Gregg Williams -Lame Duck Coach 2003, Drew Bledsoe Lame Duck QB 2004?!

[baalworship]

AP reports: 'The Titans signed Volek to a five-year deal Thursday after he visited twice with the Falcons and even looked at houses in Atlanta, where he received an offer. Buffalo also made an offer to let him compete with Drew Bledsoe immediately. ''But my heart was here,'' Volek said at a news conference with his wife and three small children. ''It was really hard to walk away from this place. This place has been awesome to me.'''




I don't know about you guys but even Bledsoe bashers can't be happy that Bledsoe will feel like a lame duck QB. We already suffered from poor QB play last year. I don't know how Bledsoe being aware that Billy "Family Man" Volek was going to get a chance to compete for his job if he had signed with us will help Drew's confidence in 2004. Gregg Williams lame duck year sucked. The lesson we should have learned is, if in doubt, CUT THE CORD!!!!!!

[The Spaz]

What's wrong with competing?

[saviorbledsoe]

I dont think that competition would make him play worse...I believe it could and WILL help him play better this year.

[The Spaz]

Originally posted by saviorbledsoe
I dont think that competition would make him play worse...I believe it could and WILL help him play better this year.

That what I'm sayign I think Drew would work his ass off and if he couldn't beat out Volek then I'm still happy because Volek earned it.

[baalworship]

My point is that it is obvious that Bledsoe is not the future. This just seems very similar to Gregg Williams being a lame duck coach last year. We better get a good backup (Not Kordell) because if the wheels fall off again it won't be pretty.

[saviorbledsoe]

Why is that obvious that Bledsoe is not the future..no one including TD can see or know what Drew will do this year.........I think of him bringing in a vet back up as an "in case" Drew sucks again this year.

[helmetguy]

Gregg Williams was a "lame duck" because he put himself in that position. He was approached about a contract extension before the season started and he declined. Why? Who knows? Speculation was that he felt that he could improve on the 8-8 record of 2002 and could leverage that improvement into a better deal.

As for Bledsoe being a "lame duck" QB is pretty absurd. That assumes that it was up to Bledsoe, and not the coaching staff, whether he played last year or not. As of this moment, he's still the starter. AVP is gone and Travis Brown has not supplanted him. If anyone knows he has to step up and play better, it's Bledsoe. Whomever comes in as the backup, Bledsoe knows he could play his way out of the starting job, or the new guy could play his way into it. If Bledso even harbored the notion of being a "lame duck," he'd retire.

[baalworship]

The evidence seemed weighted towards Bledsoe playing here this year and having someone take over in 2005. But offering Billy Volek a chance to compete for the starting job is pretty strong writing on the wall stuff. Nothing is certain but the Bills FO appears to have spoken more through contact with Volek's agent about their opinion of Bledsoe's future more than press releases on buffalobills.com.

The thread is about concern about Bledsoe playing EVEN WORSE than last year because of his apparent lame duck status. Usually someone takes one side or another but no one seems to get what I am saying.

[Billzz]

Just wondering what's wrong with having a back up plan? I sense, ok that's understating, I know everyone is being a tad bit witch huntish lately.

[saviorbledsoe]

Originally posted by helmetguy
If Bledso even harbored the notion of being a "lame duck," he'd retire.

Exactly, in the workout videos today he was smiling and looked all confident again like the begining of 2002.....I really do think he is going to be great this year.

:yankee:

[Mr. Cynical]

I agree. Drew is a lame duck QB.

Quack. :D

[Mr. Cynical]

Originally posted by baalworship
My point is that it is obvious that Bledsoe is not the future.

:up:

[helmetguy]

You mean, he knows the writing is on the wall about not being the future of the franchise; knows there is someone waiting in the wings, but knows he still has the starting job for now, so he can just go through the motions? Or, are you saying that he'll be so preoccupied with his tenuous hold on the job that it'll affect him that adversely? Getting back to the Gregg Williams analogy. Even if his status was "lame duck," it'd be hard to believe he approached the rest of the season as just going through the motions. I was none too fond of Williams, but it'd be foolish to assume he just coasted along, waiting for the axe to fall.

[baalworship]

I will certainly hope for the best.


:pray:



I can live with Bledsoe starting much easier if we get a competent backup that can take control if Bledsoe falters again.

[helmetguy]

Wouldn't that be a good reason to be shopping for a decent, experienced back-up? If Bledsoe falters or gets hurt, well, we've been through stuff like that before, as I mentioned in another thread.

