making of the coaches and QBs, whether or not they intended to call a run play or a pass play and how likely the QB is to scramble. The running yards and 1st downs from running for each QB does not follow this distinction.

All sacks, QB scrambles, and pass attempts (including the Marshawn option) are pass plays. All runs (including fake punts) and QB sneaks are run plays. Punts and Field Goals are plays but neither run nor pass.

Offensive points scored includes all points from TDs by the offense and FGs. Returns for TDs (INT, FUM, kickoff returns, punt returns) and safeties are not included.

All rate stats will be to 2 decimal places.

If you think I counted something wrong then point it out and I will eventually post my per game calculations for the numbers. I am pretty busy and I used this as a pretty extensive procrastination tool so I need to get stuff done so it may take me a while.

Have fun with this.

Total number of Drives:
Trent Edwards - 111
JP Losman - 66

Plays per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 632/111 - 5.69
JP Losman - 388/66 - 5.88

Pass Plays per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 284/111 - 2.56
JP Losman - 197/66 - 2.98

Run Plays per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 267/111 - 2.41
JP Losman - 153/66 - 2.32

Time of Possession per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 17045 sec/111 - 2:33
JP Losman - 10645 sec/66 - 2:41

Passing First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 81/111 - .73
JP Losman - 59/66 - .89

Running First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 53/111 - .48
JP Losman - 36/66 - .55

First Down per Drive (excluding Penalty):
Trent Edwards - 134/111 - 1.21
JP Losman - 95/66 - 1.44

Sacks per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 12/111 - .11
JP Losman - 14/66 - .21

Sack Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 105/111 - (.95)
JP Losman - 103/66 - (1.56)

Passing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1630/111 - 14.68
JP Losman - 1204/66 - 18.24

Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1115/111 - 10.05
JP Losman - 793/66 - 12.02

QB Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 49/111 - .44
JP Losman - 110/66 - 1.67

QB Rushing 1st Down per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04
JP Losman - 8/66 - .12

QB Fumbles per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04
JP Losman - 5/66 - .08

QB INT per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 8/111 - .07
JP Losman - 6/66 - .09

QB Turnover per Drive (includes lost fumbles):
Trent Edwards - 8/111 - .07
JP Losman - 8/66 - .12

Passing TDs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 7/111 - .06
JP Losman - 4/66 - .06

Rushing TDs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04
JP Losman - 4/66 - .06

Offensive Points per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 125/111 - 1.13
JP Losman - 88/66 - 1.33
17 stat categories
JP wins 11 categories
Trent wins 5 categories
1 category tied

Sounds about right... It seems even though JP has more frequent "negg plays", he still outshines Trent in just about every positive category.

[feelthepain]

JP is a veteran Edwards was a rookie.

[hydro]

JP is a veteran Edwards was a rookie.

/thread

[yordad]

/threadHow does that show he was the better QB again? Did you read those figures? The figures say it all. They are cut and dry. JPs negative plays were outweight by his positive ones when compared to Trent. It is clear.

[Philagape]

The figures say it all.

And that says it all about the pro-JP mentality.

[EDS]

How does that show he was the better QB again? Did you read those figures? The figures say it all. They are cut and dry. JPs negative plays were outweight by his positive ones when compared to Trent. It is clear.

JP has great physical tools and all, but his head is just not there. People who know him can confirm this.

[yordad]

And that says it all about the pro-JP mentality.Well call it what you want. I call it the pro-Objective, pro-Bills mentality. The one who produces MORE should play MORE. What a crazy idea, huh.

[yordad]

JP has great physical tools and all, but his head is just not there. People who know him can confirm this.Then why did he PRODUCE more? And, isn't PRODUCTION what matters? Dan Marino was dumber then a box of rocks, but he produced.

Not that I buy that arguement anyways.

[Philagape]

Well call it what you want. I call it the pro-Objective, pro-Bills mentality. The one who produces MORE should play MORE. What a crazy idea, huh.

Not crazy, just simple-minded.


Dan Marino was dumber then a box of rocks

Now THAT's crazy.

[Philagape]

Then why did he PRODUCE more?

Because he didn't have to play in a blizzard and a monsoon, and he wasn't a rookie.

[EDS]

Then why did he PRODUCE more? And, isn't PRODUCTION what matters? Dan Marino was dumber then a box of rocks, but he produced.

Not that I buy that arguement anyways.

I wish the guy the best but the light just hasn't gone on for him and I don't think it ever will.

I think the real question is why do so many Bills fans want Losman, despite his struggles, to get another chance at the expense of Edwards? Edwards may end up failing also but the Bills need to find out one way or the other and give him the same chances Losman had.

[Yasgur's Farm]

Because he didn't have to play in a blizzard and a monsoon, and he wasn't a rookie.Someone should keep track of the excuses in this thread... I don't count any for JP to this point...

[yordad]

Because he didn't have to play in a blizzard and a monsoon, and he wasn't a rookie.So.... he did produce more? I guess we should take this a few words at a time so you can't say I am twisting yours.

[yordad]

I wish the guy the best but the light just hasn't gone on for him and I don't think it ever will.

I think the real question is why do so many Bills fans want Losman, despite his struggles, to get another chance at the expense of Edwards? Edwards may end up failing also but the Bills need to find out one way or the other and give him the same chances Losman had.Why do I want JP given another chance? Easy question. Because he produced more. If you think TE will be better in the future.... first, I disagree; second, if he does get better then JP start him then and not before.

[Dr. Lecter]

Now THAT's crazy.

Actually it is not. His wonderlic was something like a 12.

[Philagape]

So.... he did produce more? I guess we should take this a few words at a time so you can't say I am twisting yours.

How many threads have there been blindly comparing their stats? And how many people have been convinced by that? Have there been any new ideas introduced today? Anything that hasn't been said a hundred times? Anything that has at least a 1% chance of winning new converts?

[Philagape]

Actually it is not. His wonderlic was something like a 12.

He wasn't dumb on the field.

[Yasgur's Farm]

How many threads have there been blindly comparing their stats? And how many people have been convinced by that? Have there been any new ideas introduced today? Anything that hasn't been said a hundred times? Anything that has a 1% chance of winning new converts?Just taking away the claims that Trent sustains drives better... Trent has a better 3 and out %... Trent produces more yards... Trent produces more points... Trent produces more yards per play... yadda, yadda.

Those statements have been "blindly" floated by Trent supporters since day 1. Trouble is, those statements can't be backed by facts. But I guess when "feelings" rule the day, who needs facts?

[yordad]

How many threads have there been blindly comparing their stats? And how many people have been convinced by that? Have there been any new ideas introduced today? Anything that hasn't been said a hundred times? Anything that has a 1% chance of winning new converts?Was my question complicated? Stats show production. I am asking you who produced more. Who produced more?

[Yasgur's Farm]

Don't expect a clear answer yordad... That's unfair.

[Philagape]

Was my question complicated? Stats show production. I am asking you who produced more. Who produced more?

The question is irrelevant to the issue. What these stats don't show is more relevant than what they do. And the overwhelming majority agrees, including the coaches who, believe it or not, want to win as much if not more than you do and unquestionably know more about the players and the position and the sport more than you do.

[hydro]

And yet who is the starter coming into this year? Obviously the coaches see something we don't.

[Philagape]

And yet who is the starter coming into this year? Obviously the coaches see something we don't.

That just a tiny few of us don't.

But they must be motivated by money and ego, because they disagree with the tiny few.

[yordad]

The question is irrelevant to the issue. What these stats don't show is more relevant than what they do. And the overwhelming majority agrees, including the coaches who, believe it or not, want to win as much if not more than you do and unquestionably know more about the players and the position and the sport more than you do.Who produces more is irrelevent when choosing our starter? And, if these coaches know so much more then everyone, why did they change there minds several times in one season? These are questions, but don't bother answering (like you were even going to).

Ladies and Gents, I rest my case. How can I debate this with someone who thinks production is irrelevant when choosing a starter.

[Yasgur's Farm]

What's the harm in answering the "irrelevant" question?

[yordad]

And yet who is the starter coming into this year? Obviously the coaches see something we don't.Yep, and they seen that same thing when the started JP over a healthy TE in the middle of last season? Or K. Thomas over Greer? Or Youboty over Greer? Or A-train over Jackson? Or Tripplett over McCargo? Or signing Kelsey to big cash? Or cutting T. Pennington in favor of K. Chambers? Or.......

[hydro]

LOL, signing Kelsay to big cash. The coaching staff has nothing to do with that. McCargo did nothing to show he should start over tripplett last season. He does show more promise being younger and getting better though. Pennington is a horrible argument. Chambers is also a long snapper. Can Pennington long snap? Doubt it.

A-train was only in as a 3rd down back and mainly because he could block. There was no evidence Jackson was as good of a blocker as he was. Greer over Thomas was possibly their only slip up.

[Philagape]

What's the harm in answering the "irrelevant" question?

When a question is irrelevant, there has to be a reason to discuss it, not a reason not to.
What color is the grass? What the square root of 64? Those questions are about as relevant, let's discuss those.

[Philagape]

Who produces more is irrelevent when choosing our starter? And, if these coaches know so much more then everyone, why did they change there minds several times in one season? These are questions, but don't bother answering (like you were even going to).

Ladies and Gents, I rest my case. How can I debate this with someone who thinks production is irrelevant when choosing a starter.

Indeed, how can you when you discount (rather, don't even talk about) the reasons for the marginal production difference? You can't.

[Yasgur's Farm]

A-train was only in as a 3rd down back and mainly because he could block.Then why did the coaches start him when Beast wasn't able to answer the bell?

BTW... JP managed to lead the offense to more production in spite of the absense of Lynch for an extended period of time.

[Yasgur's Farm]

When a question is irrelevant, there has to be a reason to discuss it, not a reason not to.
What color is the grass? What the square root of 64? Those questions are about as relevant, let's discuss those.Green and 8. Oh damn... I'm melting!!

[yordad]

LOL, signing Kelsay to big cash. The coaching staff has nothing to do with that. McCargo did nothing to show he should start over tripplett last season. He does show more promise being younger and getting better though. Pennington is a horrible arguement. Chambers is also a long snapper. Can Pennington long snap? Doubt it.

A-train was only in as a 3rd down back and mainly because he could block. There was no evidence Jackson was as good of a blocker as he was. Greer over Thomas was possibly their only slip up.Did someone have to evaluate Kelsey's performance before giving him the contract? Was performance assessment done by contract negotiators? If so, then the problem is even bigger then I imagined.

MaCargo had more plays then Tripplett in a fraction of the time. Only 6 less tackles and 2.5 times the sacks. McCargo produced way more minute for minute. I could prove this conclusively if we had a minutes played stat, but I don't think we need it. Who do you think had more time on the field?

Niell was the long snapper. It was his only duty (he was listed as a last resort DE, but never performed it). Preston and Whittle could do it in a pinch. I think backup tackle is a higher priority then backup long snapper. You may not agree (which would be really strange), but if the coaches don't agree, then again, the problem is even bigger then I thought.

Was A-train the third down back when Lynch was injured? No.

You selectively defending these horrible moves further proves my point.

[gr8slayer]

Then why did the coaches start him when Beast wasn't able to answer the bell?

BTW... JP managed to lead the offense to more production in spite of the absense of Lynch for an extended period of time.
The coaches started Jackson....

[Philagape]

LOL, signing Kelsay to big cash. The coaching staff has nothing to do with that. McCargo did nothing to show he should start over tripplett last season. He does show more promise being younger and getting better though. Pennington is a horrible argument. Chambers is also a long snapper. Can Pennington long snap? Doubt it.

A-train was only in as a 3rd down back and mainly because he could block. There was no evidence Jackson was as good of a blocker as he was. Greer over Thomas was possibly their only slip up.

Plus, A-Train, Thomas and Tripplett are gone now.

And whatever mistakes a coach makes, fans make them too. So that whole argument is meaningless.

[yordad]

When a question is irrelevant, there has to be a reason to discuss it, not a reason not to.
What color is the grass? What the square root of 64? Those questions are about as relevant, let's discuss those.Except my question was relevent. But, good thing you stopped to answer a question about why it was hard to answer a question, instead of just answering the question.

[yordad]

The coaches started Jackson....No they didn't. Not until A-Train was injured.

[hydro]

Did someone have to evaluate Kelsey's performance before giving him the contract? Was performance assessment done by contract negotiators? If so, then the problem is even bigger then I imagined. The point is moot anyway. Kelsay getting 25 million (not all guaranteed) isn't even that much for a player of his stature anyway.

MaCargo had more plays then Tripplett in a fraction of the time. Only 6 less tackles and 2.5 times the sacks. McCargo produced way more minute for minute. I could prove this conclusively if we had a minutes played stat, but I don't think we need it. Who do you think had more time on the field? And yet we cut him. So I guess we gave him every chance we could to let him succeed and he obviously didn't meet their standards. Did Triplett really get that many more plays than McCargo even though he started?

Niell was the long snapper. It was his only duty (he was listed as a last resort DE, but never performed it). Preston and Whittle could do it in a pinch. LOL, are you a Bills insider? How the hell do you know?I think backup tackle is a higher priority then backup long snapper. You may not agree (which would be really strange), but if the coaches don't agree, then again, the problem is even bigger then I thought. With all of our injuries at the time we had no choice but to have a player who could fill two positional requirements.

You selectively defending these horrible moves further proves my point. That is your opinion

[gr8slayer]

No they didn't. Not until A-Train was injured.
Comical at best considering he only carried the ball 36 times the entire season.

[gr8slayer]

Add to that the fact that Kelsay didn't even get $25 million he got $23 which is nothing with the way the cap has been going up and up and up every year. At no point in that contract does he make more than $3.7 million either, which does nothing to us from a cap stand point.

[Yasgur's Farm]

Indeed, how can you when you discount (rather, don't even talk about) the reasons for the marginal production difference? You can't.Marginal? Why don't we have a look?

Maybe I need you to define "marginal" for me?

Plays per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 632/111 - 5.69
3.3% JP Losman - 388/66 - 5.88

Time of Possession per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 17045 sec/111 - 2:33
3.4% JP Losman - 10645 sec/66 - 2:41

Passing First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 81/111 - .73
21.9% JP Losman - 59/66 - .89

Running First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 53/111 - .48
14.6% JP Losman - 36/66 - .55

First Down per Drive (excluding Penalty):
Trent Edwards - 134/111 - 1.21
19.0% JP Losman - 95/66 - 1.44

Passing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1630/111 - 14.68
24.3% JP Losman - 1204/66 - 18.24

Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1115/111 - 10.05
19.6% JP Losman - 793/66 - 12.02

QB Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 49/111 - .44
279.5% JP Losman - 110/66 - 1.67

QB Rushing 1st Down per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04
200.0% JP Losman - 8/66 - .12 Total number of Drives:

Rushing TDs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04
50.0% JP Losman - 4/66 - .06

Offensive Points per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 125/111 - 1.13
17.7% JP Losman - 88/66 - 1.33

[Yasgur's Farm]

The coaches started Jackson....No... not until A-train tore a muscle. A train went almost 2 whole games.

[gr8slayer]

No... not until A-train tore a muscle. A train went almost 2 whole games.
And he got a total of 24 carries in those two games, he may have started in the sense that he got the first snap but that's about it.

[Philagape]

Maybe I need you to define "marginal" for me?

Not enough, considering the reasons.

[yordad]

Indeed, how can you when you discount (rather, don't even talk about) the reasons for the marginal production difference? You can't.Funny how the fact JP produced more is irrelevant, but the reasons why are what is relevant. That makes zero sense. How about the numerous relevant reasons why JP should have been outperformed, but wasn't. I would give examples, but I ain't sure you could/would follow.

Then again, you would some how say I was making excuses, and we would be back full circle, comparing the two straight up with no excuses. And it would feel like I was chasing my tail again, just like every JP vs. TE conversation with you.

I do agree with you sometimes. Hopefully we can agree on this someday. I am sure if that happens it will be for entirely different reasons. But, if either QB does something to make it unanimous all the better.

[gr8slayer]

Marginal? Why don't we have a look?

Maybe I need you to define "marginal" for me?

Plays per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 632/111 - 5.69
3.3% JP Losman - 388/66 - 5.88

Time of Possession per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 17045 sec/111 - 2:33
3.4% JP Losman - 10645 sec/66 - 2:41

Passing First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 81/111 - .73
21.9% JP Losman - 59/66 - .89

Running First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 53/111 - .48
14.6% JP Losman - 36/66 - .55

First Down per Drive (excluding Penalty):
Trent Edwards - 134/111 - 1.21
19.0% JP Losman - 95/66 - 1.44

Passing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1630/111 - 14.68
24.3% JP Losman - 1204/66 - 18.24

Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1115/111 - 10.05
19.6% JP Losman - 793/66 - 12.02

QB Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 49/111 - .44
279.5% JP Losman - 110/66 - 1.67

QB Rushing 1st Down per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04
200.0% JP Losman - 8/66 - .12 Total number of Drives:

Rushing TDs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04
50.0% JP Losman - 4/66 - .06

Offensive Points per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 125/111 - 1.13
17.7% JP Losman - 88/66 - 1.33
Wow, pathetic numbers at best for any QB. They were both horrible, why even try to compare the two....

[yordad]

Comical at best considering he only carried the ball 36 times the entire season.Plain and simple. A-train started VS the Jags and took the lions share of the carries. I find it comical too, for entirely different reasons.

[Philagape]

Funny how the fact JP produced more is irrelevant, but the reasons why are what is relevant. That makes zero sense. How about the numerous relevant reasons why JP should have been outperformed, but wasn't. I would give examples, but I ain't sure you could/would follow.

Then again, you would some how say I was making excuses, and we would be back full circle, comparing the two straight up with no excuses. And it would feel like I was chasing my tail again, just like every JP vs. TE conversation with you.

I do agree with you sometimes. Hopefully we can agree on this someday. I am sure if that happens it will be for entirely different reasons. But, if either QB does something to make it unanimous all the better.

Pointing out reasons makes zero sense? Did you really say that? That's what results in chasing your tail.
I'm willing to discuss any reason/excuse and how relevant it is and why, especially why the veteran "should have been outperformed" by the rookie who got a blizzard and monsoon.

[acehole]

JP is a veteran Edwards was a rookie.


You are 100% correct.

But the argument wasnt about that.

It was the T Edwards was a better qb.

Nothing really pionts to that in the stats.

[gr8slayer]

Everyone wants facts? Here's a fact, Edwards is the starter this year, Losman is not. What happened last year has nothing to do with what happens this year. Get over it and move on....

[gr8slayer]

You are 100% correct.

But the argument wasnt about that.

It was the T Edwards was a better qb.

Nothing really pionts to that in the stats.
Since when is football about stats? Last time I checked it was wins that mattered.

