If Fitz was younger, would that change your opinion on him?

[imbondz]

Not saying he's old, but does that have anything to do with your opinion on his play? If he was 5 yrs younger, with his current stats, would that change things?

I am just not sold on that he can't carry us deep into the playoffs and even win a championship. I know consistency is an issue, but I think we have deeper problems than him at QB. And during our 5-2 run, he WAS throwing the ball deep and accurate.

Since Kelly, it goes Bledsoe, then Fitz. Revolving doors around QBs, coaches, never work. For the first time in a long time, it feels like we have a foundation of the workings of a good team. It would just seem like torture to continue to start over. Unless of course we're miraculously able to get Luck or RGIII. But that's a given under any discussion.

[DraftBoy]

No, his age isn't a huge factor for me at this point.

[EDS]

Not saying he's old, but does that have anything to do with your opinion on his play? If he was 5 yrs younger, with his current stats, would that change things?

I am just not sold on that he can't carry us deep into the playoffs and even win a championship. I know consistently is an issue, but I think we have deeper problems than him at QB. And during our 5-2 run, he WAS throwing the ball deep and accurate.

Since Kelly, it goes Bledsoe, then Fitz. Revolving doors around QBs, coaches, never work. For the first time in a long time, it feels like we have a foundation of the workings of a good team. It would just seem like torture to continue to start over. Unless of course we're miraculously able to get Luck or RGIII. But that's a given under any discussion.

Obviously you would have much greater cause to believe your QB will improve if they are a young guy with minimal experience. Fitz has started over 50 games at this point, so to believe he will improve dramatically is imprudent. Andy Dalton, however, who had similar stats to Fitz as a rookie, has much more room for improvement just based on gaining experience.

[Mski]

no i really dont believe his age has a whole lot to do with my dislike for him as the long term guy at QB... he is still realatively young, but i simply dont think he has the skill set to be anything more than a lower tier starting QB... things that players can improve upon are mechanics and reading defenses... both of those are things fitz is fairly decent at... what doesnt improve with age and more reps is accuracy and arm strength... two things fitz is below par in

[Bill Cody]

It depends....if Fitz gets to be younger do I get to be younger too?

[trapezeus]

fitz's issue is his windup and long release. when he had the protection he was ok. not outstanding.

but when the line went down, he was errant. there were a lot of plays he left on the field

age is not a factor. i think he sees the game correctly. i don't think he has the athleticism to always pull it off. you need to marry what he sees with a guy who can get the ball out fast.

[OpIv37]

it's experience more than age.

Fitz has reached that point where he has been around long enough that he's unlikely to improve significantly beyond where he is now.

[PTI]

If he was the same age and played like the Rich Gannon that was resurrected then I would not care.

[PromoTheRobot]

Let me ask this question: If Fitz was a #1 draft pick who had back-to-back 3K passing seasons and ranked around #10 in 3 offensive stats, would you say we found our franchise QB?

PTR

[The King]

Im not as down on Fitz as some. He was playing with cast-off's and undrafted FA's. Out top receiver was a 7th round pick.

A lot of these guys were mid season insertions, so theres little to no chemistry there. He missed on some deep throws this year no question but that takes time to develop.

Fitz was able to get the absolute most out of this oline but that involved a lot of quick throws, which require perfect syncronocity between the QB and the receiver a tough feat with a new face each week. We also were a terrible YAC team, which I believe was a direct result of the quick strike offense.

I think if Fitz had a few more weapons to throw to we'd be talking differently. Look how much having Freddy helped the passing game.

We were also behind so often late in the season teams could just play the pass which makes life on a QB even harder.

Fitz wasn't perfect but he's not the root of the problem either. I have zero issue giving him another year under center.

For us to take a QB early in this draft, just means we're passing on another position of need.

[justasportsfan]

My problem with Fitz is his deep throws. If he cant hit his recievers acurately it wont open things up . Early in Brady's career he dinked and dunked with screen passes al the way to the sb. He has since evolved to hurting teams with the deep ball if D's dared him to. Not sure if Fitz is set on his ways at this stage of his career when it comes to his arm.

I would dare Fitz to beat me deep if I were a DC all day especially if the bills were behind.

[Forward_Lateral]

:bf1: @ MBB

[imbondz]

Let me ask this question: If Fitz was a #1 draft pick who had back-to-back 3K passing seasons and ranked around #10 in 3 offensive stats, would you say we found our franchise QB?

PTR

lol. I think most people would say YES!

[imbondz]

If he was the same age and played like the Rich Gannon that was resurrected then I would not care.

if I recall correctly, Rich Gannon is a great example of someone who absolutely got better and had better stats later in his career.

[OpIv37]

Im not as down on Fitz as some. He was playing with cast-off's and undrafted FA's. Out top receiver was a 7th round pick.



Here's the problem: it's always going to be like that for Fitz.

As long as he's in Buffalo, he's always going to be surrounded by cast-offs and UDFA's because that's how this organization works. It's unfair to Fitz, or any other QB we might have, because few- if any- QB's in the history of the NFL would be able to excel with such a steaming pile of **** around them. But it's the unfortunate reality of how the Bills do business.

[OpIv37]

if I recall correctly, Rich Gannon is a great example of someone who absolutely got better and had better stats later in his career.

Ahhhh yes. The Billszone mantra of using the exception to prove the rule.

The overwhelming majority of quarterbacks plateau at this point in their careers, and either they're good enough or they're not. In a few rare instances, QB's get better beyond their first 3 years in the league or so.

So, how long should we gamble on Fitz to find out if he's that rare exception?

[Mski]

if I recall correctly, Rich Gannon is a great example of someone who absolutely got better and had better stats later in his career.
but this is what it all comes back to.... rich gannon had the physical tools that fitz doesnt (accuracy, and arm strength) his entire career... he was able to learn the other stuff that fitz is already good at( reading D, and quick decisions)

[The King]

Here's the problem: it's always going to be like that for Fitz.

As long as he's in Buffalo, he's always going to be surrounded by cast-offs and UDFA's because that's how this organization works. It's unfair to Fitz, or any other QB we might have, because few- if any- QB's in the history of the NFL would be able to excel with such a steaming pile of **** around them. But it's the unfortunate reality of how the Bills do business.

I agree to some extent. There are fixes though, Fitz has found a way to work with a weak line, so he's picking up the slack there. So you need to get him a target that can make the most of his touches... like Freddy was doing. It's never going to be Green Bay but it can definitely improve where one piece compliments the other.

[Johnny Bugmenot]

Here's the problem: it's always going to be like that for Fitz.

As long as he's in Buffalo, he's always going to be surrounded by cast-offs and UDFA's because that's how this organization works. It's unfair to Fitz, or any other QB we might have, because few- if any- QB's in the history of the NFL would be able to excel with such a steaming pile of **** around them. But it's the unfortunate reality of how the Bills do business.
Well, if you're going to use that standard, Fitz himself is a cast-off and a late-round draft pick, too. So, if we're going to discount his help, then we discount him as well.

[DraftBoy]

I agree to some extent. There are fixes though, Fitz has found a way to work with a weak line, so he's picking up the slack there. So you need to get him a target that can make the most of his touches... like Freddy was doing. It's never going to be Green Bay but it can definitely improve where one piece compliments the other.

He's going to need to show me a lot more than he did to say he found a way to work with a weak line, because 7-9 games say he didn't.

[trapezeus]

i'll give fitz the benefit of having no receivers. and i heard from a friend of a bills lineman that the OL all credit Fitz for having them in the right spot earlier in the season. and i'm sure wood was very good as a center to get the right calls made.

but even when he was good a concern i had was that windup. we still went down by a lot of points in 2 games and it took near perfect second halves with many turnoveres on short fields to execute. giants should have been a team win, but it was a few bad tosses on fitz part on plays that were available.

He's a great back up and he could be a starter next year while a rookie learns the ropes. but to not have the next piece will put the bills in a sanchez situation. when the defense and offense are finally there, we'll have a completely inexperienced guy trying to lead guys who are ready to win now.

[PTI]

Let me ask this question: If Fitz was a #1 draft pick who had back-to-back 3K passing seasons and ranked around #10 in 3 offensive stats, would you say we found our franchise QB?

PTR

I would say no, unless you are the Bills. I mean, Jason Campbell was a high pick, had back to back 3K yards seasons, had 62.3 and then 64.5 completion percentage, and was screwed royally by having a differenc OC all 4 years at Auburn and all 4 years in Washington and was shown the door.

Mark Sanchez is now being thought that Jets should replace him, back to bakc 3K seasons, had 26 TD passes too, and Jets were 22nd in rushing, 9 places below the Bills.

Joe Flacco is also being questioned now, first round pick, 3 years of over 3600 yards and over 2-1 TD-INT in that time too. He is being questioned to whether be can come up big in big games.

Do you like winning? Well, maybe Vince Young is your man, but 2 years of playoffs in a row and rookie of the year in year one was not enough either.

David Garrard, not a high pick, had a 92 QB rating last year and was replaced.


Only in Buffalo would some fans be happy with a crappy QB like Fitzpatrick.

[justasportsfan]

I agree to some extent. There are fixes though, Fitz has found a way to work with a weak line, so he's picking up the slack there.
to some degree he's done that. On the flipside he's made some horrible decisions/throws in crucial times to negate his good decisions.

We are going to need an awsome D if we are going to stick with Fitz because I am not convinced that Fitz is a qb who can carry the team on his shoulders alone.

[The King]

We are going to need an awsome D if we are going to stick with Fitz because I am not convinced that Fitz is a qb who can carry the team on his shoulders alone.


I never expected that from him. I think anyone who did was wearing blinders.

[The King]

Weren't we calling audibles more while we were healthy too?

[trapezeus]

I would say no, unless you are the Bills. I mean, Jason Campbell was a high pick, had back to back 3K yards seasons, had 62.3 and then 64.5 completion percentage, and was screwed royally by having a differenc OC all 4 years at Auburn and all 4 years in Washington and was shown the door.

Mark Sanchez is now being thought that Jets should replace him, back to bakc 3K seasons, had 26 TD passes too, and Jets were 22nd in rushing, 9 places below the Bills.

Joe Flacco is also being questioned now, first round pick, 3 years of over 3600 yards and over 2-1 TD-INT in that time too. He is being questioned to whether be can come up big in big games.

Do you like winning? Well, maybe Vince Young is your man, but 2 years of playoffs in a row and rookie of the year in year one was not enough either.

David Garrard, not a high pick, had a 92 QB rating last year and was replaced.


Only in Buffalo would some fans be happy with a crappy QB like Fitzpatrick.

vince young is a head case. i like his play when he's on, but he's so hot and cold emotionally. a senior team like the eagles keep him in check. you bring him to a young team and he goes primadonna that team is sunk. Too bad because he could have been what cam newton is doing. i thought cam newton would bust out because he didn't seem like a very high character person, but he seems to have proved that wrong.

Although i think vince young had a great first year and then went prima donna.

[Syderick]

Ahhhh yes. The Billszone mantra of using the exception to prove the rule.

The overwhelming majority of quarterbacks plateau at this point in their careers, and either they're good enough or they're not. In a few rare instances, QB's get better beyond their first 3 years in the league or so.

So, how long should we gamble on Fitz to find out if he's that rare exception?

"Hall of Fame coach Tom Landry always felt a quarterback was most effective north of 30, almost a decade into an NFL career. By that time, the game slows down enough to allow talented passers to pick apart defenses. That is, if their body doesn't break down in any number of ways -- reduced mobility, arm strength or their ability to withstand injuries.

That's where the organizational investment in Cutler could pay off. His arm strength should be there in spades at 33 or 34 years old, much like Roger Staubach (Landry's quarterback), Terry Bradshaw, John Elway, or Steve Young all of whom were better in their 30s than in their 20s"

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d821d1bd0/article/cutlers-game-not-attitude-must-improve-to-take-super-step

[EDS]

"Hall of Fame coach Tom Landry always felt a quarterback was most effective north of 30, almost a decade into an NFL career. By that time, the game slows down enough to allow talented passers to pick apart defenses. That is, if their body doesn't break down in any number of ways -- reduced mobility, arm strength or their ability to withstand injuries.

That's where the organizational investment in Cutler could pay off. His arm strength should be there in spades at 33 or 34 years old, much like Roger Staubach (Landry's quarterback), Terry Bradshaw, John Elway, or Steve Young all of whom were better in their 30s than in their 20s"

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d821d1bd0/article/cutlers-game-not-attitude-must-improve-to-take-super-step

Fitz's noodle arm will not improve - he is getting by solely on his mental accument as is. He is no athletic wonderkid like Elway or Young.

[Syderick]

Fitz's noodle arm will not improve - he is getting by solely on his mental accument as is. He is no athletic wonderkid like Elway or Young.

Didn't say he was going to be like them. Just pointing out something about QB's age.

[imbondz]

Ahhhh yes. The Billszone mantra of using the exception to prove the rule.

The overwhelming majority of quarterbacks plateau at this point in their careers, and either they're good enough or they're not. In a few rare instances, QB's get better beyond their first 3 years in the league or so.

So, how long should we gamble on Fitz to find out if he's that rare exception?

I don't know, but more than just 1 full year with the entire organization behind him.

[imbondz]

Only in Buffalo would some fans be happy with a crappy QB like Fitzpatrick.

Only in Buffalo do we accept doing the same things over and over and over and expecting change. Fitz may not be Brady, or Brees, but not many are. If we can find one of those, then i'll be the first one to say f Fitz. but until then, he's our best option, and a good option. A few more solid pieces to the puzzle and we'll be in the playoffs.

[PTI]

Only in Buffalo do we accept doing the same things over and over and over and expecting change. Fitz may not be Brady, or Brees, but not many are. If we can find one of those, then i'll be the first one to say f Fitz. but until then, he's our best option, and a good option. A few more solid pieces to the puzzle and we'll be in the playoffs.

When your best option proves to not be good enough, you must move on IMO, I try and remember the people saying, "Well Fitz never got a real chance", he has now, and there are others out there who have never got a real chance, and I would rather see someone else then Fitz because he is deemed our best option to be 7-9.

[justasportsfan]

I never expected that from him.
but that is what we need to win the sb unless the goal of the fans is merely making the playoffs.

[Novacane]

Since Kelly, it goes Bledsoe, then Fitz. Revolving doors around QBs, coaches, never work. .





That's because bad coaches and QB's are replaced with new bad coaches and QB's. Especially in Buffalo!

[Novacane]

Only in Buffalo do we accept doing the same things over and over and over and expecting change. .



How long do you go? 3 years? 4 years? Say we end up 6-10 again next year. Should we continue with Chan and Fitz because we've already tried changing over and over and that didn't work? I don't buy the continuity for the sake of continuity argument. Winning teams keep the same coach and QB for years because the guys are good.