Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

[Philagape]

That should have no bearing whatsoever on who they pick at No. 3.

Who they draft should be based on how they evaluate the prospects on their own merits. That's it.
And you can take any historical positional trends and shove them into your hole where they belong.

You can't go into a pick thinking it MUST be a certain position. That's what resulted in Whitner, McCargo and other busts. They should pick whoever's at the top of their value chart, based only on the pros and cons of each player.

Nobody's disputing that Fitz isn't a franchise QB, but if one isn't available at third overall -- meaning, there isn't one worth that pick, in their judgment -- then they have to find another solution if they want one.

I'm not saying here that there's no QB worth no. 3, although I'm doubtful. That's another issue. If they truly feel there's a QB good enough to warrant the pick, then they should pull the trigger for that reason alone.
But "Fitz isn't the answer" is not an argument to draft a QB at third overall no matter what.

[Beebe's Kid]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

That should have no bearing whatsoever on who they pick at No. 3.

Who they draft should be based on how they evaluate the prospects on their own merits. That's it.
And you can take any historical positional trends and shove them into your hole where they belong.

You can't go into a pick thinking it MUST be a certain position. That's what resulted in Whitner, McCargo and other busts. They should pick whoever's at the top of their value chart, based only on the pros and cons of each player.

Nobody's disputing that Fitz isn't a franchise QB, but if one isn't available at third overall -- meaning, there isn't one worth that pick, in their judgment -- then they have to find another solution if they want one.

I'm not saying here that there's no QB worth no. 3, although I'm doubtful. That's another issue. If they truly feel there's a QB good enough to warrant the pick, then they should pull the trigger for that reason alone.
But "Fitz isn't the answer" is not an argument to draft a QB at third overall no matter what.

I'll dispute that.

I know that we are supposed to "know" Fitz isn't a real QB, and is nothing more than a backup, and that very well may end up being the case. I will not say that I "know" that, or accept it as fact, simply because it is popular sentiment that is passed off and common knowledge.

I am just curious...how long do we have to wait for a "Franchise" QB to be good? Do we have to give them 3-4 years? We sure had to give Kelly that long, and most of the others that are christened with the elusive "Franchise" title, didn't see success for a few seasons either.

Fitz has improved, and shown that he has the ability to play the position. I know that the Harvard thing is overplayed, but I don't think that people give enough credit to how smart this dude is. He also is athletic, and toward the end of this year was making throws that you don't see many other guys in the NFL making.

It appears that, either way, sink or swim, Fitz will get one more season at the helm... I have a feeling that the sentiment changes towards him after this year. Not with the Kiper-ites, but with a large constituency of Bills fans that watch games.

There are a lot of fans that will never be able to be swayed, but there were a lot of fans that thought Reich should have been the starter, there were fans that were screaming for Collins, there are fans that still think RJ of Flutie was a good move, fans that complained about Fletcher tackling everybody downfield, Kenneth Davis over Thurman... and on and on. Fans will make 9000 predictions, and then tell everybody about the two they hit on, so forgive me if what the fans say doesn't mean a hell of a lot to me.

Fitz will make believers out of many this year...regardless of who gets drafted at #3

[X-Era]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

That should have no bearing whatsoever on who they pick at No. 3.

Who they draft should be based on how they evaluate the prospects on their own merits. That's it.
And you can take any historical positional trends and shove them into your hole where they belong.

You can't go into a pick thinking it MUST be a certain position. That's what resulted in Whitner, McCargo and other busts. They should pick whoever's at the top of their value chart, based only on the pros and cons of each player.

Nobody's disputing that Fitz isn't a franchise QB, but if one isn't available at third overall -- meaning, there isn't one worth that pick, in their judgment -- then they have to find another solution if they want one.

I'm not saying here that there's no QB worth no. 3, although I'm doubtful. That's another issue. If they truly feel there's a QB good enough to warrant the pick, then they should pull the trigger for that reason alone.
But "Fitz isn't the answer" is not an argument to draft a QB at third overall no matter what.

Totally agree with this post. Well done.

[Night Train]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

Agreed.

And I DON'T think there's a QB worth the #3 pick.. but it's just my opinion.

[X-Era]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

I'll dispute that.

I know that we are supposed to "know" Fitz isn't a real QB, and is nothing more than a backup, and that very well may end up being the case. I will not say that I "know" that, or accept it as fact, simply because it is popular sentiment that is passed off and common knowledge.

I am just curious...how long do we have to wait for a "Franchise" QB to be good? Do we have to give them 3-4 years? We sure had to give Kelly that long, and most of the others that are christened with the elusive "Franchise" title, didn't see success for a few seasons either.

Fitz has improved, and shown that he has the ability to play the position. I know that the Harvard thing is overplayed, but I don't think that people give enough credit to how smart this dude is. He also is athletic, and toward the end of this year was making throws that you don't see many other guys in the NFL making.

It appears that, either way, sink or swim, Fitz will get one more season at the helm... I have a feeling that the sentiment changes towards him after this year. Not with the Kiper-ites, but with a large constituency of Bills fans that watch games.

There are a lot of fans that will never be able to be swayed, but there were a lot of fans that thought Reich should have been the starter, there were fans that were screaming for Collins, there are fans that still think RJ of Flutie was a good move, fans that complained about Fletcher tackling everybody downfield, Kenneth Davis over Thurman... and on and on. Fans will make 9000 predictions, and then tell everybody about the two they hit on, so forgive me if what the fans say doesn't mean a hell of a lot to me.