[yordad]

Hydro......
Did someone have to evaluate Kelsey's performance before giving him the contract? Was performance assessment done by contract negotiators? If so, then the problem is even bigger then I imagined. The point is moot anyway. Kelsay getting 25 million (not all guaranteed) isn't even that much for a player of his stature anyway. First, in no way does that make it moot. Just because it doesn't support your poor disagreement, doesn't make it moot. And, considering you thought it was so moot, I wonder why you decided you wanted to disagree with me dispite the fact you new I was right.

MaCargo had more plays then Tripplett in a fraction of the time. Only 6 less tackles and 2.5 times the sacks. McCargo produced way more minute for minute. I could prove this conclusively if we had a minutes played stat, but I don't think we need it. Who do you think had more time on the field? And yet we cut him. So I guess we gave him every chance we could to let him succeed and he obviously didn't meet their standards. Did Triplett really get that many more plays than McCargo even though he started? If he was bad enough to cut, seems he was bad enough to bench. And, YES Tripplett got a considerable amount more time.

Niell was the long snapper. It was his only duty (he was listed as a last resort DE, but never performed it). Preston and Whittle could do it in a pinch. LOL, are you a Bills insider? How the hell do you know? First, YES. Second, How do you know? I think backup tackle is a higher priority then backup long snapper. You may not agree (which would be really strange), but if the coaches don't agree, then again, the problem is even bigger then I thought. With all of our injuries at the time we had no choice but to have a player who could fill two positional requirements. Oh, so that is why BACKUP longsnapper was more important then backup TACKLE?

You selectively defending these horrible moves further proves my point. That is your opinion And, a darn good one if I must say so myself.

[Yasgur's Farm]

Everyone wants facts? Here's a fact, Edwards is the starter this year, Losman is not. What happened last year has nothing to do with what happens this year. Get over it and move on....LOL... I was wondering when we'd get around to these gems!

[Philagape]

Going by stats means one could never watch a single down and think they know better. Is that what the stats people believe?

[hydro]

Hydro......
Did someone have to evaluate Kelsey's performance before giving him the contract? Was performance assessment done by contract negotiators? If so, then the problem is even bigger then I imagined. The point is moot anyway. Kelsay getting 25 million (not all guaranteed) isn't even that much for a player of his stature anyway. First, in no way does that make it moot. Just because it doesn't support your poor disagreement, doesn't make it moot. And, considering you thought it was so moot, I wonder why you decided you wanted to disagree with me dispite the fact you new I was right.

MaCargo had more plays then Tripplett in a fraction of the time. Only 6 less tackles and 2.5 times the sacks. McCargo produced way more minute for minute. I could prove this conclusively if we had a minutes played stat, but I don't think we need it. Who do you think had more time on the field? And yet we cut him. So I guess we gave him every chance we could to let him succeed and he obviously didn't meet their standards. Did Triplett really get that many more plays than McCargo even though he started? If he was bad enough to cut, seems he was bad enough to bench. And, YES Tripplett got a considerable amount more time.

Niell was the long snapper. It was his only duty (he was listed as a last resort DE, but never performed it). Preston and Whittle could do it in a pinch. LOL, are you a Bills insider? How the hell do you know? First, YES. Second, How do you know? I think backup tackle is a higher priority then backup long snapper. You may not agree (which would be really strange), but if the coaches don't agree, then again, the problem is even bigger then I thought. With all of our injuries at the time we had no choice but to have a player who could fill two positional requirements. Oh, so that is why BACKUP longsnapper was more important then backup TACKLE?

You selectively defending these horrible moves further proves my point. That is your opinion And, a darn good one if I must say so myself.
Could you be a little more smug? It really helps your arguement :up:

He wasn't a backup long snapper, he was the starter! We picked him up after releasing our former long snapper because we needed a player who could fill two positional requirements. If you didn't know this then how can I be convinced you know anything about this team.


First, in no way does that make it moot. Just because it doesn't support your poor disagreement, doesn't make it moot. And, considering you thought it was so moot, I wonder why you decided you wanted to disagree with me dispite the fact you new I was right.
Actually it does make it moot because it wasn't as bad of a decision as you are making it out to be. Believe it or not, but that wasn't a bad contract for his production. But keep thinking you are more intelligent then the rest of us.

[acehole]

Since when is football about stats? Last time I checked it was wins that mattered.

Well it should mater if your qb plays well enought to contribute to that...or the team just carries him....it will mater to the players around him.

Anyway glad you posted...

We will see the wins this year and judge him by your measure.

[yordad]

Add to that the fact that Kelsay didn't even get $25 million he got $23 which is nothing with the way the cap has been going up and up and up every year. At no point in that contract does he make more than $3.7 million either, which does nothing to us from a cap stand point."Adam Schefter of NFL Network reports that the Buffalo Bills have signed defensive end Chris Kelsay to a four-year, $23 million deal. The package includes roughly $13 million in guaranteed money."

No more then 3.7 million? Yeah, so I suppose his 13 million doesn't count. Lets allocate it for a fair assessment. 5.75 million a year for a lower tier non-blind side DE? Poor value.

[gr8slayer]

"Adam Schefter of NFL Network reports that the Buffalo Bills have signed defensive end Chris Kelsay to a four-year, $23 million deal. The package includes roughly $13 million in guaranteed money."

No more then 3.7 million? Yeah, so I suppose his 13 million doesn't count. Lets allocate it for a fair assessment. 5.75 million a year for a lower tier non-blind side DE? Poor value.
2/26/2007: Signed a four-year, $23 million contract. The deal included an $8 million signing bonus and an initial roster bonus of $3 million. 2008: $1.4 million, 2009: $3 million, 2010: $3.7 million, 2011: Free Agent

[yordad]

Wow, pathetic numbers at best for any QB. They were both horrible, why even try to compare the two....They are compared because they are the only two Bills QBs with starting time. Seemed obvious. And, they aren't good numbers, your right, but how much sense does "well they both didn't seem to produce too much, so lets start the least productive" make to you?

[The Spaz]

The coaches obviously don't care about those stats. and neither do I.

[gr8slayer]

They are compared because they are the only two Bills QBs with starting time. Seemed obvious. And, they aren't good numbers, your right, but how much sense does "well they both didn't seem to produce too much, so lets start the least productive" make to you?
How much sense does it make to start the guy who has had plenty of opportunities and failed nearly every time. It's time to move on and get some fresh blood in here.

[yordad]

Pointing out reasons makes zero sense? Did you really say that? Nope. I said you saying the results don't matter but the reasons for the resuklts does matter made no sense.That's what results in chasing your tail. Nope, me being silly enough to answer your rediculous questions, and me being silly enough to ask you relevant ones is why.
I'm willing to discuss any reason/excuse and how relevant it is and why, especially why the veteran "should have been outperformed" by the rookie who got a blizzard and monsoon. Again, if you think the reasons JP outperformed TE are relevant, then the fact JP outperformed him, BY LOGIC, is 100% relevant.Gosh. Why do I do this with you. You will continue twisting my clear words. And, you will continue giving indirect twisting answers forever.

[OpIv37]

I can't even friggin believe we're still having this debate.

I was pulling for Losman but the guy just doesn't win games. He's had 4 years- 3 with significant playing time- and hasn't gotten any better. Losman is not going to bring this team to the next level. I don't like the fact that we have to start the franchise QB search over again for the 5th time since Kelly retired, but the sooner we can get over the fact that Losman isn't the guy, the sooner we can figure out who is the guy.

Maybe Edwards is the franchise QB and maybe he isn't, but he played well enough last year to earn his shot. JP got 3 years and did nothing with it- he's had his shot. Time to move on.

This goes along with what I've been saying in other threads- doing the same thing and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. Every year we hope for guys like Losman and Reed to get better, but it never happens. And it never will.

[gr8slayer]

I can't even friggin believe we're still having this debate.

I was pulling for Losman but the guy just doesn't win games. He's had 4 years- 3 with significant playing time- and hasn't gotten any better. Losman is not going to bring this team to the next level. I don't like the fact that we have to start the franchise QB search over again for the 5th time since Kelly retired, but the sooner we can get over the fact that Losman isn't the guy, the sooner we can figure out who is the guy.

Maybe Edwards is the franchise QB and maybe he isn't, but he played well enough last year to earn his shot. JP got 3 years and did nothing with it- he's had his shot. Time to move on.

This goes along with what I've been saying in other threads- doing the same thing and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. Every year we hope for guys like Losman and Reed to get better, but it never happens. And it never will.
Where's BMN when we need him :shakeno:

[yordad]

Everyone wants facts? Here's a fact, Edwards is the starter this year, Losman is not. What happened last year has nothing to do with what happens this year. Get over it and move on....So, because no one on this board has the power to make or change a decision, that means it shouldn't be discussed? Why have a message board then?

Draz here just found a post that clearly shatters everything JP haters have been saying for months, and now the arguement is "but... but... but..just stop talking about it".

[OpIv37]

Where's BMN when we need him :shakeno:

and before he jumps in, for the record I ripped on the FO for the Edwards pick last year. I thought it was stupid and wasteful given our other needs, and I was wrong. For a 3rd round QB to play that well as a rookie is definitely a pleasant surprise, and given Losman's lack of development, Edwards clearly fills a need that I didn't see at the time. Like many others here, I had too much faith in Losman.

This crow would test better with some BBQ sauce.

[yordad]

Since when is football about stats? Last time I checked it was wins that mattered.Since we are evaluating a QB. Not a team. When Trent starts running back punts or playing LB, let me know.

[gr8slayer]

and before he jumps in, for the record I ripped on the FO for the Edwards pick last year. I thought it was stupid and wasteful given our other needs, and I was wrong. For a 3rd round QB to play that well as a rookie is definitely a pleasant surprise, and given Losman's lack of development, Edwards clearly fills a need that I didn't see at the time. Like many others here, I had too much faith in Losman.

This crow would test better with some BBQ sauce.
The Losman project was ****ed from the start due to bad coaching and handling of him. He has the tools to be any kind of QB he wants to be, he just needs the coaching and situation, he's not going to get that here.

[OpIv37]

So, because no one on this board has the power to make or change a decision, that means it shouldn't be discussed? Why have a message board then?

Draz here just found a post that clearly shatters everything JP haters have been saying for months, and now the arguement is "but... but... but..just stop talking about it".

draz found numbers that compare a 4 year vet to a rookie and didn't include the most important number: wins. It's comparing apples to oranges.

At this point, a better comparison would be JP in 2007 to JP in 2005 and 2006, which would show that he's developing far too slowly to be our franchise QB.

[Dr. Lecter]

and before he jumps in, for the record I ripped on the FO for the Edwards pick last year. I thought it was stupid and wasteful given our other needs, and I was wrong. For a 3rd round QB to play that well as a rookie is definitely a pleasant surprise, and given Losman's lack of development, Edwards clearly fills a need that I didn't see at the time. Like many others here, I had too much faith in Losman.

This crow would test better with some BBQ sauce.

If you are going to be up front and honest about it, I guess I won't even bust your balls about it. Thanks for runing my fun and driving me outside to do work.

[acehole]

Going by stats means one could never watch a single down and think they know better. Is that what the stats people believe?

Stats = reality.

Stats tell us things.

If you dont think stats are important.....

You think reality doent mater...only your opinion.

Then your opinions are baseless.

Built on nothing but hopes and dreams.

Ever NFL coach and front office person looks at them all day long.....

Contracts are based on them.

Players are evaluated from them in school and the pros.

I cant believe you people argue these pionts...

All to support a qb who has proved nothing yet.

They may not mater to you....but if he doent improve on his "Numbers" or Stats from last year (Which were last in many catagories).

...the front office won't be as keen as you to ignore them.

Trent Edwards is the Starter. JP is the back up.

For now they are all out for Trent as they
have to be to give a rookie confidence and
to focus on his job at hand.

If you think that they will never pull him if his STATS or
number are in the tank you are sorley mistaken.....the Fans...the players...and the coaching...(which may be there last coaching job)
Will not stand by while he learns the long ball and not getting batted at LOS,
not getting hurt and scoring Td's... indefinitely. If you people dont think it maters to guys like Lee Evans that Trents stats are last you are sorley mistaken again.

Usually except in the bizzarro world some of you live in...

better stat = better players.

IE more rushing yards = better running back.

By your logic if a rb runs 20 yards a game and is last in the NFL and score no td's and his team is winning that is ok.

Great Rb aye?

Should start over a guy on the
same team who gains more yards
per carry and gets 100 yards and a TD.

Insane.

Makes me glad some of you are planting corn and not designing bridges.

[gr8slayer]

So, because no one on this board has the power to make or change a decision, that means it shouldn't be discussed? Why have a message board then?

Draz here just found a post that clearly shatters everything JP haters have been saying for months, and now the arguement is "but... but... but..just stop talking about it".
What's even better is that you feel the need to label people who don't agree with your point of view, good way to lose credibility.

Draz hardly shattered anything, the statistics might as well be the same as close as they are. The fact that you can't face the reality that Losman is no longer the starter here and won't be in the foreseeable future is far more shattering but does make for great comedy.

[Philagape]

They are compared because they are the only two Bills QBs with starting time. Seemed obvious. And, they aren't good numbers, your right, but how much sense does "well they both didn't seem to produce too much, so lets start the least productive" make to you?

The rookie played like a rookie.
The veteran played like a rookie.

The rookie's play was normal relative to his experience.
The veteran's play was bad relative to his level of experience.

Normal is better than bad. That suggests the rookie has a better chance of improving, since the whole debate is about what they'll do in 2008. Stats don't tend to stay exactly the same from year to year, yet another reason why they're irrelevant in this case.

[Yasgur's Farm]

At this point, a better comparison would be JP in 2007 to JP in 2005 and 2006, which would show that he's developing far too slowly to be our franchise QB.There you have it folks... Yet another statement made with no facts to back it. But when I bring in the facts to debunk it, I'll be told it's irrelevant, marginal, overated, meaningless, worthless and the ever popular "Trent is the starter period! Get over it!"

[Philagape]

Gosh. Why do I do this with you. You will continue twisting my clear words. And, you will continue giving indirect twisting answers forever.

Ask more relevant questions, and you'll get better answers.

[Yasgur's Farm]

The rookie played like a rookie.
The veteran played like a rookie.

The rookie's play was normal relative to his experience.
The veteran's play was bad relative to his level of experience.

Normal is better than bad. That suggests the rookie has a better chance of improving, since the whole debate is about what they'll do in 2008. Stats don't tend to stay exactly the same from year to year, yet another reason why they're irrelevant in this case.By that logic I should go and try out. I would expect to start if I performed at a level greater than a "normal" 50 year old!!!

[yordad]

Going by stats means one could never watch a single down and think they know better. Is that what the stats people believe?There are a number of different things that don't show on the stat sheet. IMO, these things favor JP.

But, you act like he is a double teamed DT or WR.

Is this where the ol' "he looks poised" argument comes in?

[OpIv37]

There you have it folks... Yet another statement made with no facts to back it. But when I bring in the facts to debunk it, I'll be told it's irrelevant, marginal, overated, meaningless, worthless and the ever popular "Trent is the starter period! Get over it!"

get the facts then.

Or are you avoiding getting the facts because they prove you wrong, and you're just using rhetoric as an excuse?

Wow, you found stats that say a 4 year vet was marginally better than a rookie in 11 of 17 categories. You're actually impressed by that? You have an opinion and you're finding and interpreting numbers to support that opinion, rather than analyzing the numbers and coming to a conclusion.

And btw, my argument isn't "trent is the starter, period. Get over it!" It's "JP hasn't gotten the job done, either statistically or in the win column. So get over it!".

[Philagape]

draz found numbers that compare a 4 year vet to a rookie and didn't include the most important number: wins. It's comparing apples to oranges.

At this point, a better comparison would be JP in 2007 to JP in 2005 and 2006, which would show that he's developing far too slowly to be our franchise QB.

The best comparison of all is Trent's first year to JP's first year, when he wasn't even a true rookie. Trent's the clear winner there by any measure. If Trent is that far ahead at the same level of experience, then it follows that his upside is greater.

[acehole]

I agree with you in spirt.

But niether qb was on a good team last year.

Jp was on a decent team in 2006.

I would like to see jp with these weapon on this team...before I throw him under the bus.....for a guy who may have played well enough for you guys...but not for me....and not better stat wise the the other guy.

When we keep revolving qb's like we do all the time...
we always seem as fans anyway we ignore some of the larger issues.

NE goes and gets R Moss and D Stalworth to help out thier qb...

We get peerless price and Justin Jenkins?

Why some people think nothing else is a factor is beyond me.

I mean we were last at stopping the run and second to
last in defending the pass....

and some of you are baffled we are losing games?




I can't even friggin believe we're still having this debate.

I was pulling for Losman but the guy just doesn't win games. He's had 4 years- 3 with significant playing time- and hasn't gotten any better. Losman is not going to bring this team to the next level. I don't like the fact that we have to start the franchise QB search over again for the 5th time since Kelly retired, but the sooner we can get over the fact that Losman isn't the guy, the sooner we can figure out who is the guy.

Maybe Edwards is the franchise QB and maybe he isn't, but he played well enough last year to earn his shot. JP got 3 years and did nothing with it- he's had his shot. Time to move on.

This goes along with what I've been saying in other threads- doing the same thing and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. Every year we hope for guys like Losman and Reed to get better, but it never happens. And it never will.

[acehole]

The best comparison of all is Trent's first year to JP's first year, when he wasn't even a true rookie. Trent's the clear winner there by any measure. If Trent is that far ahead at the same level of experience, then it follows that his upside is greater.

Oh you mean stat wise ehh?

Bizzaro world...and you are its king.

[Yasgur's Farm]

Ask more relevant questions, and you'll get better answers.Dancing around a question does nothing to prove your point...

Outperforming probably carries the most relevance of any critera in this matter. Yet you choose to minimalize it.

Trenchers however would rather hang their wet towels on a stat that has NO practical evaluation relevance... The fact that Trent has 5 wins rather than 4 due to JP pulling a game out for him... The fact that Trent has 4 losses rather than 5 due to the fact JP started and played 3 plays vs NE.

All the while ignoring the fact that the D and ST's have accounted for more TD's than the Trent led offense.

It's all been smoke and mirror's.

[gr8slayer]

Well it's good to know that what happened last year means everything going into this year. I'm going to go put my years salary on the Giants for the SB :up:

[OpIv37]

I agree with you in spirt.

But niether qb was on a good team last year.

Jp was on a decent team in 2006.

I would like to see jp with these weapon on this team...before I throw him under the bus.....for a guy who may have played well enough for you guys...but not for me....and not better stat wise the the other guy.