[Mr. Cynical]

Originally posted by helmetguy
You mean, he knows the writing is on the wall about not being the future of the franchise; knows there is someone waiting in the wings, but knows he still has the starting job for now, so he can just go through the motions? Or, are you saying that he'll be so preoccupied with his tenuous hold on the job that it'll affect him that adversely? Getting back to the Gregg Williams analogy. Even if his status was "lame duck," it'd be hard to believe he approached the rest of the season as just going through the motions. I was none too fond of Williams, but it'd be foolish to assume he just coasted along, waiting for the axe to fall.

I don't think he will coast, no. He's not that type of guy. But let's face it, the heart can't do it all and he's had 11 years of the same thing. I like him, but he needs to go. He makes way too much to start, and he would never be a backup. As such I wouldn't be surprised if he fails next year, gets cut, goes to one more team, plays one year and then retires at 34-35.

[Mr. Cynical]

Originally posted by helmetguy
Wouldn't that be a good reason to be shopping for a decent, experienced back-up? If Bledsoe falters or gets hurt, well, we've been through stuff like that before, as I mentioned in another thread.

I would argee if Drew cost us $1-2M instead of $6M+. But as it stands now, any experienced backup we can get at this point won't be able to take us anywhere. Unless we were getting the vet to be #1 (thus saving the cash by cutting Drew), it kinda doesn't matter who we get at #2. Keep Brown and draft.....get Slash and draft...no matter how you slice it, the important thing is we get a good QB in the draft. :)

[helmetguy]

I understand your concern about Bledsoe's salary and all; particularly based on his performance last year. The prevailing theory is that last season's performance was the norm, and not an aberration. How bas IS he? We don't know. How bad WAS KG? We have opinions, but we really don't know. How bad was the combination? Miserable. That, we DO know. It is possible that Bledsoe is at the end of his career. It is just as possible that he could flourish under Mularkey and Clements. That remains to be seen. It is just as possible that the offense we played under Gilbride made Bledsoe's weakness that much more glaring. Players, play, and do what they're told to do.

Getting back to Bledsoe's salary. We inherited Bledsoe's contract from NE, without the signing bonus. Dumping Bledsoe because he didn't "earn" the raise to $6 million only buys you a QB merry-go-round. Yes, we do have to address the QB situation. If a viable vet QB is out there, TD will find him. Right now, all that is out there are career journeymen. TD's also looking to the future; several years in the future, actually. It's not like he's taking a perennially moribund franchise and starting from scratch. He's put together a fairly solid roster that should have been more competitive than they were under Williams. With Williams and Gilbride gone, TD has already altered the equation. This alone should give us all a better read on what was wrong with the offense and what can be done to fix it.

[Novacane]

Originally posted by baalworship
. Buffalo also made an offer to let him compete with Drew Bledsoe immediately.







If that is true Volek is an idiot for staying in TN. Maybe he knows he's not good enough.

[baalworship]

As bad as Bledsoe is, at least Drew doesn't want to just hold a clipboard. My love affair with Volek ended when he turned down a chance to start in Buffalo for a backup role.


Looks like Bledsoe for one more year. Let's hope we run the ball 70 % of the time.

[Philagape]

First of all, no 32-year-old QB is the "future"
Second, no player can be a lame-duck like a coach can because players' value declines as they get old, and it's the opposite for a coach. In the cap/FA era, each team has several "lame ducks." A 32-year-old player is nearing the end; a coach in his 30s or 40s is just beginning his career.

[Novacane]

Originally posted by baalworship
As bad as Bledsoe is, at least Drew doesn't want to just hold a clipboard. My love affair with Volek ended when he turned down a chance to start in Buffalo for a backup role.


Looks like Bledsoe for one more year. Let's hope we run the ball 70 % of the time.

I agree with you 100% on Volek. If he is not competitive enough to want to fight for a job I would not have wanted him anyway.



I hope we run the ball 90% if the time. The less the ball is in Drews hand the better chance we have of winning.

[baalworship]

I started this thread yet it seems we all have a different definition of lame duck.


What I mean by lame duck in Bledsoe's case is that he is in his last year as a Bill. There is almost ZERO chance that he will be here as a starter in 2005 for various reasons (His contract is a large part). Not only is Bledsoe in his last year from Tom Donahoe's perspective, BUT WORSE, Bledsoe is in his last year as a Bill PUBLICLY. The fact that Volek's agent was so public or whatever demonstrates to every one, every player on the offense, every fan, and finally to Drew Bledsoe himself that he is on borrowed time. Bledsoe is a streaky player and if the streak ever heads downward in 2004.......yikes.