Fitz will make believers out of many this year...regardless of who gets drafted at #3

We have seen QB's do well early like Sanchez and Roeth, but I'm thinking we wouldn't start ours until mid-season at the earliest.

I don't want to have to throw a rookie into starting right away. That's one reason I'd rather get the QB this year. Fitz is a UFA next year and could demand starting QB money. Unless he lights it up next year, I don't think we should pay it. I think he should get backup money. He may not take that, leaves, and leaves us drafting and starting a QB right away.

As for Fitz's ability to be all we need, I'm worried that teams will catch up with our offense and be able to shut us down much more. Fitz does a nice job of moving the ball around and that will help him be productive so maybe he keeps his production where it's at.

[Extremebillsfan247]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

What if they took a gamble and went with Ponder at 3? how jaw dropping would that be? They were debating heavily last year on whether they were going to take Tebow in the first before finally deciding on rolling out with Spiller.

[Philagape]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

What if they took a gamble and went with Ponder at 3? how jaw dropping would that be? They were debating heavily last year on whether they were going to take Tebow in the first before finally deciding on rolling out with Spiller.

That's not a gamble, that's getting falling-down drunk and putting your life savings for one spin on the roulette table.
And then peeing on it and getting thrown in jail.

[Commissioner]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

The Bills should take whoever is going to help the franchise be successful the most....

That doesn't mean this year... it could mean 2 years from now.

With that being said... the biggest impact on franchise comes from the QB position. I don't care if Gabbert has some flaws.... the question is ... do the Bills think he can eventually be a franchise QB that can go to a super bowl? If the answers yes... then they should take Gabbert at #3... no matter how much of a reach it may appear to be this year. 3 years from now if we are going to the playoffs ... who will care?

[TigerJ]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

Don't reach to take a QB? Yeah that's what I thought you said. I agree.

[Philagape]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

The Bills should take whoever is going to help the franchise be successful the most....

That doesn't mean this year... it could mean 2 years from now.

With that being said... the biggest impact on franchise comes from the QB position. I don't care if Gabbert has some flaws.... the question is ... do the Bills think he can eventually be a franchise QB that can go to a super bowl? If the answers yes... then they should take Gabbert at #3... no matter how much of a reach it may appear to be this year. 3 years from now if we are going to the playoffs ... who will care?

If they think he's going to be that good, absolutely.

[Extremebillsfan247]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

That's not a gamble, that's getting falling-down drunk and putting your life savings for one spin on the roulette table.
And then peeing on it and getting thrown in jail.

Oh I agree, but its odd to me that they even considered drafting Tebow last year for whom in some crowds would have drawn the same kind of opinions. JMO

[Nighthawk]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

I'll dispute that.

I know that we are supposed to "know" Fitz isn't a real QB, and is nothing more than a backup, and that very well may end up being the case. I will not say that I "know" that, or accept it as fact, simply because it is popular sentiment that is passed off and common knowledge.

I am just curious...how long do we have to wait for a "Franchise" QB to be good? Do we have to give them 3-4 years? We sure had to give Kelly that long, and most of the others that are christened with the elusive "Franchise" title, didn't see success for a few seasons either.

Fitz has improved, and shown that he has the ability to play the position. I know that the Harvard thing is overplayed, but I don't think that people give enough credit to how smart this dude is. He also is athletic, and toward the end of this year was making throws that you don't see many other guys in the NFL making.

It appears that, either way, sink or swim, Fitz will get one more season at the helm... I have a feeling that the sentiment changes towards him after this year. Not with the Kiper-ites, but with a large constituency of Bills fans that watch games.

There are a lot of fans that will never be able to be swayed, but there were a lot of fans that thought Reich should have been the starter, there were fans that were screaming for Collins, there are fans that still think RJ of Flutie was a good move, fans that complained about Fletcher tackling everybody downfield, Kenneth Davis over Thurman... and on and on. Fans will make 9000 predictions, and then tell everybody about the two they hit on, so forgive me if what the fans say doesn't mean a hell of a lot to me.

Fitz will make believers out of many this year...regardless of who gets drafted at #3

Umm, Fitz has had 7 years in the NFL to prove he is better then a backup and he hasn't done it. You are grasping at straws...he isn't a rookie who is going to grow into something special. Hell, he isn't even a 2nd year player learning the position, he's a freakin' veteran and you should start realizing that! Damn...some people are so thick!

[PTI]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

Umm, Fitz has had 7 years in the NFL to prove he is better then a backup and he hasn't done it. You are grasping at straws...he isn't a rookie who is going to grow into something special. Hell, he isn't even a 2nd year player learning the position, he's a freakin' veteran and you should start realizing that! Damn...some people are so thick!

I know, how do people not realize this? Mostly they ignore it. This was his 3rd year in a row of extended play, and the majority of the year starter too. He has the 20th most starts of any QB who has played in the NFL in the last 3 years.

[justasportsfan]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

I know, how do people not realize this? Mostly they ignore it. This was his 3rd year in a row of extended play, and the majority of the year starter too. He has the 20th most starts of any QB who has played in the NFL in the last 3 years.

using the last 3 years to grade Fitz is not fair. No one could have succeeded.

[PTI]

Re: Fitz isn't the answer, but ...

using the last 3 years to grade Fitz is not fair. No one could have succeeded.

The year after Fitz left Cincinnati they were 10-6. If the Colts had Fitz and not Manning they would have been lucky to win 5 games. If the Bills had Manning instead of Fitz and everyone else the Bills would have had 8-10 wins this year and last year.