When we keep revolving qb's like we do all the time...
we always seem as fans anyway we ignore some of the larger issues.

NE goes and gets R Moss and D Stalworth to help out thier qb...

We get peerless price and Justin Jenkins?

Why some people think nothing else is a factor is beyond me.

I mean we were last at stopping the run and second to
last in defending the pass....

and some of you are baffled we are losing games?

trust me- I'm well aware that there are a lot of reasons besides QB play that are causing the losses. But we're specifically talking about the QB's here.

Unfortunately, we're not going to get better weapons. Whoever we go with at QB has to be the one that's better with what we have. JP hasn't done anything with what we have, so it's time for Trent to get a shot. I'm a fan of the Bills more than I am any single player, and I just want to see the team win. JP has done nothing to make me believe he can win.

Going back to what gr8 said, I agree that JP wasn't treated fairly by the coaches and never had the tools around him. In Marv Levy's book, he talks about how to properly develop a QB in the NFL, and what was done with JP was almost the polar opposite.

But unfortunately that's damage that has already been done and it doesn't make JP the better player now.

[Philagape]

Dancing around a question does nothing to prove your point

Outperforming probably carries the most relevance of any critera in this matter. Yet you choose to minimalize it....

And most others. I don't have to prove anything, I agree with the status quo.


Trenchers however would rather hang their wet towels on a stat that has NO practical evaluation relevance... The fact that Trent has 5 wins rather than 4 due to JP pulling a game out for him... The fact that Trent has 4 losses rather than 5 due to the fact JP started and played 3 plays vs NE.

And like I've said before, I don't do that. I give Trent the Pats1 loss, and JP the Jets2 win. If memory serves, you gave JP the Pats loss in which he took three snaps in a quality-of-opponent debate, so you're no better.

[Yasgur's Farm]

And you seem to forget that I was doing an apples to apples comparison based on the trenchers logic I stated above... They seem to think they can cherry pick from both ends of the candle.

[Philagape]

All the while ignoring the fact that the D and ST's have accounted for more TD's than the Trent led offense.

Why do you keep saying that when you know it's not true? I'm trying to stay civil here.

[Yasgur's Farm]

I believe it is true phil.

[OpIv37]

And you seem to forget that I was doing an apples to apples comparison based on the trenchers logic I stated above... They seem to think they can cherry pick from both ends of the candle.

So, in your apples to apples comparison, JP's 3 extra years of experience is worth
.19 plays per drive, 9 seconds TOP per drive, .16 first downs per drive, .2 points per drive, 2 rushing yards per drive, and 3.6 passing yards per drive?

Wow, JP sure put those 3 years to good use! :rolleyes:

[Philagape]

It is true phil.

The D/ST had 5 TDs. How is that more? And way to change your post.

[yordad]

Could you be a little more smug? It really helps your arguement :up: I see your point, sorry. But I am not the only being smug.

He wasn't a backup long snapper, he was the starter! We picked him up after releasing our former long snapper because we needed a player who could fill two positional requirements. If you didn't know this then how can I be convinced you know anything about this team. A starting long snapper? I'm confussed. I guess I will clarify some things for you.

Long snappers don't start. Neill was the long snapper. The last preseason game Al Wallace the DE was injured. Why is this significant? Hargrove was suspended. We needed depth. Neill was the only one able on the roster. Then in our coaches "infinate wisdom" they decided Neill could dub as a longsnapper too. And, they figured they could cut Schneck and save room for Schobey. Well Schobey sucked too! Along with Neill, whom to my knowledge never took a snap at DE.

Which makes me ask, if they thought the first string long snapper was interchangable, why would they go out of there way for the backup Longsnapper, and in doing so, cut Pennington for Chambers?

Neill, Scobey, and Chambers? Or Neill, Pennington and Schneck? Hmmm.


Actually it does make it moot because it wasn't as bad of a decision as you are making it out to be. Believe it or not, but that wasn't a bad contract for his production. But keep thinking you are more intelligent then the rest of us. Divide his contract by term. Look at what he makes per year. 5.75 Million for a DE who is like the 60th best in the league? Not a good deal. And compared to his productuion since, laughable. Plus, I don't appreciate your shot at the self assessment of my mental capacity relative to others.

[Yasgur's Farm]

The D/ST had 5 TDs. How is that more? And way to change your post.I've just reviewed those stats... You are correct.

See what happens when one cites stats by feelings?

It's still true however that Trent achieved 2 wins (JetsII and Redskins) without leading the O to a TD... I believe (I didn't look it up) that Trent's O scored a total of 6 points in those 2 wins.

[yordad]

2/26/2007: Signed a four-year, $23 million contract. The deal included an $8 million signing bonus and an initial roster bonus of $3 million. 2008: $1.4 million, 2009: $3 million, 2010: $3.7 million, 2011: Free AgentDoes that somehow change the fact he is getting 23 million over 4 years? 5.75 million a year? A good deal? How would you rank him compared to DEs around the league? 60th?

[yordad]

How much sense does it make to start the guy who has had plenty of opportunities and failed nearly every time. It's time to move on and get some fresh blood in here.If "failing" is producing better the the alternative, how much sense does it make to go with the alternative? Less sense.

[Philagape]

I've just reviewed those stats... You are correct.

See what happens when one cites stats by feelings?

It's still true however that Trent achieved 2 wins (JetsII and Redskins) without leading the O to a TD... I believe (I didn't look it up) that Trent's O scored a total of 6 points in those 2 wins.

The O scored 15 against the Redskins.

[yordad]

draz found numbers that compare a 4 year vet to a rookie and didn't include the most important number: wins. It's comparing apples to oranges.

At this point, a better comparison would be JP in 2007 to JP in 2005 and 2006, which would show that he's developing far too slowly to be our franchise QB.No your comparison would be apples to oranges. When choosing which QB performed better, and choosing which QB gives you the best chance to win, looking at tenure wouldn't make much sense.

The comparison was between the two QB on the same team, the same year. That is as apples to apples as you are going to get.

If you are trying to predict the future, maybe you could use your example (no one can predict the future, but everyone tries). But, in football, you take one game at a time.

Also, could it be the franchise was developing to slow? Could it be the franchise took a step back? It a QB is 10% better, but the team got 5% worst, are then better off, worst off, or the same?

[Yasgur's Farm]

Yup... Lindell had a great day!

[yordad]

What's even better is that you feel the need to label people who don't agree with your point of view, good way to lose credibility.

Draz hardly shattered anything, the statistics might as well be the same as close as they are. The fact that you can't face the reality that Losman is no longer the starter here and won't be in the foreseeable future is far more shattering but does make for great comedy.I didn't lable you. I said "JP haters", if you took that personally, you labled yourself.

OK, so those stats are the same? And I'm the comedian.

I can surely face the facts JP is currently the backup. But, the fact you think you can say what the future holds and claim it as fact is also kind of funny. I'm a Bills fan. I think JP starting is best for them. Don't try and make it more then it is.

[yordad]

The rookie played like a rookie.
The veteran played like a rookie.

The rookie's play was normal relative to his experience.
The veteran's play was bad relative to his level of experience.

Normal is better than bad. That suggests the rookie has a better chance of improving, since the whole debate is about what they'll do in 2008. Stats don't tend to stay exactly the same from year to year, yet another reason why they're irrelevant in this case.OK, there are 100 holes in your thoery, but lets assume it is all true. How is the fact he is young help him win the next game?

[OpIv37]

No your comparison would be apples to oranges. When choosing which QB performed better, and choosing which QB gives you the best chance to win, looking at tenure wouldn't make much sense.

The comparison was between the two QB on the same team, the same year. That is as apples to apples as you are going to get.

If you are trying to predict the future, maybe you could use your example (no one can predict the future, but everyone tries). But, in football, you take one game at a time.

Also, could it be the franchise was developing to slow? Could it be the franchise took a step back? It a QB is 10% better, but the team got 5% worst, are then better off, worst off, or the same?

it's only apples to apples if you ignore that JP had 3 extra years experience, which is completely illogical as QB is the position that has the highest learning curve.

No doubt the franchise is developing too slow, but it's developing at the same pace for both QBs. And some of JP's mistakes are still being repeated- throwing short passes too high, holding the ball too long, etc. That's on him personally and has nothing to do with the rest of the franchise.

Look, I'm not a JP hater. I'd love to see him win the camp battle and go on to throw for 3000 yards and 20 TDs and take us deep in the playoffs. I just want this team to finally win and I don't care who's behind center when it happens. But based on what JP's done on the field, there is no good reason to believe that will actually happen. And stats that show JP to be marginally better than a rookie on the same team really don't change that fact.

This is an interesting discussion to have and it's the reason why fans have message board- to talk this stuff out. It would be boring if everyone agreed. But the reality of the situation is that JP has some baggage with the coaching staff and right now they see it as Trent's job to lose. So numbers nothwithstanding, JP's going to really have to light up the field in TC and preseason to even be considered for the starting job.

[gr8slayer]

If "failing" is producing better the the alternative, how much sense does it make to go with the alternative? Less sense.
Yeah, let's just stick with what hasn't been working over the past three years. That's the way to get something done.

[gr8slayer]

I didn't lable you. I said "JP haters", if you took that personally, you labled yourself.

OK, so those stats are the same? And I'm the comedian.

I can surely face the facts JP is currently the backup. But, the fact you think you can say what the future holds and claim it as fact is also kind of funny. I'm a Bills fan. I think JP starting is best for them. Don't try and make it more then it is.
You might want to adjust your bifocals; no where in my post did I say they were exactly the same. I said they might as well be as close as they are.

[Philagape]

OK, there are 100 holes in your thoery, but lets assume it is all true. How is the fact he is young help him win the next game?

As far as helping the team win, he's already ahead, so he's earned more trust there anyway.

There was a thread started recently about the difference between a QB's first year and second. I think that may answer your question better than I could ...
http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php?t=151963

[Yasgur's Farm]

it's only apples to apples if you ignore that JP had 3 extra years experience, which is completely illogical as QB is the position that has the highest learning curve. Whichever QB (regardless of experience and accomplishments) performs the best should be the starter.

No doubt the franchise is developing too slow, but it's developing at the same pace for both QBs. And some of JP's mistakes are still being repeated- throwing short passes too high, holding the ball too long, etc. That's on him personally and has nothing to do with the rest of the franchise.

Look, I'm not a JP hater. I'd love to see him win the camp battle and go on to throw for 3000 yards and 20 TDs and take us deep in the playoffs. I just want this team to finally win and I don't care who's behind center when it happens. But based on what JP's done on the field, there is no good reason to believe that will actually happen. And stats that show JP to be marginally better than a rookie on the same team really don't change that fact. An average of 59.4% greater production (although admittedly over emphasised in some categories) is not marginal.

This is an interesting discussion to have and it's the reason why fans have message board- to talk this stuff out. It would be boring if everyone agreed. But the reality of the situation is that JP has some baggage with the coaching staff and right now they see it as Trent's job to lose. So numbers nothwithstanding, JP's going to really have to light up the field in TC and preseason to even be considered for the starting job. 100% agree... I'd like to think that he'd be given the opportunity if he does accomplish that. Some here are just hell bent in proclaiming JP sucks! That's where I chime in.OP... Nice job staying logical.

As a Bills fan, I will 100% support the players on the field... They're not on the field until week 1.

[YardRat]

JP supporters had their panties in a bunch for him to start over Holcomb, even though Holcomb had better numbers when doing a similar statistical comparison.

Karma's a *****, isn't it?

[OpIv37]

OP... Nice job staying logical.

you shouldn't criticize other people's logic when yours isn't even close. Where did you get 59%? In most of the stats you posted, JP's production was marginally better and in some stats Trent was better. JP wasn't even close to 59% higher production.

As far as the better QB, this sounds like the Bledsoe debate all over again. If one QB is slightly better but is probably as good as he's going to get, whereas the other QB has a lot of potential and could be great, which one do you play? I honestly don't know the answer to that- just throwing it out for discussion. It's a slightly better chance of winning now vs preparing for the future and it's not an easy choice to make.

[Yasgur's Farm]

you shouldn't criticize other people's logic when yours isn't even close. Where did you get 59%? In most of the stats you posted, JP's production was marginally better and in some stats Trent was better. JP wasn't even close to 59% higher production.

As far as the better QB, this sounds like the Bledsoe debate all over again. If one QB is slightly better but is probably as good as he's going to get, whereas the other QB has a lot of potential and could be great, which one do you play? I honestly don't know the answer to that- just throwing it out for discussion. It's a slightly better chance of winning now vs preparing for the future and it's not an easy choice to make.

(although admittedly over emphasised in some categories) Average the following "production" categories...

Plays per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 632/111 - 5.69
3.3% JP Losman - 388/66 - 5.88

Time of Possession per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 17045 sec/111 - 2:33
3.4% JP Losman - 10645 sec/66 - 2:41

Passing First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 81/111 - .73
21.9% JP Losman - 59/66 - .89

Running First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 53/111 - .48
14.6% JP Losman - 36/66 - .55

First Down per Drive (excluding Penalty):
Trent Edwards - 134/111 - 1.21
19.0% JP Losman - 95/66 - 1.44

Passing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1630/111 - 14.68
24.3% JP Losman - 1204/66 - 18.24

Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1115/111 - 10.05
19.6% JP Losman - 793/66 - 12.02

QB Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 49/111 - .44
279.5% JP Losman - 110/66 - 1.67

QB Rushing 1st Down per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04
200.0% JP Losman - 8/66 - .12 Total number of Drives:

Rushing TDs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04
50.0% JP Losman - 4/66 - .06

Offensive Points per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 125/111 - 1.13
17.7% JP Losman - 88/66 - 1.33

[yordad]

Ask more relevant questions, and you'll get better answers.Again, you don't consider the question "Who was more productive?" to be a relevant question.

[YardRat]

BREAKING NEWS....

Trent Edwards is still #1 on the depth chart.

Back to you, Susan...

[OpIv37]

Average the following "production categories...

Plays per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 632/111 - 5.69
3.3% JP Losman - 388/66 - 5.88

Time of Possession per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 17045 sec/111 - 2:33
3.4% JP Losman - 10645 sec/66 - 2:41

Passing First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 81/111 - .73
21.9% JP Losman - 59/66 - .89

Running First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 53/111 - .48
14.6% JP Losman - 36/66 - .55

First Down per Drive (excluding Penalty):
Trent Edwards - 134/111 - 1.21
19.0% JP Losman - 95/66 - 1.44

Passing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1630/111 - 14.68
24.3% JP Losman - 1204/66 - 18.24

Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1115/111 - 10.05
19.6% JP Losman - 793/66 - 12.02

QB Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 49/111 - .44
279.5% JP Losman - 110/66 - 1.67

QB Rushing 1st Down per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04
200.0% JP Losman - 8/66 - .12 Total number of Drives:

Rushing TDs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04
50.0% JP Losman - 4/66 - .06

Offensive Points per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 125/111 - 1.13
17.7% JP Losman - 88/66 - 1.33
you averaged that to 59% and actually think that's an acurate number? The 200 and 279 from the QB rushing yardage greatly skew that 59% average without adding hardly any production.

Damn, your whole argument is based on a completely manufactured statistic that is inflated by QB rushing numbers when the QB's main job is to THROW the ball.

If you honestly think averaging those numbers together is an accurate measure of anything, there's no point in arguing this further. Some of those number measure plays, some measure time, some measure yards, yet you think you can combine them and come up with a meaningful number? Give me a ****ing break.

[Yasgur's Farm]

Average the following "production" categories...

Plays per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 632/111 - 5.69
3.3% JP Losman - 388/66 - 5.88

Time of Possession per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 17045 sec/111 - 2:33
3.4% JP Losman - 10645 sec/66 - 2:41

Passing First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 81/111 - .73
21.9% JP Losman - 59/66 - .89

Running First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 53/111 - .48
14.6% JP Losman - 36/66 - .55

First Down per Drive (excluding Penalty):
Trent Edwards - 134/111 - 1.21
19.0% JP Losman - 95/66 - 1.44

Passing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1630/111 - 14.68
24.3% JP Losman - 1204/66 - 18.24

Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1115/111 - 10.05
19.6% JP Losman - 793/66 - 12.02

QB Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 49/111 - .44
279.5% JP Losman - 110/66 - 1.67

QB Rushing 1st Down per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04
200.0% JP Losman - 8/66 - .12 Total number of Drives:

Rushing TDs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04
50.0% JP Losman - 4/66 - .06

Offensive Points per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 125/111 - 1.13
17.7% JP Losman - 88/66 - 1.33 I suppose I could throw out the 2 highest and the 2 lowest results of the bell curve... 23.9% is still not "marginal" by any definition of the word.

[Yasgur's Farm]

you averaged that to 59% and actually think that's an acurate number? The 200 and 279 from the QB rushing yardage greatly skew that 59% average without adding hardly any production.

Damn, your whole argument is based on a completely manufactured statistic that is inflated by QB rushing numbers when the QB's main job is to THROW the ball.

If you honestly think averaging those numbers together is an accurate measure of anything, there's no point in arguing this further. Some of those number measure plays, some measure time, some measure yards, yet you think you can combine them and come up with a meaningful number? Give me a ****ing break.what part of "(although admittedly over emphasised in some categories)" are you having trouble with? I guess I was a little too hastey to give you props!!

[Yasgur's Farm]

Damn, your whole argument is based on a completely manufactured statistic that is inflated by QB rushing numbers when the QB's main job is to THROW the ball.I guess this restores validity to the passer rating stats that have been dismeiised to date?

[OpIv37]

what part of "(although admittedly over emphasised in some categories)" are you having trouble with? I guess I was a little too hastey to give you props!!

but here's my question: when you admit the number is over-emphasized, why do you still use it as a basis for an argument? JP wasn't even close to 59% more productive than Trent and you even admit it. The number is artificial.

If you want to run real statistical analysis on those numbers:
1. The median needs to be considered as well as the mean.
2. You need to find the standard deviation and throw out any numbers that are more than 2 standard deviations from the mean. Once you do that, that 200 and 279 will disappear, as will some of the lower numbers like the .06, and you'll have a much more accurate representation of JP's production.

I have a software program that will do this but I don't have the time to do it right now. Until you run the full analysis, don't cite the numbers as facts or use them as the basis for your argument.

[Yasgur's Farm]

<dl><dt class="hwrd"></dt></dl>
<dl><dt class="hwrd">Main Entry:</dt><dd class="hwrd">mar&#183;gin&#183;al http://www.merriam-webster.com/images/audio.gif (javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?margin03.wav=marginal'))</dd><dt class="pron">Pronunciation:</dt><dd class="pron"> \ˈm&#228;rj-nəl, ˈm&#228;r-jə-n^əl\ </dd><dt class="func">Function:</dt><dd class="func">adjective </dd><dt class="ety">Etymology:</dt><dd class="ety">Medieval Latin marginalis, from Latin margin-, margo</dd><dt class="date">Date:</dt><dd class="date">1573</dd></dl> 1: written or printed in the margin (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/margin) of a page or sheet <marginal notes>2 a: of, relating to, or situated at a margin (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/margin) or border b: not of central importance <regards violence as a marginal rather than a central problem>; also : limited in extent, significance, or stature <had only marginal success with the business> c (1): occupying the borderland of a relatively stable territorial or cultural area <marginal tribes> (2): characterized by the incorporation of habits and values from two divergent cultures and by incomplete assimilation in either <the marginal cultural habits of new immigrant groups> (3): excluded from or existing outside the mainstream of society, a group, or a school of thought <marginal voters>3: located at the fringe of consciousness <marginal sensations>4 a: close to the lower limit of qualification, acceptability, or function : barely exceeding the minimum requirements <a semiliterate person of marginal ability> b (1): having a character or capacity fitted to yield a supply of goods which when marketed at existing price levels will barely cover the cost of production <marginal land> (2): of, relating to, or derived from goods produced and marketed with such result <marginal profits>5: relating to or being a function of a random variable that is obtained from a function of several random variables by integrating or summing over all possible values of the other variables <a marginal probability function>
— mar&#183;gin&#183;al&#183;i&#183;ty http://www.merriam-webster.com/images/audio.gif (javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?margin04.wav=marginality')) \ˌm&#228;r-jə-ˈna-lə-tē\ noun
— mar&#183;gin&#183;al&#183;ly http://www.merriam-webster.com/images/audio.gif (javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?margin05.wav=marginally')) \ˈm&#228;rj-nə-lē, ˈm&#228;r-jə-n^əl-ē\ adverb

[Yasgur's Farm]

but here's my question: when you admit the number is over-emphasized, why do you still use it as a basis for an argument? JP wasn't even close to 59% more productive than Trent and you even admit it. The number is artificial.

If you want to run real statistical analysis on those numbers:
1. The median needs to be considered as well as the mean.
2. You need to find the standard deviation and throw out any numbers that are more than 2 standard deviations from the mean. Once you do that, that 200 and 279 will disappear, as will some of the lower numbers like the .06, and you'll have a much more accurate representation of JP's production.

I have a software program that will do this but I don't have the time to do it right now. Until you run the full analysis, don't cite the numbers as facts or use them as the basis for your argument.post #110
I suppose I could throw out the 2 highest and the 2 lowest results of the bell curve... 23.9% is still not "marginal" by any definition of the word.

[OpIv37]

I guess this restores validity to the passer rating stats that have been dismeiised to date?
you didn't include passer ratings in your initial argument, but you're including it now that your other numbers have been debunked?

Nice.

[YardRat]

"Gee, Dick...Why did you decide to start Losman over Edwards this week?"

"Well, because JP averages .19 more plays per drive than Trent, and over the course of an entire game that could add up to almost, well, one more play."

"But do you realize that single play has a fifty percent better chance of being a sack, a 100% better chance of being a fumble, or a 22% better chance of being an interception, which adds up to a likelihood that that particular play has a 172% chance to be a negative?"

"Awww ****. Back to the drawing board."

[OpIv37]

"Gee, Dick...Why did you decide to start Losman over Edwards this week?"

"Well, because JP averages .19 more plays per drive than Trent, and over the course of an entire game that could add up to almost, well, one more play."

"But do you realize that single play has a fifty percent better chance of being a sack, a 100% better chance of being a fumble, or a 22% better chance of being an interception, which adds up to a likelihood that that particular play has a 172% chance to be a negative?"

"Awww ****. Back to the drawing board."

pwnd

[gr8slayer]

"Gee, Dick...Why did you decide to start Losman over Edwards this week?"

"Well, because JP averages .19 more plays per drive than Trent, and over the course of an entire game that could add up to almost, well, one more play."

"But do you realize that single play has a fifty percent better chance of being a sack, a 100% better chance of being a fumble, or a 22% better chance of being an interception, which adds up to a likelihood that that particular play has a 172% chance to be a negative?"

"Awww ****. Back to the drawing board."
:snicker:

[Yasgur's Farm]

"Gee, Dick...Why did you decide to start Losman over Edwards this week?"

"Well, because JP averages .19 more plays per drive than Trent, and over the course of an entire game that could add up to almost, well, one more play."

"But do you realize that single play has a fifty percent better chance of being a sack, a 100% better chance of being a fumble, or a 22% better chance of being an interception, which adds up to a likelihood that that particular play has a 172% chance to be a negative?"

"Awww ****. Back to the drawing board."Gee Dick... Why do you name your starting QB when stats show that hes 23.6% less productive?

Well... We've looked at the stats... And we've decided that in spite of what they say,we "feel" Trent's clearly more productive when it comes to defense and special teams production... He just makes us "feel" all warm and fuzzy when he's out here.

My history clearly shows that I've stuck by my QB's in the past. I'm very proud of my accomplishments with Shane Matthews.

[Philagape]

Five of the top six scores under Trent. That blows anything else away.

[Yasgur's Farm]

What? You wouldn't be including the 5 TD's the ST's and D scored... Would you?

[Philagape]

What? You wouldn't be including the 5 TD's the ST's and D scored... Would you?

Nope, just the offense.

[OpIv37]

Gee Dick... Why do you name your starting QB when stats show that hes 23.6% less productive?

Well... We've looked at the stats... And we've decided that in spite of what they say,we "feel" Trent's clearly more productive when it comes to defense and special teams production... He just makes us "feel" all warm and fuzzy when he's out here.

My history clearly shows that I've stuck by my QB's in the past. I'm very proud of my accomplishments with Shane Matthews.

does that 23% include yards or points? Or victories?

"well if you take these certain categories then JP is 23% more productive." Please.

Did you account for the strength of the D's JP played vs the ones Trent played? Didn't think so.

Your numbers are artificial.

[Yasgur's Farm]

Maybe we need to have a look at opposition points scored as a result of QB turnovers.

Or maybe the result of yards lost via sack coupled with yards gained by QB run to determine which QB actually has a net loss.

[Yasgur's Farm]

does that 23% include yards YES or points? YES Or victories? NO

"well if you take these certain categories then JP is 23% more productive." Please.

Did you account for the strength of the D's JP played vs the ones Trent played? Didn't think so. Gotta leave something for you to do... But being that JP starts have been against stronger D's... I "feel" good about my stats holding up.

Your numbers are artificial. Prove them otherwise.

[Yasgur's Farm]

I gotta thank you all... I've made over 60 zonebux on this thread!

[raphael120]

Hey MODs can we have an "abort thread" button?

[Yasgur's Farm]

Or maybe the result of yards lost via sack coupled with yards gained by QB run to determine which QB actually has a net loss. http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/8346
Trent Edwards 2007
Yards lost via sack... -105
Yards gained via run... +49
Net yards... -56

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/6781/career
JP Losman 2007
Yards lost via sack... -103 (That's right... Less than Trent!)
Yards gained via run... +110
Net yards... +7

[SABURZFAN]

17 stat categories
JP wins 11 categories
Trent wins 5 categories
1 category tied

Sounds about right... It seems even though JP has more frequent "negg plays", he still outshines Trent in just about every positive category.


Losman- 10 wins in 31 starts
Edwards- 5 wins in 9 starts



that's the ONLY category that seems to matter the most.

[hydro]

Losman- 10 wins in 31 starts
Edwards- 5 wins in 9 starts



that's the ONLY category that seems to matter the most.

Or if you like percentages:

JP: Wins 32% of the time
Trent: Wins 55% of the time

[SABURZFAN]

JP has great physical tools and all, but his head is just not there. People who know him can confirm this.



he's the poster boy for the $1 million arm- 10 cent head theory. :up:

[hydro]

I can't wait until TD or Justa sees this thread. They will have a kitten!

[SABURZFAN]

Or if you like percentages:

JP: Wins 32% of the time
Trent: Wins 55% of the time


this doesn't matter to the Lickers. they're only worried about individual stats.

[YardRat]

he's the poster boy for the $1 million arm- 10 cent head theory. :up:

A dime just ain't worth what it used to be.

[SABURZFAN]

I can't wait until TD or Justa sees this thread. They will have a kitten!


i hope Justa has a new set of excuses. i'm tired of hearing the repeated ones.

[SABURZFAN]

A dime just ain't worth what it used to be.


neither is Losman.

[Philagape]

I can't wait until TD or Justa sees this thread. They will have a kitten!

"There was arguing and I missed it!!"

[Philagape]

Or if you like percentages:

JP: Wins 32% of the time
Trent: Wins 55% of the time

Now to be fair, Trent didn't finish one of those wins. Shame, shame.

[acehole]

Agree.....but I hope he can redeem himself here or elsewhere.


I guess my only problem is we have a decent team...and if Trent doent improve we start the whole thing again.


trust me- I'm well aware that there are a lot of reasons besides QB play that are causing the losses. But we're specifically talking about the QB's here.

Unfortunately, we're not going to get better weapons. Whoever we go with at QB has to be the one that's better with what we have. JP hasn't done anything with what we have, so it's time for Trent to get a shot. I'm a fan of the Bills more than I am any single player, and I just want to see the team win. JP has done nothing to make me believe he can win.

Going back to what gr8 said, I agree that JP wasn't treated fairly by the coaches and never had the tools around him. In Marv Levy's book, he talks about how to properly develop a QB in the NFL, and what was done with JP was almost the polar opposite.

But unfortunately that's damage that has already been done and it doesn't make JP the better player now.

[acehole]

Maybe we need to have a look at opposition points scored as a result of QB turnovers.

Or maybe the result of yards lost via sack coupled with yards gained by QB run to determine which QB actually has a net loss.

I would like to see stregth of opponent myself.

[acehole]

Five of the top six scores under Trent. That blows anything else away.

Stats dont mater.


Eder er reder hihi er perder.

[acehole]

Losman- 10 wins in 31 starts
Edwards- 5 wins in 9 starts



that's the ONLY category that seems to matter the most.

His performaces don't mater at all to you in those games?

The one in that JP cleaned up his mess in....that is 4 - 9.

So what like 6 - 10 next year is what we are excited about here?

Ok let see how that stat hold up this year.

[SABURZFAN]

I would like to see stregth of opponent myself.



why??? to come up with another pathetic excuse to favor Losman? i hope you Losman Lovers leave when Losman does.

[SABURZFAN]

His performaces don't mater at all to you in those games?

The one in that JP cleaned up his mess in....that is 4 - 9.

So what like 6 - 10 is what we are excited about here?

Ok let see how that stat hold up this year.



blahblahblahblah......... i've heard it a million times. and for the millionth time, key words are "games started." stop trying to use MLB's concept for wins and losses to the pitchers.

[acehole]

why??? to come up with another pathetic excuse to favor Losman? i hope you Losman Lovers leave when Losman does.

Settle down bevis.

Just like to look beyond the surface.

You are one of those guys who put all the blame on the qb or credit.

Got it.

I am not.

A lot to be learned if you have an open mind.

Just because I think he gives us the best chance to win....
at this piont in time doesnt make me a fan.

He is inconsistent and when nobody is open
(Because we had no weapons) he locks up at times.
Was not good enough qb to overcome many problems..including the worst run/pass defense in the league .....no.

I still think he is better then Trent ...right at this piont in time.

I would like to see him in preseason with the first team offense.

You guys wish him dead.

[acehole]

blahblahblahblah......... i've heard it a million times. and for the millionth time, key words are "games started." stop trying to use MLB's concept for wins and losses to the pitchers.

Hurts dont it.

[acehole]

I would like to see stregth of opponent myself.


Because it maters/factors.

You guys wanted to take out all of the chillly weather games....because it wasnt fair that your boy can't take the cold......

I wonder if he had the sniffles that game.......hotcocoa on the sidelines would have fixed that up.....

[SABURZFAN]

Hurts dont it.


it doesn't hurt me to tell you the facts.

[acehole]

it doesn't hurt me to tell you the facts.

Umm no...It hurts you that JP cleaned up Trents mess in the Meadowlands...
and you want to credit Trent for the Win even though he stunk worse then NJ.

A real truth detector you are.

What poise Trent had though....

Thats the game he got a boo boo from the vaulted Jets attack.

[SABURZFAN]

Settle down bevis.

Just like to look beyond the surface.

You are one of those guys who put all the blame on the qb or credit.

Got it.

I am not.

A lot to be learned if you have an open mind.

Just because I think he gives us the best chance to win....
at this piont in time doesnt make me a fan.

He is inconsistent and when nobody is open
(Because we had no weapons) he locks up at times.
Was not good enough qb to overcome many problems..including the worst run/pass defense in the league .....no.

I still think he is better then Trent ...right at this piont in time.

I would like to see him in preseason with the first team offense.

You guys wish him dead.


WOW!!!!!!!!! you can spin it with the best of them, can't you?

first of all, Butthead, you spelled Beavis wrong. second, the QB is the guy who orchestrates the offense. so naturally, his play is going to matter. but don't try and throw that QB Passer Rating crap because it's a useless stat.

as for opening my mind, i've already done that. i opened my mind up to where i thought a Rookie couldn't do any worse. guess what??? i was right. the Bills won more games with Edwards as a starter than they did when Losman started.
Edwards had to work with the same pieces that Losman did and the team did better in the win-loss column.

as for wishing the guy dead, you actually believe that. otherwise, you're just spouting crap out of your ass.

[SABURZFAN]

Umm no...It hurts you that JP cleaned up Trents mess in the Meadowlands...
and you want to credit Trent for the Win even though he stunk worse then NJ.

A real truth detector you are.

What poise Trent had though....

Thats the game he got a boo boo from the vaulted Jets attack.


i never brought up anything about the Meadowlands so how does it hurt me? Trent got credited for the win because he STARTED the game!!!!!!!! it's apparent that it bothers you more than it bothers me because you're bringing it up.

[acehole]

i never brought up anything about the Meadowlands so how does it hurt me? Trent got credited for the win because he STARTED the game!!!!!!!! it's apparent that it bothers you more than it bothers me because you're bringing it up.

Just kind of a funny badge of honor...when someone else does the fighting.

You garnished his win loss like it was the only factor we should consider...

I guess you would not like to stick to the thread
....doesnt make your case very well.

I could understand your anger.

[acehole]

Anyway nice thread Draz.....good points to consider if ones mind is open.

[yordad]

Well it's good to know that what happened last year means everything going into this year. I'm going to go put my years salary on the Giants for the SB :up:Oh, so your in favor of open camp competition? Sounds good. :up:

Yeah, let's just stick with what hasn't been working over the past three years. That's the way to get something done.We aren't. We upgraded the defense. We hopefully have a legit #2, giving us a solid #3 and #4. A quality line. A solid rushing identity. And best of all, NO FAIRCHILD. Either way, I think JP gives us the best chance. I think he is about to break his shell regardless.

You might want to adjust your bifocals; no where in my post did I say they were exactly the same. I said they might as well be as close as they are.Bifocals? Sweet joke. Well, no where in my post did I say you said "exactly the same" I guess if you want to differentiate between "might as well be the same" and "the same", then I will have to point out I didn't say "exactly the same" I only said "the same". Not to mention, I worded it as a question.

Seriously?

JP supporters had their panties in a bunch for him to start over Holcomb, even though Holcomb had better numbers when doing a similar statistical comparison.

Karma's a *****, isn't it?OK, Karma huh? Then where is mine? You have no idea what I wanted.

you shouldn't criticize other people's logic when yours isn't even close. Op, I think that was a compliment.


This goes along with what I've been saying in other threads- doing the same thing and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. Every year we hope for guys like Losman and Reed to get better, but it never happens. And it never will.So, lets repeatedly start a guy too soon, develop him, and then draft his replacement right before we start seeing the fruits of our labor.

Losman- 10 wins in 31 starts
Edwards- 5 wins in 9 starts



that's the ONLY category that seems to matter the most.Yep. Pretty good TEAM stat. Unfortunately for your argument, we are talking about the QBs, not the different teams they played, or played on.

this doesn't matter to the Lickers. they're only worried about individual stats. Well you see, that is what people do when they are comparing individual players, and not teams.

why??? to come up with another pathetic excuse to favor Losman? i hope you Losman Lovers leave when Losman does.So, you admit the stat would favor him? If he starts, are you going to leave? I don't think you understand, people that want Losman to succeed, want him to do so because he happens to be a QB on there favorite team. Do you think "JP Lovers" (I won't even get into your projecting) would be complaining about TE if he performs like Brady? Montana?


first of all, Butthead, you spelled Beavis wrong. second, the QB is the guy who orchestrates the offense. so naturally, his play is going to matter. but don't try and throw that QB Passer Rating crap because it's a useless stat.
Criticizing spelling on a message board in a sentence that doesn't even start with a capital? A passer rating measures TD, ints, yards, yards per attempt, and completion %. If it fits your argument, it would be the best stat in the world. And, if it fit your argument, we probably wouldn't be arguing.

[BSXIII]

One stat that is overlooked in these discussions is teams that were willing to give up anything of value to make JP Losman their starter. The answer to that is zero! There were no reports of any teams aggresively pursuing JP, and by most accounts the Bills were asking for a 3rd round pick, and he could have been had for a 4th or maybe even a 5th. However, no other teams showed any significant interest in him.

Basically, staffs that watched film on him and faced him were not impressed. Sure he lit up a couple of teams, but most of those coaches are out of the job these days, so tough luck for JP.

[Romes]

I'm thinking the Bills could save a lot of money if they just fired all their scouts and hired a few statisticians with computers to determine who we should draft.

[acehole]

I'm thinking the Bills could save a lot of money if they just fired all their scouts and hired a few statisticians with computers to determine who we should draft.

Cute....but the scouts look at numbers also....

[acehole]

That is not a stat sparky.

....and they were telling the truth when they said they wanted him as the back up....they are smart as T Edwards is injury prone....

We will see if it was a wise choice by them soon enough.


One stat that is overlooked in these discussions is teams that were willing to give up anything of value to make JP Losman their starter. The answer to that is zero! There were no reports of any teams aggresively pursuing JP, and by most accounts the Bills were asking for a 3rd round pick, and he could have been had for a 4th or maybe even a 5th. However, no other teams showed any significant interest in him.

Basically, staffs that watched film on him and faced him were not impressed. Sure he lit up a couple of teams, but most of those coaches are out of the job these days, so tough luck for JP.

[Romes]

Cute....but the scouts look at numbers also.

keyword: "also"

So why should we conclude that JP was the more productive QB just based off the stats?

[acehole]

keyword: "also"

So why should we conclude that JP was the more productive QB just based off the stats?

Qb Stat are a measure of QB productivity.

[Romes]

Qb Stat are a measure of QB productivity.

A few posts ago you just said that stats go along with scouting :huh:

[acehole]

A few posts ago you just said that stats go along with scouting :huh:




My opinion is scouts do look at stats......as well as the entire league.

Except here...wow.

If you are a DE they will look at sacks....
If you are a rb they will look at yards...

I mean come on people....I really have to go here?

Cut to the chase man what is your point?

Stats dont mater fine.....Got it.

[acehole]

A few posts ago you just said that stats go along with scouting :huh:

Qb Stat are a measure of QB productivity.

[Romes]

The problem with cutting to the chase is that the chase does not seem to be understood, so I try and explain it in other ways.

But anyway, here it goes...my point, as others have also tried to make, is that you cannot evaluate and draw meaningful conclusions just using stats.

Using your examples of DE and RB,

Emmit Smith has the most yards of any RB. But do you think he is really better than Payton, Brown or Sanders?

Bruce Smith has the most sacks of any DE but most people would rate Reggie White and Deacon Jones as better DEs.

[acehole]

Oh yea....based on what?


The problem with cutting to the chase is that the chase does not seem to be understood, so I try and explain it in other ways.

But anyway, here it goes...my point, as others have also tried to make, is that you cannot evaluate and draw meaningful conclusions just using stats.

Using your examples of DE and RB,

Emmit Smith has the most yards of any RB. But do you think he is really better than Payton, Brown or Sanders?

Bruce Smith has the most sacks of any DE but most people would rate Reggie White and Deacon Jones as better DEs.

[acehole]

I understand it is not the be all end all...

You cant just dismiss them....because they dont make your case.

Case and point...Trent is more accurate...

No he isnt.

Yea he is..

That stats say jp is more accurate....

You are a licker.

Welcome to my world.

I dont want to bicker with you...I disagree and that is that.




The problem with cutting to the chase is that the chase does not seem to be understood, so I try and explain it in other ways.

But anyway, here it goes...my point, as others have also tried to make, is that you cannot evaluate and draw meaningful conclusions just using stats.

Using your examples of DE and RB,

Emmit Smith has the most yards of any RB. But do you think he is really better than Payton, Brown or Sanders?

Bruce Smith has the most sacks of any DE but most people would rate Reggie White and Deacon Jones as better DEs.

[yordad]

The problem with cutting to the chase is that the chase does not seem to be understood, so I try and explain it in other ways.

But anyway, here it goes...my point, as others have also tried to make, is that you cannot evaluate and draw meaningful conclusions just using stats.

Using your examples of DE and RB,

Emmit Smith has the most yards of any RB. But do you think he is really better than Payton, Brown or Sanders?

Bruce Smith has the most sacks of any DE but most people would rate Reggie White and Deacon Jones as better DEs.You are trying to compare the comparison of different RBs from different eras to the comparison of different QBs from the same team during the same era. And, I know you are a smart guy, so I know you know the difference but....

Career stats for a RB with an elite team compared to an elite RB with less seasons with a crappy team, all compared to two QB with the same team during the same season?

See the difference? Could you try and explain this point of yours in a different "other way"?

Do stats not measure productivity? Let me give you an example. A QB drops back, throws a pass, and gains 7 yards. What did he produce? 7 yards. What goes in the stats? 7 yards.

I'll give you a random question...who was better, Dan Marino or Trent Dilfer? :headscrat

[acehole]

Dilfer .....he won a superbowl.



You are trying to compare the comparison of different RBs from different eras to the comparison of different QBs from the same team during the same era. And, I know you are a smart guy, so I know you know the difference but....

Career stats for a RB with an elite team compared to an elite RB with less seasons with a crappy team, all compared to two QB with the same team during the same season?

See the difference? Could you try and explain this point of yours in a different "other way"?

Do stats not measure productivity? Let me give you an example. A QB drops back, throws a pass, and gains 7 yards. What did he produce? 7 yards. What goes in the stats? 7 yards.

I'll give you a random question...who was better, Dan Marino or Trent Dilfer? :headscrat

[Romes]

You are trying to compare the comparison of different RBs from different eras to the comparison of different QBs from the same team during the same era. And, I know you are a smart guy, so I know you know the difference but....

Career stats for a RB with an elite team compared to an elite RB with less season with a crappy team; all compared to two QB with the same team during the same season.

See the difference. Could you try and explain this point in a different "other way"?

Do stats not measure productivity? Let me give you an example. A QB drops back, throws a pass, and gains 7 yards. What did he produce? 7 yards. What goes in the stats? 7 yards.

Who was better, Dan Marino or Trent Dilfer? :headscrat

Thats exactly the point. Outside variables, such as era, can affect the stats.

JP v TE: same era, same team, yes, but different weather conditions, different game plans different opponents. How do those variables get factored into the stats?

As for productivity, sure it shows how many yards or completions or TDs a QB threw for without argument. But how productive was he? Or were the numbers produced by a weak defense, a superior gameplan, superior talent around him. All those factors can skew the statistics to make one look better than the other.

I don't think you need stats to show you who was better Marino or Dilfer...

[yordad]

Thats exactly the point. Outside variables, such as era, can affect the stats.

JP v TE: same era, same team, yes, but different weather conditions, different game plans different opponents. How do those variables get factored into the stats?

As for productivity, sure it shows have many yards or completions or TDs a QB threw for without argument. But how productive was he? Or were the numbers produced by a weak defense, a superior gameplan, superior talent around him. All those factors can skew the statistics to make one look better than the other.

I don't think you need stats to show you who was better Marino or Dilfer...So, you are telling me there is no objective means of comparing the two QBs? Not even a little bit? Zero? Or, is this objective means you had in mind the good old "eye ball test"?

To speed up the process, I know I am leading the witness, so I will just go ahead and ask the next question... If you cannot compare them, how are so many convinced TE is great, and JP is straight garbage? And, if you can compare them, then I guess I can't ask the next question because I am still scratching my head wondering how you plan to do that with out measuring productivity.

Or is tenure the only stat that matters?

Weak defense? JP played better teams. Game plan? They were suited to TEs strengths, not JPs. Talent? Well, it was a young team that got better with time, right? TE had the benefit of playing after JP throughout the season. You get the weather conditions, but don't you think JP's stronger arm may have faired better?

Keep in mind, I would have just went to bed if I wasn't wondering what you thought.

[Romes]

So, you are telling me there is no objective means of comparing the two QBs? Not even a little bit? Zero? Or, is this objective means you had in mind the good old "eye ball test"?

To speed up the process, I know I am leading the witness, so I will just go ahead and ask the next question... If you cannot compare them, how are so many convinced TE is great, and JP is straight garbage? And, if you can compare them, then I guess I can't ask the next question because I am still scratching my head wondering how you plan to do that with out measuring productivity.

Or is tenure the only stat that matters?

Weak defense? JP played better teams. Game plan? They were suited to TEs strengths, not JPs. Talent? Well, it was a young team that got better with time, right? TE had the benefit of playing after JP throughout the season. You get the weather conditions, but don't you think JP's stronger arm may have faired better?

Keep in mind, I would have just went to bed if I wasn't wondering what you thought.

sorry, to keep you up. lol

Well, I'm not convinced TE is great but I am pretty sure he is better than JP.

And, yes part of is the good ol' eye ball test. And, yes, it is objective but its not just my opinion either, its seems to be the overwhelming majority opinion which does lend some more credence to it.

Stats can be just as objective as eye ballin it. They can easily be skewed to look better in favor of one opinion. After all, stats are just numbers and they still have to be interpreted.

What do you make of Trent having a higher TD%, lower INT% and lower sack% than JP? ....you can answer that later.

[Philagape]

All those factors can skew the statistics to make one look better than the other.

Or when a receiver turns a bad pass from an interception into an 85-yard touchdown. Stats don't tell you that.

Or when a running back runs for a 56-yard TD, the stats don't tell you he broke two tackles behind the line. Without knowing that, one might think the QB had something to do with it.

[Jan Reimers]

Haven't we tortured the stats enough? JP, in his fourth year, had marginally better numbers than the rookie TE. But JP didn't win, and never looked poised, confident, or comfortable at QB.

The coaching staff likes TE's intelligence, pocket presence and ability to read defenses better and has chosen him to lead the team.

End of story.

[SABURZFAN]

Haven't we tortured the stats enough? JP, in his fourth year, had marginally better numbers than the rookie TE. But JP didn't win, and never looked poised, confident, or comfortable at QB.

The coaching staff likes TE's intelligence, pocket presence and ability to read defenses better and has chosen him to lead the team.

End of story.



no doubt.

[SABURZFAN]

Yep. Pretty good TEAM stat. Unfortunately for your argument, we are talking about the QBs, not the different teams they played, or played on.


So, you admit the stat would favor him? If he starts, are you going to leave? I don't think you understand, people that want Losman to succeed, want him to do so because he happens to be a QB on there favorite team. Do you think "JP Lovers" (I won't even get into your projecting) would be complaining about TE if he performs like Brady? Montana?



A passer rating measures TD, ints, yards, yards per attempt, and completion %.

i'm not arguing about anything.

i don't know if it would favor him. that's why i had it in question form. anything that the Losman Lovers bring up usually goes that route anyways. yes. if TE did play like Brady, i'm sure a couple of them would still be complaining.

but yet, it fails to figure in sacks and fumbles. Passer Rating figures into part of a QB's performance, not their complete performance.

[Yasgur's Farm]

I understand it is not the be all end all...

You cant just dismiss them....because they dont make your case.

Case and point...Trent is more accurate...

No he isnt.

Yea he is..

That stats say jp is more accurate....

You are a licker.

Welcome to my world.

I dont want to bicker with you...I disagree and that is that.That's what it looks like to hit the nail on the head.

[SABURZFAN]

That's what it looks like to hit the nail on the head.



in your eyes maybe.



edited: attack the post, not the poster...thanks. ~shelby

[HHURRICANE]

There is no QB debate between JP and Trent. I watched JP suck for 4 years and if Trent sucks it wont be "bring back JP" it will be "get someone new."

The JP train has long left and is not coming back. A guy who can't throw a simple screen pass isn't destined for a long career in the NFL.

[acehole]

Or when a receiver turns a bad pass from an interception into an 85-yard touchdown. Stats don't tell you that.

Or when a running back runs for a 56-yard TD, the stats don't tell you he broke two tackles behind the line. Without knowing that, one might think the QB had something to do with it.

Or when sombody add fieldgoals to the qbs production to make on qb look like he scores more pionts

[acehole]

I agree Trent is the starter....

I disagree he cant throw a screen pass or he stunk for 4 years.

Inconsistant..yes.

Dont be too suprised to see JP play at some piont this year.

The thread is about JP out performing Trent in many catagoies last year...even though words like poised or more accurate are use in the comparison between the two....when you look at the numbers.....they bust those myths. So yea Trent is the starter.....for as much as you think JP sucked.....Trent suck worse in mthe most important catagories the NFL seems important enough to keep...qb rating.

Trent was the worst in the league in this catgory.

I for one think it is important and cause for concern.




There is no QB debate between JP and Trent. I watched JP suck for 4 years and if Trent sucks it wont be "bring back JP" it will be "get someone new."

The JP train has long left and is not coming back. A guy who can't throw a simple screen pass isn't destined for a long career in the NFL.

[justasportsfan]

/thread
you had your fair share in keeping this qb debate thread going

[Typ0]

There is no QB debate between JP and Trent. I watched JP suck for 4 years and if Trent sucks it wont be "bring back JP" it will be "get someone new."

The JP train has long left and is not coming back. A guy who can't throw a simple screen pass isn't destined for a long career in the NFL.

good summary and I concur. This isn't the JP vs. TE debate that so many have dragged along. JP didn't get the job done in a reasonable amount of time. He's done. Let's hope TE is our guy if not it's back to the drawing board.

[YardRat]

Umm no...It hurts you that JP cleaned up Trents mess in the Meadowlands...


Fair is fair, and I believe credit should be given where credit is due.

Props to Lee Evans for cleaning up JP's mess in the Meadowlands last year.

[acehole]

This was never suppose to be a TE vs Jp debate.

Just facts to debunk many myths.

I think Draz did that.

Although I like the Jedi...thing you guys do with your feelings on things....much easier way to go through life...

Anyway lets hope facts dont mean anything and we win some game this year.

I will watch whomever is under center.

[YardRat]

Let's take experience into consideration and factor that into the equations...



Have fun with this.

Total number of Drives:
Trent Edwards - 111
JP Losman - 66

Plays per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 632/111 - 5.69/1 = 5.69
JP Losman - 388/66 - 5.88/4 = 1.47

Pass Plays per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 284/111 - 2.56/1 = 2.56
JP Losman - 197/66 - 2.98/4 = .745

Run Plays per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 267/111 - 2.41/1 = 2.41
JP Losman - 153/66 - 2.32/4 = .58

Time of Possession per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 17045 sec/111 - 2:33/1 = 2.33
JP Losman - 10645 sec/66 - 2:41/4 = .60

Passing First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 81/111 - .73/1 = .73
JP Losman - 59/66 - .89/4 = .22

Running First Downs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 53/111 - .48/1 = .48
JP Losman - 36/66 - .55/4 = .14

First Down per Drive (excluding Penalty):
Trent Edwards - 134/111 - 1.21/1 = 1.21
JP Losman - 95/66 - 1.44/4 = .36

Sacks per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 12/111 - .11/1 = .11
JP Losman - 14/66 - .21/4 = .05

Sack Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 105/111 - (.95)/1 = .95
JP Losman - 103/66 - (1.56)/4 = .39

Passing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1630/111 - 14.68/1 = 14.68
JP Losman - 1204/66 - 18.24/4 = 4.56

Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 1115/111 - 10.05/1 = 10.05
JP Losman - 793/66 - 12.02/4 = 3.00

QB Rushing Yardage per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 49/111 - .44/1 = .44
JP Losman - 110/66 - 1.67/4 = .42

QB Rushing 1st Down per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04/1 = .04
JP Losman - 8/66 - .12/4 = .03

QB Fumbles per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04/1 = .04
JP Losman - 5/66 - .08/4 = .02

QB INT per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 8/111 - .07/1 = .07
JP Losman - 6/66 - .09/4 = .0225

QB Turnover per Drive (includes lost fumbles):
Trent Edwards - 8/111 - .07/1 = .07
JP Losman - 8/66 - .12/4 = .03

Passing TDs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 7/111 - .06/1 = .06
JP Losman - 4/66 - .06/4 = .015

Rushing TDs per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 4/111 - .04/1 = .04
JP Losman - 4/66 - .06/4 = .015

Offensive Points per Drive:
Trent Edwards - 125/111 - 1.13/1 = 1.13
JP Losman - 88/66 - 1.33/4 = .33


Wow. Trent wins 14 out of 19 categories, and the difference in the other five is a whopping .1675 percent and .56 yards.

Pretty obvious who the better QB is now, if you ask me.

[Yasgur's Farm]

I have no idea what you've just done. But I suspect, by your factoring, that Peyton Manning would not beat Trent either.

[YardRat]

I have no idea what you've just done. But I suspect, by your factoring, that Peyton Manning would not beat Trent either.

Statistics can be funny that way, can't they?

[Yasgur's Farm]

That post was just stupidity.

[yordad]

Statistics can be funny that way, can't they?Yeah, or we could multiply Trent's stats by twenty. Then we have a real good comparison!! :up:

I love the argument, "you can twist the stats to make them seem how you want them, so they aren't objective." Well JP haters, feel free to "twist" Trent's stats. I would like to see them make TE look more productive. I mean, what are you going to do, divide JP's stats by 4? Multiply Trent's by 10? That isn't twisting. That is straight making stuff up.

So, without making stuff up, let's hear the Trent Edwards twist. Because these stats that favor JP are not twisted.

sorry, to keep you up. lol

Well, I'm not convinced TE is great but I am pretty sure he is better than JP.

And, yes part of is the good ol' eye ball test. And, yes, it is objective but its not just my opinion either, its seems to be the overwhelming majority opinion which does lend some more credence to it.

Stats can be just as objective as eye ballin it. They can easily be skewed to look better in favor of one opinion. After all, stats are just numbers and they still have to be interpreted.

What do you make of Trent having a higher TD%, lower INT% and lower sack% than JP? ....you can answer that later.LOL, sorry about the keeping me up part. That was supposed to sound like a compliment, but I was hammered. I will do some looking into your question.

[SABURZFAN]

That post was just stupidity.



it's no different than the crap you post, is it?

[mikemac2001]

Fair is fair, and I believe credit should be given where credit is due.

Props to Lee Evans for cleaning up JP's mess in the Meadowlands last year.

JP inspires his teammates thats y

[Yasgur's Farm]

it's no different than the crap you post, is it?Comparing per drive stats of two players from the same season is a reasonable evaluation. Dividing JP's per drive stats by 4 for the number of years in the NFL is simply dillusional.

Do you think Trent's next TD should go down in the books as 1/2?

Why don't we divide Peyton Mannings per drive stats by 10? Do you honestly think that would be an accuartae comparison with Trent?

[Ingtar33]

Wow, pathetic numbers at best for any QB. They were both horrible, why even try to compare the two....


bingo

this is what i was saying last year.

when i posted this thread.



2007 3rd down conversions:
Losman: 8-25
Edwards: 15-46

3rd Down Percentage:
Buffalo 2006: 31.7 (Losman) *31st in the league
Buffalo 2007: 32.0 (Losman) *29th in the League
Buffalo 2007: 32.6 (Edwards) *29th in the League

Percentage of Drives ending in 3&Out: 2007
Losman: 36.8%
Edwards: 25.0%

Percentages of Drives ending in 3&Out: 2006
Losman: 29.8% (57-191)

2007 Red Zone Numbers
Losman 2 times in the red zone 0 FG 1 TDs (.500 scoring, .500 TD)
Edwards 9 times in the red zone 4 FG 4 TDs (.888 scoring, .444 TD)

2006 Red Zone Numbers
Losman 35 times in the red zone 16 FGs 15 TDs (.886 scoring, .429 TD)


*I defined 3&Out as being any drive that had no first downs, no turnovers, no points, and did not end on a half. the same standard was applied to both Quarterbacks

Part of why i included Losman's numbers from last year is for a better basis of comparison.

My basic point is we're still in a pee-ing contest with both sides spraying their shoes. Both are mediocre.

these numbers were from the mid way point of last year, they probably changed a bit... but my basic premise remains the same. they both did a great job spraying their shoes in a peeing contest... mediocre.

the problem is, that jp has had 4 years, and looked pretty much like trent... a rookie.

[Ingtar33]

i can do up those numbers for the full season. I'm sure they'll look basically the same. Who knows? It doesn't matter. They both were mediocre to terrible.

[SABURZFAN]

that 3 and Out stat stands out like a sore dick.

[Ingtar33]

UPDATED (full season)

2007 3rd down conversions:
Losman: 31-74
Edwards: 30-108

3rd Down Percentage:
Buffalo 2006: 31.7 (Losman) *31st in the league
Buffalo 2007: 41.9 (Losman) *12th in the League
Buffalo 2007: 27.8 (Edwards) *32nd in the League

Percentage of Drives ending in 3&Out: 2007
Losman: 34.8%
Edwards: 24.5%

Percentages of Drives ending in 3&Out: 2006
Losman: 29.8% (57-191)

2007 Red Zone Numbers
Losman 11 times in the red zone 5 FG 5 TDs (.909 scoring, .455 TD)
Edwards 22 times in the red zone 10 FG 9 TDs (.866 scoring, .409 TD)

2006 Red Zone Numbers
Losman 35 times in the red zone 16 FGs 15 TDs (.886 scoring, .429 TD)


*I defined 3&Out as being any drive that had no first downs, no turnovers, no points, and did not end on a half. the same standard was applied to both Quarterbacks

I still included 2006's numbers for Losman, mostly because he didn't play enough in 2007 to get a solid (true) average. TE barely played enough... though his numbers are not completely accurate either, thanks to the low playing time.

I also decided to add one more for your consideration.

Chance of a Negative Outcome per Play (Sacks, Fumbles or INTs)

Losman 2006
514 plays
47 sacks, 6 fumbles lost, 14 ints = 67 neg plays
13% of all plays were negative

Losman 2007
210 plays
14 sacks, 2 fum lost, 6 int = 22 neg plays
10.5% of all plays were negative

Edwards 2007
295 plays
12 sacks, 1 fum, 8 int = 21 neg plays
7.1% of all plays were negative

My basic point is we're still in a pee-ing contest with both sides spraying their shoes. Both are mediocre. and truthfully.. as a coach, i would take the man who's safer with the ball, and keeps the chains moving.


one small note. Losman played in just 6 games last year... his numbers were heavily weighted by one spectacular game, against Cincinnati, without which his numbers would have been pretty much identical to Edwards. because of the small sample size (6 games is no where near enough to draw any statistical conclusions, in fact 16 is barely enough from a strict statistical point of view; while against cinci he went something silly like 10 of 12 on 3rd down, blowing that number clean out of alignment... i was tempted to drop the high and low from both QB's samples, but losman's sample was so small that wouldn't have been any better), i chose to include the 2006 numbers as well to expand the sample size.

[Ingtar33]

that 3 and Out stat stands out like a sore dick.


yep... what's worse... is there were whole games where losman would go 3 and out for whole quarters...

he ran really hot and cold.

not that TE's numbers were "good", they were just better then terrible (and not much better at that)

which brings us back to the point. neither was any good.

The difference between the two is TE was a rookie, and Losman is a 4th year player.

[OpIv37]

UPDATED (full season)

2007 3rd down conversions:
Losman: 31-74
Edwards: 30-108

3rd Down Percentage:
Buffalo 2006: 31.7 (Losman) *31st in the league
Buffalo 2007: 41.9 (Losman) *12th in the League
Buffalo 2007: 27.8 (Edwards) *32nd in the League

Percentage of Drives ending in 3&Out: 2007
Losman: 34.8%
Edwards: 24.5%

Percentages of Drives ending in 3&Out: 2006
Losman: 29.8% (57-191)

2007 Red Zone Numbers
Losman 11 times in the red zone 5 FG 5 TDs (.909 scoring, .455 TD)
Edwards 22 times in the red zone 10 FG 9 TDs (.866 scoring, .409 TD)

2006 Red Zone Numbers
Losman 35 times in the red zone 16 FGs 15 TDs (.886 scoring, .429 TD)


*I defined 3&Out as being any drive that had no first downs, no turnovers, no points, and did not end on a half. the same standard was applied to both Quarterbacks

I still included 2006's numbers for Losman, mostly because he didn't play enough in 2007 to get a solid (true) average. TE barely played enough... though his numbers are not completely accurate either, thanks to the low playing time.

I also decided to add one more for your consideration.

Chance of a Negative Outcome per Play (Sacks, Fumbles or INTs)

Losman 2006
514 plays
47 sacks, 6 fumbles lost, 14 ints = 67 neg plays
13% of all plays were negative

Losman 2007
210 plays
14 sacks, 2 fum lost, 6 int = 22 neg plays
10.5% of all plays were negative

Edwards 2007
295 plays
12 sacks, 1 fum, 8 int = 21 neg plays
7.1% of all plays were negative

My basic point is we're still in a pee-ing contest with both sides spraying their shoes. Both are mediocre. and truthfully.. as a coach, i would take the man who's safer with the ball, and keeps the chains moving.


one small note. Losman played in just 6 games last year... his numbers were heavily weighted by one spectacular game, against Cincinnati, without which his numbers would have been pretty much identical to Edwards. because of the small sample size (6 games is no where near enough to draw any statistical significance; while against cinci he went something silly like 10 of 12 on 3rd down, blowing that number clean out of alignment... i was tempted to drop the high and low from both QB's samples, but losman's sample was so small that wouldn't have been any better), i chose to include the 2006 numbers as well to expand the sample size.

but, that analysis doesn't count because you acknowledged stats that don't "prove" Losman is better.

At the end of the day, with 3 more years of experience and playing with the exact same team, the numbers don't show Losman as being any better than Trent.

[Typ0]

The difference between the two is TE was a rookie, and Losman is a 4th year player.


that really begs to question why some people have so much patience with JP but none with TE. I gather it's because of the "excitement" of a low percentage pass downfield...that doesn't win football games consistently IMO. He's lulled people into a trance based on the entertainment value as opposed to good football qualities.

We're going to find out soon. The difference between a first year and second year QB is pretty significant. Within six months of being drafted these kids are on the field opening day. Not a lot of time to study and prepare. Unless, of course, it's JP Lossman who in his second year after 18 months preparation he was "still a rookie". I think this coming season he must be somewhere near to completing his rookie season.

[gr8slayer]

that really begs to question why some people have so much patience with JP but none with TE. I gather it's because of the "excitement" of a low percentage pass downfield...that doesn't win football games consistently IMO. He's lulled people into a trance based on the entertainment value as opposed to good football qualities.

We're going to find out soon. The difference between a first year and second year QB is pretty significant. Within six months of being drafted these kids are on the field opening day. Not a lot of time to study and prepare. Unless, of course, it's JP Lossman who in his second year after 18 months preparation he was "still a rookie". I think this coming season he must be somewhere near to completing his rookie season.
I'm not sure where you get the idea that we were patient with Losman. He only got three starts in '05 before he was pulled in favor of Holcomb; that's definitely no way to handle a QB situation correctly.

[Marvelous]

I will miss JP's longball..It was borderline perfect... I had Lee Evans in my local FF league & it was blatant how m,ediocre his stats we're once Trent came in...

Question #1--Is Lee Evans maybe "not the perfect fit for us like was with JP"? IMO a Roy Williams trade for Evans could probably go down str8 ^..Can't say i like Roy better than Evans. Heck i love Evans & i love our homegrown boys esp.. BUt Roy is more clutch instead of Evans raw blazing speed...I hope Evans works out for us but i did notice dropoff in his production under our new star starter...

--Question #2--Any chance whatsoever that Mace WIndu survived? I mean Luke handled the same lightning from the same man for alot longer then Mace & most jedi can use the force to guide their falls for safe landings etc... lol Been on my mind alot lately & want to here the POV from the best fans in the world!

[Philagape]

[QUOTE=Marvelous]I will miss JP's longball..It was borderline perfect[QUOTE]

He was 2 for 13 on passes over 30 yards, and both completions were because the receivers made really good adjustments.

Trent: 3 for 9, and his completions were way more accurate.

In 2007, Trent was the better long-ball passer.

[gr8slayer]

[QUOTE=Marvelous]I will miss JP's longball..It was borderline perfect[QUOTE]

He was 2 for 13 on passes over 30 yards, and both completions were because the receivers made really good adjustments.

Trent: 3 for 9, and his completions were way more accurate.

In 2007, Trent was the better long-ball passer.
I'm all for Edwards starting but to say that he has the better long ball is well...... yeah.

[Typ0]

I'm not sure where you get the idea that we were patient with Losman. He only got three starts in '05 before he was pulled in favor of Holcomb; that's definitely no way to handle a QB situation correctly.


the fans are patient constantly explaining away his experience and why he fails to move forward on a consistent basis...he still deserves more chances I guess.

[gr8slayer]

the fans are patient constantly explaining away his experience and why he fails to move forward on a consistent basis...he still deserves more chances I guess.
So you think that his situation was handled correctly by our organization from the start?

[Typ0]

So you think that his situation was handled correctly by our organization from the start?

yes I do. I watched all the games. JP kept regressing. We were not going to win with him in there and it may also have damaged his fragile psyche to continue to get pummelled.

[gr8slayer]

yes I do. I watched all the games. JP kept regressing. We were not going to win with him in there and it may also have damaged his fragile psyche to continue to get pummelled.
So if Edwards struggles in his first three games this year we should pull him right?

[Romes]

the fans are patient constantly explaining away his experience and why he fails to move forward on a consistent basis...he still deserves more chances I guess.

The patience is strange. Did you know Rob Johnson played 30 games and started 26 as a Buffalo Bill, Todd Collins played in 28 and started 17, while JP Losman has played in 37 and started 31 as a Bill?

Its not like JP hasn't had his chances. Infact he has had more chances than most.

[yordad]

bingo

this is what i was saying last year.

when i posted this thread.




these numbers were from the mid way point of last year, they probably changed a bit... but my basic premise remains the same. they both did a great job spraying their shoes in a peeing contest... mediocre.

the problem is, that jp has had 4 years, and looked pretty much like trent... a rookie.

2007 3rd down conversions:
Losman: 8-25
Edwards: 15-46

3rd Down Percentage:
Buffalo 2006: 31.7 (Losman) *31st in the league
Buffalo 2007: 32.0 (Losman) *29th in the League
Buffalo 2007: 32.6 (Edwards) *29th in the League

Percentage of Drives ending in 3&Out: 2007
Losman: 36.8%
Edwards: 25.0%

Percentages of Drives ending in 3&Out: 2006
Losman: 29.8% (57-191)

2007 Red Zone Numbers
Losman 2 times in the red zone 0 FG 1 TDs (.500 scoring, .500 TD)
Edwards 9 times in the red zone 4 FG 4 TDs (.888 scoring, .444 TD)

2006 Red Zone Numbers
Losman 35 times in the red zone 16 FGs 15 TDs (.886 scoring, .429 TD)


*I defined 3&Out as being any drive that had no first downs, no turnovers, no points, and did not end on a half. the same standard was applied to both Quarterbacks

Part of why i included Losman's numbers from last year is for a better basis of comparison.

My basic point is we're still in a pee-ing contest with both sides spraying their shoes. Both are mediocre.OK man, I gotta tell you, I looked up some of your listed stats. Turns out some where completely fabricated. Unless these stats were done after the fourth TE drive against the Pats, because that was the last time TE's 3-and-out % was so low. Not that that makes sense because your other numbers wouldn't fit.

And, strange that you listed these as the stats that tell the story, and then deny there relevance when you are shown the stats favor JP (maybe a bit of an assumption).

Or, are you trying to say if I show you how these stats ended, you will change your mind if they favor JP?

[Marvelous]

[QUOTE=Marvelous]I will miss JP's longball..It was borderline perfect[QUOTE]

He was 2 for 13 on passes over 30 yards, and both completions were because the receivers made really good adjustments.

Trent: 3 for 9, and his completions were way more accurate.

In 2007, Trent was the better long-ball passer.

Im gonna have to disagree with the stats..
--Did the recievers not make the plays on Trents longballs?

[acehole]

[quote=Marvelous]I will miss JP's longball..It was borderline perfect[quote]

He was 2 for 13 on passes over 30 yards, and both completions were because the receivers made really good adjustments.

Trent: 3 for 9, and his completions were way more accurate.

In 2007, Trent was the better long-ball passer.

Stats dont mater.

[acehole]

that 3 and Out stat stands out like a sore dick.


hahaha you would know.

Wait until Shelby gets a hold of you.

[acehole]

The patience is strange. Did you know Rob Johnson played 30 games and started 26 as a Buffalo Bill, Todd Collins played in 28 and started 17, while JP Losman has played in 37 and started 31 as a Bill?

Its not like JP hasn't had his chances. Infact he has had more chances than most.

With the exception of Todd Collins...they had big holes on all those teams.

Todd Colins was not a bad qb for Washington in cambles stead.

The problem with you fans is....you always looking for the next Jim Kelly.....whe we really need the next B Smith,House Ballard and Mezzalars......Thermal.....then you will see your Jim Kelly.

Build a freaking team around a qb with half ass
coaching and we will make some noise.

We seem to have one in place if they can make bail.

[acehole]

[quote=Marvelous]I will miss JP's longball..It was borderline perfect[quote]

He was 2 for 13 on passes over 30 yards, and both completions were because the receivers made really good adjustments.

Trent: 3 for 9, and his completions were way more accurate.

In 2007, Trent was the better long-ball passer.

What he leaves out is Trents INT's come
from this area of the field....that is what
happens when you throw up ducks...

One more pass in what 5 games?

Talk about stats not matering....

[Romes]

With the exception of Todd Collins...they had big holes on all those teams.

Todd Colins was not a bad qb for Washington in cambles stead.

The problem with you fans is....you always looking for the next Jim Kelly.....whe we really need the next B Smith,House Ballard and Mezzalars......Thermal.....then you will see your Jim Kelly.

Build a freaking team around a qb with half ass
coaching and we will make some noise.

We seem to have one in place if they can make bail.

I don't think the problem is looking for another Jim Kelly. I'd be happy with something in between Jim and JP. I think our problem is having seen enough of JP and being ready for something new....if you can call that a problem.

BTW, we had a pretty decent team when RJ was QB. That team had a top ranked defense, Moulds in his prime, and a solid ground game. The OL may have been a little suspect but RJ only made that issue worse by his lack of pocket presence.

[Night Train]

Stats don't matter is the correct answer.

Edwards is in there because Losman made incredible gaffs at critical times of the game. Experience didn't change that.

[Yasgur's Farm]

3 (or 4) plays or less resulting in no score or less than 10 yards.
No 3 plays or less drives that end the half or end the game.

Trent 33 of 102... 32.4%

[Philagape]

I will miss JP's longball..It was borderline perfect

Im gonna have to disagree with the stats..
--Did the recievers not make the plays on Trents longballs?

Trent's long completions hit the receivers in stride, and where only the receivers could catch it. The ball went to where the receivers were, instead of the other way around.

The numbers are from ESPN's splits, so disagree with them.

[justasportsfan]

I can't wait until TD or Justa sees this thread. They will have a kitten!Wow, you've taken snitching to the mods to a new high. We haven't even said anything and you're already pointing fingers? I don't think it gets any gayer than that.

I read it alright but I'm not gonna give you the satisfaction of being able to lift your skirt high enough to play girlscout again and lie "teacher, teacher, justa did it"

[Romes]

Well since I was bored I ran through the numbers myself.

I defined a non 3&Out drive as any drive which completed a first down or TD.
I did not include drives where the QB never threw a pass or drives that ended the half.

JP Losman:

Game 3&Out Drives %
vsDEN 4 9 44.44%
vsPIT 3 8 37.50%
@NYJ 0 3 0.00%
vsCIN 2 10 20.00%
@MIA 5 10 50.00%
vsNE 2 8 25.00%
@JAX 4 9 44.44%
Total 20 57 35.09%



*I did not include the first NE game for JP because he got the first down on the penalty and then fumbled the next play. Out of my own judgment I left it out

Trent Edwards:

Game 3&Out Drives %
@NE 5 9 55.6%
vsNYJ 1 8 12.5%
vsDAL 2 9 22.2%
vsBAL 4 10 40.0%
@NYJ 1 6 16.7%
@WAS 2 8 25.0%
vsMIA 3 14 21.4%
@CLE 3 9 33.3%
vsNYG 6 12 50.0%
@PHI 3 9 33.3%
Total 30 94 31.91%



One thing I noticed is how much the margin of error could be here, certain drives we got 1st downs only because of penalties. Some drives we got 1 big play on first down and then promptly went 3&out. Some drives we were within FG range to begin with and we ran on 3rd and 5 in an apparent attempt to settle for the FG. Some 3&outs were caused by drop passes. Some 3&outs there was an offensive penalty which negated a first down. Point being there are many things these stats don't consider. I made my rules and stuck by them...but I still think this is by no means the best way to determine who was more productive.

[Ingtar33]

OK man, I gotta tell you, I looked up some of your listed stats. Turns out some where completely fabricated. Unless these stats were done after the fourth TE drive against the Pats, because that was the last time TE's 3-and-out % was so low. Not that that makes sense because your other numbers wouldn't fit.

And, strange that you listed these as the stats that tell the story, and then deny there relevance when you are shown the stats favor JP (maybe a bit of an assumption).

Or, are you trying to say if I show you how these stats ended, you will change your mind if they favor JP?


those numbers you highlighted were taken from games 1 to 8 in 2007.

i included the whole numbers for that year in a thread 2 posts down.

and as i added them up myself... by the standard i listed, (i couldn't find a 3 and out stat) by counting the drives, then taking all the drives that had... no points, turnovers and didn't end a quarter as a 3 and out.

I'm not sure what you're looking at, but my number was the % of drives that ended as a 3 and out.

[Ingtar33]

3 (or 4) plays or less resulting in no score or less than 10 yards.
No 3 plays or less drives that end the half or end the game.

Trent 33 of 102... 32.4%


i didn't count turnovers. that's how our numbers diverge.

we can count the turnovers if you wish.

jp doesn't win that one either

[gr8slayer]

those numbers you highlighted were taken from games 1 to 8 in 2007.

i included the whole numbers for that year in a thread 2 posts down.

and as i added them up myself... by the standard i listed, (i couldn't find a 3 and out stat) by counting the drives, then taking all the drives that had... no points, turnovers and didn't end a quarter as a 3 and out.

I'm not sure what you're looking at, but my number was the % of drives that ended as a 3 and out.
owned

[Ingtar33]

And, strange that you listed these as the stats that tell the story, and then deny there relevance when you are shown the stats favor JP (maybe a bit of an assumption).

Or, are you trying to say if I show you how these stats ended, you will change your mind if they favor JP?

Actually my post wasn't to advocate either QB. i think they both stink, and when i did the initial evaluation i was actually looking to justify my position that QB was a team need in the nfl draft.

My point's remained consistent. they both stink.

the difference is while they're statistically similar (identical even) one's a 4th year player, the other is a rookie.

anyone advocating either person needs their head examined, largely because they're settling for mediocrity.

if i was a coach of the bills, i would go with trent for the following reasons.

-not as many negative plays
-not as many 3 and outs
-younger
-jp's contract comes up next year, and even if he has a good year we're not going to pay him elite $$... so we need to look to the future.

simply put, as a coach (and admittedly one who leans conservative), Trent makes me feel comfortable. It's a bad situation as neither is ideal (one or both might be, but at the moment they're not), so i would look to depend on the guy i know probably wont cost me a game, over a guy who might.

[hydro]

Double pwned!

[gr8slayer]

Actually my post wasn't to advocate either QB. i think they both stink, and when i did the initial evaluation i was actually looking to justify my position that QB was a team need in the nfl draft.

My point's remained consistent. they both stink.

the difference is while they're statistically similar (identical even) one's a 4th year player, the other is a rookie.

anyone advocating either person needs their head examined, largely because they're settling for mediocrity.

if i was a coach of the bills, i would go with trent for the following reasons.

-not as many negative plays
-not as many 3 and outs
-younger
-jp's contract comes up next year, and even if he has a good year we're not going to pay him elite $$... so we need to look to the future.

simply put, as a coach (and admittedly one who leans conservative), Trent makes me feel comfortable. It's a bad situation as neither is ideal (one or both might be, but at the moment they're not), so i would look to depend on the guy i know probably wont cost me a game, over a guy who might.
Ah... Finally someone who agrees with me.

[Yasgur's Farm]

Includes drives of 4 plays or less resulting in no 1st down or score.

Does not include drives resulting in no 1st down or score that end the half or end the game.

Trent...
26 Punt
4 Interception
1 Fumble
2 Downs
33 Total of 102 drives = 32.4%

JP...
17 Punts
0 Interceptions
2 Fumbles
1 Downs
20 Total of 62 drives = 32.3%

[The Answer]

Let's see - 12 pages of more pointless spam and garbage - thank God I don't post much during the weekend when threads like this dominate the board and have better things to do than research and post this type of propaganda.

After an initial glance through this crap this is what I see, keep in mind this is a personal attack and I'm not naming names - just a generalization that I'm sure 100 other posters here will agree with.....

JP Lover #1: "Here are some pointless stats that I crunched that show why a 4th year veteran is marginally better than a NFL rookie (on paper), despite their respective win/loss records. I got 300 repsonses from this on another Bills message board so let's try it here too, maybe the Bills front office will change their minds and start JP in 2008!"

JP Lover #2: "I agree. Go JP!"

JP Lover #3: "Wow great find, lets see the Trentards respond to this."

JP Lover #4: "JP was screwed over in Buffalo and I want to have his baby."

Rational Billzone Poster: "Please stop with this crap. JP has been benched and the QB carousel has turned in Trent's direction. It's his chance to prove himself now."

JP lovers respond and the endless cycle continues. Wash, rinse, repeat.

~The Answer

[justasportsfan]

more warnings on its way in 3...2...1

[Typ0]

Let's see - 12 pages of more pointless spam and garbage - thank God I don't post much during the weekend when threads like this dominate the board and have better things to do than research and post this type of propaganda.

After an initial glance through this crap this is what I see, keep in mind this is a personal attack and I'm not naming names - just a generalization that I'm sure 100 other posters here will agree with.....

JP Lover #1: "Here are some pointless stats that I crunched that show why a 4th year veteran is marginally better than a NFL rookie (on paper), despite their respective win/loss records. I got 300 repsonses from this on another Bills message board so let's try it here too, maybe the Bills front office will change their minds and start JP in 2008!"

JP Lover #2: "I agree. Go JP!"

JP Lover #3: "Wow great find, lets see the Trentards respond to this."

JP Lover #4: "JP was screwed over in Buffalo and I want to have his baby."

Rational Billzone Poster: "Please stop with this crap. JP has been benched and the QB carousel has turned in Trent's direction. It's his chance to prove himself now."

JP lovers respond and the endless cycle continues. Wash, rinse, repeat.

~The Answer

you're a grown man...why are you calling people trenttards?

[Yasgur's Farm]

I understand it is not the be all end all...

You cant just dismiss them....because they dont make your case.

Case and point...Trent is more accurate...

No he isnt.

Yea he is..

That stats say jp is more accurate....

You are a licker.

Welcome to my world.

I dont want to bicker with you...I disagree and that is that.

[Marvelous]

sTATS CAN ALWAYS BE SHOWN TO PROVE ONES POINT.. nOT THAT THE STATS ARE FALSE, BUT THAT OUTTA 50 CATEGORIES OF PASSING STATS pHILAGE SHOWED tRENT FLUFFY OPNES..

Stats can always be shown to ones point about any one player. Not that stats are fake or even false but there's about 50 categories and a poster picks the Pro-Trent stats...I miss JP. Alot! I htought we drafted our QB of teh future. But he was another pocket ****** and we didn't put talent around him. Proof of that is a 4rd rounder comes in & looks purdy. Fact, Trent haqs better talent around him. A decent O-line and a RB who actually cares... But make no mistake that i want stability form the QB position even if that means it's Trent.. No hate here...

[yordad]

Well since I was bored I ran through the numbers myself.

I defined a non 3&Out drive as any drive which completed a first down or TD.
I did not include drives where the QB never threw a pass or drives that ended the half.

JP Losman:

Game 3&Out Drives %
vsDEN 4 9 44.44%
vsPIT 3 8 37.50%
@NYJ 0 3 0.00%
vsCIN 2 10 20.00%
@MIA 5 10 50.00%
vsNE 2 8 25.00%
@JAX 4 9 44.44%
Total 20 57 35.09%


*I did not include the first NE game for JP because he got the first down on the penalty and then fumbled the next play. Out of my own judgment I left it out

Trent Edwards:

Game 3&Out Drives %
@NE 5 9 55.6%
vsNYJ 1 8 12.5%
vsDAL 2 9 22.2%
vsBAL 4 10 40.0%
@NYJ 1 6 16.7%
@WAS 2 8 25.0%
vsMIA 3 14 21.4%
@CLE 3 9 33.3%
vsNYG 6 12 50.0%
@PHI 3 9 33.3%
Total 30 94 31.91%


One thing I noticed is how much the margin of error could be here, certain drives we got 1st downs only because of penalties. Some drives we got 1 big play on first down and then promptly went 3&out. Some drives we were within FG range to begin with and we ran on 3rd and 5 in an apparent attempt to settle for the FG. Some 3&outs were caused by drop passes. Some 3&outs there was an offensive penalty which negated a first down. Point being there are many things these stats don't consider. I made my rules and stuck by them...but I still think this is by no means the best way to determine who was more productive.I got to tell you, I rechecked a couple games for you...

JP did not fumble on the next play. Lynch ran for 4 yards on the next play.

And, TE had 6- 3 and outs (or worst) in that game (Vs the Pats).

Also, I couldn't help but noticed you altered JP's stat (*), but didn't do the same for TE when nearly the same thing happened to him. In the Jets game, he threw a short pass to Reed on second down. Reed ran for the first. On the next play (the third of the drive) TE threw an interception.

Further, JP only had 2 three and outs VS Pittsburgh. You claimed you didn't count drives to end a half, but you did.

You gave JP credit for only three drives Vs the Jets when he had 4.

JP had 9 drives Vs NE not 8. One three and out from a penalty after a nice pass. And, one after a Wright fumble. Worth noting.

JP was 3 for 11 VS. Jacksonville, not 4 for 9.

TE had three 3 and outs Vs Dallas. Unless of course you are trying to say a failed 4th down attempt isn't the same as a three and out.

Against Miami, TE had four 3 and outs, not three. Unless you are trying to tell me he had something to do with the 'Fins fumbling the punt?

You left out an entire TE drive VS Cleveland that resulted in a 3and out. He was 4 of 10, not 3 of 9. Unless a safety isn't a 3 and out (It has to be). AND, I am still leaving out the dead drive to end the half. You should count that one too because he did get three plays, and there was no first down. So, really 5 of 11.

Now, you put in work. You must think this is an important stat. Do you think it is less important now that you find it actually favors JP CONSIDERABLY. And, I think it is telling that your errors favored TE. Do I think you were lying? No, not really. Just wrong. That is how easy it is for one with formed opinion to have his judgment clouded. Which actually helps prove my sub-point.

In other words, you see what you want sometimes. Which isn't always what is there.

ownedYou might want to rethink that. Considering no matter when he did them, they are wrong. Again, the only time TE was only 25% for three and outs, it was after his 4th NFL drive. Since then his % was lower at all times.

OWNED

Double pwned!Yes. You were weren't you.

[Romes]

I got to tell you, I rechecked a couple games for you...

JP did not fumble on the next play. Lynch ran for 4 yards on the next play.

And, TE had 6- 3 and outs (or worst) in that game (Vs the Pats).

Also, I couldn't help but noticed you altered JP's stat (*), but didn't do the same for TE when nearly the same thing happened to him. In the Jets game, he threw a short pass to Reed on second down. Reed ran for the first. On the next play (the third of the drive) TE threw an interception.

Further, JP only had 2 three and outs VS Pittsburgh. You claimed you didn't count drives to end a half, but you did.

You gave JP credit for only three drives Vs the Jets when he had 4.

JP had 9 drives Vs NE not 8. One three and out from a penalty after a nice pass. And, one after a Wright fumble. Worth noting.

JP was 3 for 11 VS. Jacksonville, not 4 for 9.

TE had three 3 and outs Vs Dallas. Unless of course you are trying to say a failed 4th down attempt isn't the same as a three and out.

Against Miami, TE had four 3 and outs, not three. Unless you are trying to tell me he had something to do with the 'Fins fumbling the punt?

You left out an entire TE drive VS Cleveland that resulted in a 3and out. He was 4 of 10, not 3 of 9. Unless a safety isn't a 3 and out (It has to be). AND, I am still leaving out the dead drive to end the half. You should count that one too because he did get three plays, and there was no first down. So, really 5 of 11.

Now, you put in work. You must think this is an important stat. Do you think it is less important now that you find it actually favors JP CONSIDERABLY. And, I think it is telling that your errors favored TE. Do I think you were lying? No, not really. Just wrong. That is how easy it is for one with formed opinion to have his judgment clouded. Which actually helps prove my sub-point.

In other words, you see what you want sometimes. Which isn't always what is there.
You might want to rethink that. Considering no matter when he did them, they are wrong.

OWNED
Yes. You were weren't you.

I don't have the time now to check my numbers again but I'll get back to you.

But the reason I compiled the numbers together was to double check other people's numbers, seeing as there have been discrepancies all around and to try and show that even with these statistics there is a considerable margin of error based on 3&outs being interpreted differently by different people.

[acehole]

How about...

Nothing maters but Trents big studley arms and I would love his....fat head....

in......my......



Room.


Let's see - 12 pages of more pointless spam and garbage - thank God I don't post much during the weekend when threads like this dominate the board and have better things to do than research and post this type of propaganda.

After an initial glance through this crap this is what I see, keep in mind this is a personal attack and I'm not naming names - just a generalization that I'm sure 100 other posters here will agree with.....

JP Lover #1: "Here are some pointless stats that I crunched that show why a 4th year veteran is marginally better than a NFL rookie (on paper), despite their respective win/loss records. I got 300 repsonses from this on another Bills message board so let's try it here too, maybe the Bills front office will change their minds and start JP in 2008!"

JP Lover #2: "I agree. Go JP!"

JP Lover #3: "Wow great find, lets see the Trentards respond to this."

JP Lover #4: "JP was screwed over in Buffalo and I want to have his baby."

Rational Billzone Poster: "Please stop with this crap. JP has been benched and the QB carousel has turned in Trent's direction. It's his chance to prove himself now."

JP lovers respond and the endless cycle continues. Wash, rinse, repeat.

~The Answer

[Romes]

JP did not fumble on the next play. Lynch ran for 4 yards on the next play.



I can answer this right away though. You are right he did not fumble the next play I should have said next pass play. Either way that 4 yard run did not lead to a first down and doesn't change my logic for not including that drive.

[acehole]

JP lovers respond and the endless cycle continues. Wash, rinse, repeat.

~The Answer[/quote]

at least is isnt..

Trent lovers...respond and the cycle contiues. Rub ...squirt, wipe repeat.

[yordad]

I can answer this right away though. You are right he did not fumble the next play I should have said next pass play. Either way that 4 yard run did not lead to a first down and doesn't change my logic for not including that drive.Well, did this....

"Also, I couldn't help but noticed you altered JP's stat (*), but didn't do the same for TE when nearly the same thing happened to him. In the Jets game, he threw a short pass to Reed on second down. Reed ran for the first. On the next play (the third of the drive) TE threw an interception."

How is one different?

And, if you are saying the penalty, why doesn't JP get credit for negated plays that would have went for a 1st in his favor?

[SABURZFAN]

hahaha you would know.

Wait until Shelby gets a hold of you.


stay on the subject, a-hole. shelby has nothing to with the 3 and outs or the sore dicks.

[Romes]

Well, did this....

"Also, I couldn't help but noticed you altered JP's stat (*), but didn't do the same for TE when nearly the same thing happened to him. In the Jets game, he threw a short pass to Reed on second down. Reed ran for the first. On the next play (the third of the drive) TE threw an interception."

How is one different?

And, if you are saying the penalty, why doesn't JP get credit for negated plays that would have went for a 1st in his favor?

The clear difference is that TE completed a pass for a first down when on that first NE drive JP did nothing to earn a first down, unless he somehow strategically placed his knee under Wilfork's elbow.

I still need to go back and check my numbers I did them quickly and by hand so there is a good chance they may be off by 1 or 2 but if they are it certainly was not to favor 1 QB over the other.

edit: and if i intended to fudge my numbers I certainly would not have broken them down by game to make them easier to critique.

[Romes]

I got to tell you, I rechecked a couple games for you...

JP did not fumble on the next play. Lynch ran for 4 yards on the next play.

And, TE had 6- 3 and outs (or worst) in that game (Vs the Pats). I must have missed the INT drive he had 6 3&outs and 9 drives by my re-count

Also, I couldn't help but noticed you altered JP's stat (*), but didn't do the same for TE when nearly the same thing happened to him. In the Jets game, he threw a short pass to Reed on second down. Reed ran for the first. On the next play (the third of the drive) TE threw an interception.

Further, JP only had 2 three and outs VS Pittsburgh. You claimed you didn't count drives to end a half, but you did. I still count 3 in the first half.

Pittsburgh Steelers at 05:20
1-10-PIT 37 (5:20) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass deep middle intended for 10-S.Holmes INTERCEPTED by 42-J.Leonhard at BUF 11. 42-J.Leonhard to BUF 35 for 24 yards (83-H.Miller).
Buffalo Bills at 05:07
1-10-BUF 35 (5:07) 23-M.Lynch right tackle to BUF 44 for 9 yards (24-I.Taylor).
2-1-BUF 44 (4:25) 23-M.Lynch right end to BUF 44 for no gain (91-AA.Smith; 24-I.Taylor).
3-1-BUF 44 (3:43) #65 Whittle is eligible receiver 23-M.Lynch up the middle to BUF 44 for no gain (99-B.Keisel, 98-C.Hampton).
4-1-BUF 44 (3:00) 8-B.Moorman punts 39 yards to PIT 17, Center-72-R.Neill, out of bounds. Pittsburgh Steelers at 02:50
1-10-PIT 17 (2:50) 38-C.Davis up the middle to PIT 21 for 4 yards (90-C.Kelsay).
2-6-PIT 21 (2:15) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass short right to 38-C.Davis to PIT 21 for no gain (55-A.Crowell).
3-6-PIT 21 (1:26) (Shotgun) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass short left to 80-C.Wilson pushed ob at PIT 33 for 12 yards (33-J.Greer).
1-10-PIT 33 (1:02) 39-W.Parker left tackle to PIT 32 for -1 yards (55-A.Crowell; 51-P.Posluszny). PENALTY on BUF-77-T.Anderson, Defensive Holding, 5 yards, enforced at PIT 33 - No Play.
Timeout #1 by PIT at 00:30.
1-10-PIT 38 (:30) 39-W.Parker up the middle to PIT 49 for 11 yards (55-A.Crowell; 42-J.Leonhard).
END QUARTER 1
BUF 0 PIT 6 Plays: 14 Possession: 7:48

2nd Quarter expand [+] collapse [-]
Pittsburgh Steelers continues ...
1-10-PIT 49 (15:00) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass short left to 86-H.Ward to BUF 45 for 6 yards (26-A.Youboty, 52-J.DiGiorgio).
2-4-BUF 45 (14:30) 39-W.Parker up the middle to BUF 45 for no gain (52-J.DiGiorgio, 51-P.Posluszny).
3-4-BUF 45 (13:51) (Shotgun) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass short middle to 86-H.Ward to BUF 33 for 12 yards (25-K.Thomas).
1-10-BUF 33 (13:08) 39-W.Parker right tackle to BUF 33 for no gain (20-D.Whitner; 95-K.Williams).
2-10-BUF 33 (12:29) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass short left to 86-H.Ward to BUF 27 for 6 yards (26-A.Youboty).
3-4-BUF 27 (11:44) (Shotgun) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass short middle to 10-S.Holmes to BUF 18 for 9 yards (26-A.Youboty).
0-0- Timeout #2 by PIT at 11:00.
1-10-BUF 18 (11:00) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass incomplete deep left to 86-H.Ward.
2-10-BUF 18 (10:55) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass short right to 39-W.Parker to BUF 10 for 8 yards (51-P.Posluszny; 55-A.Crowell).
3-2-BUF 10 (10:09) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass incomplete short left to 35-D.Kreider.
4-2-BUF 10 (10:05) 3-J.Reed 28 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-60-G.Warren, Holder-9-D.Sepulveda.
Buffalo Bills at 10:02
3-J.Reed kicks 52 yards from PIT 30 to BUF 18. 24-T.McGee to BUF 24 for 6 yards (20-B.McFadden).
1-10-BUF 24 (9:57) 7-J.Losman pass short left to 88-R.Neufeld to BUF 32 for 8 yards (51-J.Farrior).
2-2-BUF 32 (9:20) 23-M.Lynch left guard to BUF 32 for no gain (91-AA.Smith).
3-2-BUF 32 (8:35) #65 Whittle is eligible receiver (Shotgun) 7-J.Losman pass incomplete short middle to 28-A.Thomas (51-J.Farrior) [92-J.Harrison].
4-2-BUF 32 (8:27) 8-B.Moorman punts 45 yards to PIT 23, Center-72-R.Neill, fair catch by 30-A.Rossum. Pittsburgh Steelers at 08:18
1-10-PIT 23 (8:18) 39-W.Parker up the middle to PIT 27 for 4 yards (51-P.Posluszny).
2-6-PIT 27 (7:44) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass short right to 89-M.Spaeth to PIT 36 for 9 yards (52-J.DiGiorgio).
1-10-PIT 36 (6:59) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass incomplete short left to 86-H.Ward. COVERAGE BY #24 MCGEE
2-10-PIT 36 (6:55) 39-W.Parker right guard to PIT 36 for no gain (98-L.Tripplett, 55-A.Crowell).
3-10-PIT 36 (6:14) (Shotgun) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass deep left to 85-N.Washington to BUF 43 for 21 yards (42-J.Leonhard, 51-P.Posluszny).
1-10-BUF 43 (5:29) 39-W.Parker left tackle to BUF 19 for 24 yards (20-D.Whitner).
Timeout #3 by PIT at 04:50.
1-10-BUF 19 (4:50) 39-W.Parker right tackle to BUF 20 for -1 yards (52-J.DiGiorgio).
2-11-BUF 20 (4:08) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass short middle to 39-W.Parker to BUF 21 for -1 yards (55-A.Crowell).
3-12-BUF 21 (3:18) 7-B.Roethlisberger pass incomplete deep left to 10-S.Holmes. COVERAGE BY #26 YOUBOTY
4-12-BUF 21 (3:13) 3-J.Reed 39 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-60-G.Warren, Holder-9-D.Sepulveda.
BUF 0 PIT 9 Plays: 10 Possession: 5:10

Buffalo Bills at 03:08
3-J.Reed kicks 66 yards from PIT 30 to BUF 4. 24-T.McGee to BUF 21 for 17 yards (92-J.Harrison).
1-10-BUF 21 (3:03) 7-J.Losman scrambles left end to BUF 25 for 4 yards (92-J.Harrison).
2-6-BUF 25 (2:23) 23-M.Lynch right end to BUF 26 for 1 yard (24-I.Taylor). PENALTY on BUF-83-L.Evans, Offensive Holding, 10 yards, enforced at BUF 26.
Two-Minute Warning
2-15-BUF 16 (2:00) 7-J.Losman pass incomplete short right to 11-R.Parrish. Pressure by #50 Foote
3-15-BUF 16 (1:56) 23-M.Lynch right tackle to BUF 24 for 8 yards (25-R.Clark; 53-C.Haggans). Penalty on BUF, Illegal Shift, declined.
4-7-BUF 24 (1:51) 8-B.Moorman punts 45 yards to PIT 31, Center-72-R.Neill. 30-A.Rossum to PIT 30 for -1 yards (72-R.Neill).


You gave JP credit for only three drives Vs the Jets when he had 4. I didn't count the last drive. JP didn't throw any passes and it was clearly a drive intended to run out the clock. I applied this standard to both.

JP had 9 drives Vs NE not 8. One three and out from a penalty after a nice pass. And, one after a Wright fumble. Worth noting. I noticed that. I did not include Wrights fumble against JP that is why there are only 8 drives and 2 3&out

JP was 3 for 11 VS. Jacksonville, not 4 for 9. I still count 4 3& out but I did miss 2 drives. There were 11.

10-J.Scobee kicks 67 yards from JAC 30 to BUF 3, out of bounds.
1-10-BUF 40 (15:00) 28-An.Thomas left end to BUF 36 for -4 yards (56-J.Durant).
2-14-BUF 36 (14:20) 7-J.Losman pass short right to 82-J.Reed to BUF 40 for 4 yards (56-J.Durant).
3-10-BUF 40 (13:40) (Shotgun) 7-J.Losman pass short left to 82-J.Reed to BUF 45 for 5 yards (21-T.Cousin).
4-5-BUF 45 (13:06) 8-B.Moorman punts 40 yards to JAC 15, Center-72-R.Neill, fair catch by 86-D.Northcutt.


1-10-BUF 47 (3:12) 28-An.Thomas up the middle to JAC 48 for 5 yards (29-B.Williams).
2-5-JAC 48 (2:33) 28-An.Thomas left end to JAC 44 for 4 yards (90-G.Jackson).
Two-Minute Warning
3-1-JAC 44 (2:00) 7-J.Losman up the middle to JAC 43 for 1 yard (23-J.Fudge). FUMBLES (23-J.Fudge), RECOVERED by JAC-23-J.Fudge at JAC 45. 23-J.Fudge to JAC 45 for no gain (66-D.Dockery). The Replay Assistant challenged the fumble ruling, and the play was Upheld.

10-J.Scobee kicks 68 yards from JAC 30 to BUF 2. 24-T.McGee MUFFS catch, and recovers at BUF 2. 24-T.McGee to BUF 13 for 11 yards (24-M.Owens).
1-10-BUF 13 (7:57) (Shotgun) 7-J.Losman pass short right to 28-An.Thomas to BUF 16 for 3 yards (51-C.Ingram).
2-7-BUF 16 (7:14) 7-J.Losman pass short left to 84-R.Royal to BUF 21 for 5 yards (52-D.Smith).
3-2-BUF 21 (6:29) (Shotgun) 7-J.Losman sacked at BUF 13 for -8 yards (95-P.Spicer). BB7 Shaken up on the play.
Timeout #1 by BUF at 06:08.
4-10-BUF 13 (6:07) 8-B.Moorman punts 42 yards to JAC 45, Center-72-R.Neill. 42-C.Nkang MUFFS catch, RECOVERED by BUF-17-J.Jenkins at JAC 45. 17-J.Jenkins to JAC 45 for no gain (86-D.Northcutt). Jacksonville challenged the kick touched ruling, and the play was Upheld. (Timeout #2 at 05:50.)


10-J.Scobee kicks 70 yards from JAC 30 to end zone, Touchback.
1-10-BUF 20 (2:39) (Shotgun) 7-J.Losman pass short right to 28-An.Thomas to BUF 26 for 6 yards (51-C.Ingram).
2-4-BUF 26 (2:14) (Shotgun) 7-J.Losman pass incomplete short right to 84-R.Royal. PENALTY on BUF-71-J.Peters, Offensive Holding, 10 yards, enforced at BUF 26 - No Play.
2-14-BUF 16 (2:10) (Shotgun) 7-J.Losman scrambles up the middle to BUF 17 for 1 yard (66-D.Landri).
Two-Minute Warning
3-13-BUF 17 (2:00) (Shotgun) 7-J.Losman pass incomplete deep left to 83-L.Evans.
4-13-BUF 17 (1:54) (Shotgun) 7-J.Losman pass incomplete deep right to 82-J.Reed.


TE had three 3 and outs Vs Dallas. Unless of course you are trying to say a failed 4th down attempt isn't the same as a three and out. I did miss one here he did have 3 on 9 drives.

Against Miami, TE had four 3 and outs, not three. Unless you are trying to tell me he had something to do with the 'Fins fumbling the punt? I count 3 because I did not count Marshawn's fumble on the second play against TE. Just like I didn't count it against JP. I did make a mistake TE went 3 for 12 not 3 for 14. I took out the last drives of the halfs since he did not attempt a pass in either of those

You left out an entire TE drive VS Cleveland that resulted in a 3and out. He was 4 of 10, not 3 of 9. Unless a safety isn't a 3 and out (It has to be). AND, I am still leaving out the dead drive to end the half. You should count that one too because he did get three plays, and there was no first down. So, really 5 of 11. I did leave the dead drive at the end of the half out and I did miss a drive here.



Here are the revised numbers.

JP Losman:

Game 3&Out Drives %
vsDEN 4 9 44.44%
vsPIT 3 8 37.50%
@NYJ 0 3 0.00%
vsCIN 2 10 20.00%
@MIA 5 10 50.00%
vsNE 2 8 25.00%
@JAX 4 11 36.36%
Total 20 59 33.90%


Trent Edwards:

Game 3&Out Drives %
@NE 6 9 66.7%
vsNYJ 1 8 12.5%
vsDAL 3 9 33.3%
vsBAL 4 10 40.0%
@NYJ 1 6 16.7%
@WAS 2 8 25.0%
vsMIA 3 12 25.0%
@CLE 4 10 40.0%
vsNYG 6 12 50.0%
@PHI 3 9 33.3%
Total 33 93 35.48%

What jumps out to me with Edwards are the games he struggled in. First off coming off the bench against NE. Terrible game statistically. Next were the two blizzard/monsoon games. You take those 3 out and his 3rd&out % drops to 27.4%.

But another thing this goes to show is only after I made a few corrections how drastically it changes the figures. Indicating again how flimsy these stats are due to the small sample size.

[Losman4Life]

17 stat categories
JP wins 11 categories
Trent wins 5 categories
1 category tied

Sounds about right... It seems even though JP has more frequent "negg plays", he still outshines Trent in just about every positive category.

JP is the better QB. The stats prove it, his talent proves it, and his play on the field proves it.

We will be making a huge mistake if he is not starting come opening day. Trent Edwards is horrible and belongs on the bench!!!!!

[yordad]

What do you make of Trent having a higher TD%, lower INT% and lower sack% than JP? ....you can answer that later. Sorry it took a while to get back to you. I addressed a portion of this question before....

Yeah, TE threw TDs on a rate .29% faster. Don't you think the sample size is a little to small to put stock in a .29% difference? A fraction of 1 %.

Also, TE threw Ints at a rate less then half a % slower. Less then 1% also.

In other words, every 220 passes JP threw an extra Int. Considering he only threw 175 on the year, the difference is negligible.

And, TE threw one more TD every 344 passes. Considering he only threw 269 passes, again, barely a difference.

A fraction of one % in both cases. Pretty low numbers. A single wind gust could do that. Your argument is based on figures that one single wind gust could account for. Or, one single tipped pass on an entire season. And, after Type tried tell me I was wrong...

TE threw 269 times for 7 tds. That is 2.60%. And 8 ints for a rate of 2.97%
JP threw 175 times for 4 tds. That is 2.29%. And 6 ints for a 3.43 %

The difference in TDs is .31%, the difference in ints. is .46%.

Where am I wrong?

That translates to 1 TD for every 323 attempts. More passes then either QB threw on the year. That is a gust of wind. That is 1 pass interference no call.

And, for interceptions, the difference is .46%. Less then half a %. 217 passes. More Passes then JP threw on the year.

Where am I wrong? Now, you can project all you want, but how accurate are you going to be from such a small sample. So small that a single gust of wind could have changed it either way.

Or, how about a dropped pass? I seem to remember Parrish dropping a long ball that hit him in the chest at the 1. But, we could both go on subtracting and adding plays all night. It is what it is. It is so small a difference for so small a sample area, IMO it almost doesn't matter.

If you want to put all your stock in that one, go ahead.
As for sacks, I can almost dismiss it without looking at the sack stat. I mean if someone lower 3 and out rate, has the offense average more points per minute, has a much higher 3rd down passer rating, has a star RB who averages more ypc when you hand him the ball, has more yards per attempt, then why does a sack stat matter? Especially considering the guy is trying to make a play back there.

But for what it is worth, I went ahead and looked at it anyways (I think Draz pointed this out once)...
TE yards lost to sacks, 105- yards gained rushing, 49- difference, -56
JP yards lost to sack, 103- yards gained rushing, 110- difference, +7

So, of the 34 times JP dropped back to throw but didn't, he averaged .2 yards. A positive.
Of the 26 Times TE dropped back to throw but didn't, he averaged -2.2 yards. A negative.

When it boils down to it, is it a concern? Some. Do I want it to get better? Need it to. Do I think it will? Yep. Do I think there are other contributing factors? Yep....

You ever been in a fight, physically or otherwise? Well, if you have been in a lot, you will notice that the ones you think your going to win, you win. Scared, you probably won't. Heck, even in poker "scared money, don't make money". What I'm trying to say is, a lot of everything you do has to do with your confidence. In yourself, and your confidence in others. If you think your a ten, your be a lot closer then if you think your a 5. Not saying you will automatically be a ten by thinking it, just saying you will be a lot better off. Heck, what was the GI Joe saying? "Knowing is half the battle"? It is half in your head.

First, I want to say I disagree he had more bad plays then good plays. And, I'm not saying a win or loss can ever be pinned on one person. But, don't you think if JP was trying less to personally win games, he could have increased his chances of not personally losing them?

That is what having a poor supporting cast will do to you to. It makes you fell like you have to be the one to make the play. JP isn't afraid to be the leader. Take the blame. Shoot the three at the buzzer. GO FOR THE WIN.

Some people would rather the guy who has shown he can be consistently mediocre. The guy who seems to rely more on the supporting cast, and feels they are a supporting cast member. The guy who plays within himself, and doesn't try to play above himself.

I want the guy who won't settle for second place even if he is second best. The guy with the confidence to feel he is the guy who can get it done. The guy who will try with everything he has to drag his team across the line.

I want the guy that can, and will, scramble all over the backfield on third and 8, with four minutes left in the 4th quarter, trying with everything he has to buy 1 more second for Josh Reed to get open, with the theme song to Rocky in his head (especially when we have a crappy defense), and force it in where it HAS to be, because he knows if he doesn't do it, no one will (was that a run on?).

I don't want the guy who throws it away. Like he is thinking, "I'm not forcing an interception here and facing all those media questions. I did that once already. Lets just punt and hope the crap D holds. Heck, it is just a job".

Now I'm not saying I think TE will only be consistently mediocre. And, I'm not saying he won't gain a swagger. And, I'm not saying I can read minds. I think it is entirely too early to be sure. But, I just don't think he has the state-of-mind JP does.

And, I'm not saying I am entirely sure JP is the next Farve. But, what I am saying is, no way am I giving up on this young man right now when he has had all the cards stacked against him. When he has shown flashes of brilliance. When he oozes with so much self confidence. When he is so physically talented. When he speaks and seemingly thinks so respectfully, smartly, and with so much integrity. When his teammates respect him, and some openly call for him to start in the media.

Has a Bills player ever called TE the better QB in the media? In fact, how often does a team's star receiver say he feels the backup should start?

This kid JP is a special football player, I can just feel it, and see it. And, I think with adequate talent around him to take some of the "I have to" pressure off, he will flourish. And, when this guy flourishes, I hope he is still a Buffalo Bill.

I think TE can be a respectable 8. I would take that. There have been some highly successful eights over the years. But I think JP can be a 10. And, I think JP thinks he can be a 10.

[Losman4Life]

Also forgot to add....who can throw the ball deep? Certain not noodle arm edwards.

JP is the best deep passer in the league and can also run in the pocket, something a statue like Edwards wishes!!

[acehole]

JP is the better QB. The stats prove it, his talent proves it, and his play on the field proves it.

We will be making a huge mistake if he is not starting come opening day. Trent Edwards is horrible and belongs on the bench!!!!!

Dont worry these things have a funny way of coming full circle.

I believe you support of him will be warented.

[acehole]

[What jumps out to me with Edwards are the games he struggled in. First off coming off the bench against NE. Terrible game statistically. Next were the two blizzard/monsoon games. You take those 3 out and his 3rd&out % drops to 27.4%.

But another thing this goes to show is only after I made a few corrections how drastically it changes the figures. Indicating again how flimsy these stats are due to the small sample size.[/quote]

You cant just do that....just take a NE game out or a snowy game out.

We play NE 2 x a year.

We play in the snow 4-5 times a year.

Hey why not just add 5 td's to trents numbers to make your case.

Just silly.

Reality happened the way it happened.

The stats are the stats are the stats are the stats......

[yordad]

The clear difference is that TE completed a pass for a first down when on that first NE drive JP did nothing to earn a first down, unless he somehow strategically placed his knee under Wilfork's elbow. Well, maybe the fumble you mention would have never happened without that injury. Either way though, you have to be consistent. Take away the three and out that had a fist negated due to penalty. Or, as I prefer, count them both as they actually were. Also, some three and outs where three consecutive runs. Why does that count against him?
I still need to go back and check my numbers I did them quickly and by hand so there is a good chance they may be off by 1 or 2 but if they are it certainly was not to favor 1 QB over the other. As I mentioned, I don't think you did it to favor one QB...... on purpose. But, 1or 2? Keep counting.
edit: and if i intended to fudge my numbers I certainly would not have broken them down by game to make them easier to critique. Good point.

[Romes]

You cant just do that....just take a NE game out or a snowy game out.

We play NE 2 x a year.

We play in the snow 4-5 times a year.

Hey why not just add 5 td's to trents numbers to make your case.

Just silly.

Reality happened the way it happened.

The stats are the stats are the stats are the stats......

Thats why I didn't take it out. I was just pointing to reasons why some games stick out from the rest. You can call it excuse making if you want but the same thing is done for JP when people say he's had weak teams around him or has had poor coaching.

Yes, we do play NE twice, but how many times does Trent have to play them in his first proffesional game. Coming off weeks of 2nd string practice and an off-season taking 3rd string reps with a gameplan designed for a QB with different strengths. That only happened and only will happen once.

Second, just take a look at Derick Anderson's and Eli Manning's production in that same game and tell me the weather didn't have something to do with stalling the offenses.

[yordad]

Here are the revised numbers.

JP Losman:

Game 3&Out Drives %
vsDEN 4 9 44.44%
vsPIT 3 8 37.50%
@NYJ 0 3 0.00%
vsCIN 2 10 20.00%
@MIA 5 10 50.00%
vsNE 2 8 25.00%
@JAX 4 11 36.36%
Total 20 59 33.90%

Trent Edwards:

Game 3&Out Drives %
@NE 6 9 66.7%
vsNYJ 1 8 12.5%
vsDAL 3 9 33.3%
vsBAL 4 10 40.0%
@NYJ 1 6 16.7%
@WAS 2 8 25.0%
vsMIA 3 12 25.0%
@CLE 4 10 40.0%
vsNYG 6 12 50.0%
@PHI 3 9 33.3%
Total 33 93 35.48%
What jumps out to me with Edwards are the games he struggled in. First off coming off the bench against NE. Terrible game statistically. Next were the two blizzard/monsoon games. You take those 3 out and his 3rd&out % drops to 27.4%.

But another thing this goes to show is only after I made a few corrections how drastically it changes the figures. Indicating again how flimsy these stats are due to the small sample size.Touche. Nice job. Maybe you were trying to be fair, but I noticed you took out JP 1st downs if he didn't throw a pass in them. But, counted it as a three and out if he didn't throw a pass in them.

I gotta hand it to you though. I asked for a spin, and you gave it a nice try, LOL. But, even as you have it, JP did better.

But, I do agree with the last thing you said. The sample is small. If I was a coach, I'd just need more from TE before I'd abandon all the coaching I did.

In all seriousness though, you do a nice job. And, I can't bring myself to look them plays over again. For now.