To think that a QB with confidence issues will respond well to being a lame duck is optimism at its finest. If Bledsoe loses a big game or two early the season could fall apart if we don't have a competent #2.

Having a competent veteran #2 QB is now THE MOST IMPORTANT position to fill, IMO.

[Novacane]

Originally posted by baalworship
I started this thread yet it seems we all have a different definition of lame duck.




Having a competent veteran #2 QB is now THE MOST IMPORTANT position to fill, IMO.



One problem......................there are not any competent vets left out there.

[Mr. Cynical]

Originally posted by baalworship
The fact that Volek's agent was so public or whatever demonstrates to every one, every player on the offense, every fan, and finally to Drew Bledsoe himself that he is on borrowed time.

Good point, and this gives me shivvers. If he has been bad for the last 1.5 years *with* support, I can't imagine what will happen if everyone now views him on "borrowed time". :eek:


Originally posted by helmetguy
The prevailing theory is that last season's performance was the norm, and not an aberration. How bas IS he? We don't know.

It is just as possible that he could flourish under Mularkey and Clements. That remains to be seen. It is just as possible that the offense we played under Gilbride made Bledsoe's weakness that much more glaring. Players, play, and do what they're told to do.

Normally I would agree, but we do know how bad Drew is. Just look at his 11 year career. 2.5 seasons were good, the rest average-to-crap. So I think it is safe to say we do know what Drew can do at this point. The trend of an 11 year career, with systems and coaches other than GW/KG, really does tell the story. Granted KG/GW certainly didn't help, but Drew's underlying career story is still the same. :(

[baalworship]

Originally posted by kal123


Good point, and this gives me shivvers. If he has been bad for the last 1.5 years *with* support, I can't imagine what will happen if everyone now views him on "borrowed time". :eek:







Thank you. That is the nightmare scenario I am talking about. Drew Bledsoe playing worse in 2004.

[Ebenezer]

I believe DB is a lame duck.

[Pride]

Originally posted by helmetguy
I understand your concern about Bledsoe's salary and all; particularly based on his performance last year. The prevailing theory is that last season's performance was the norm, and not an aberration. How bas IS he? We don't know. How bad WAS KG? We have opinions, but we really don't know. How bad was the combination? Miserable. That, we DO know. It is possible that Bledsoe is at the end of his career. It is just as possible that he could flourish under Mularkey and Clements. That remains to be seen. It is just as possible that the offense we played under Gilbride made Bledsoe's weakness that much more glaring. Players, play, and do what they're told to do.

:bf1:

I blame 90% of the problems bledsoe had on KG. At the very least... if Bledsoe sucked that much, KG should have modified the game plan. The fact is, he didnt... and every bills fan around the nation would scream at the tv when KG called a play.

Do I need to remind you we ran the following offenses last year?

No fullback
3 TE packages with 1 WR
3 WR off tackle (not spread out)
Sam Gash as WR for god sakes..
Zero commitment to the running game
Poor blocking assignments

KG was an idiot... he is gone. If DB fails this year, axe his ass... if he prevails... I will be the first to say I TOLD YOU SO.

I yelled at DB with the best of them last season, but the longer the season went on, the more I blamed KG for not modifying a broken system.

[Voltron]

Pride don't forget that DB is a pocket passer and the center of his pocket was collapsing all the time last year. Did the Line hold them off for the most part? Yeah I think they did a good job of keeping the D off his back. I would say over half the Sacks were "Johnsoneque" where he held onto the ball to long. Drew just never had a pocket to step into because the center of the line was comming back at him. When a pocket passer has no way to step forward he doesn't throw well!

[Mr. Cynical]

Originally posted by Pride
I blame 90% of the problems bledsoe had on KG.

How do you explain the problems Drew has had during the rest of his career, e.g., 4INTs for every 5TDs, 15-to-1 attempts to sacks ratio, 57% completion, etc. This is the issue that all supporters of Drew never seem to be able to answer.


Originally posted by Voltron
Pride don't forget that DB is a pocket passer and the center of his pocket was collapsing all the time last year. Did the Line hold them off for the most part? Yeah I think they did a good job of keeping the D off his back. I would say over half the Sacks were "Johnsoneque" where he held onto the ball to long. Drew just never had a pocket to step into because the center of the line was comming back at him. When a pocket passer has no way to step forward he doesn't throw well!

Not sure I follow..... on one hand you say *over half* the sacks were "Johnson-esque" (meaning Drew's fault), and on the other hand you say he had no pocket (the line's fault). This still implies Drew is the root of the problem. :scratch: