This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
2 catches....wow, huge sample sizeAlso, Brandon Lloyd has schooled McGee so far all game.
His first catch was pure ownage.2 catches....wow, huge sample sizeAlso, Brandon Lloyd has schooled McGee so far all game.
Looked like initial contact was made with Moore's shoulder to Jones' chest, then his helmet hit Jones' facemask. Not a dirty play, but he'll deserve the fine.
Watching the first half it was clearly Fred Jackson being the starter and Spiller being the change of pace/3rd down back.
The Bills seemed to be making an effort to put the ball into Spiller's hands early. However, Spiller missed a blocking assignment leading to a big hit on Fitzpatrick, and Jackson dominated the snaps after that. Spiller did line up at WR quite a bit (much like he did last year).
I think it is Jackson's job to lose. Not Spiller's to win.
Jackson just isn't a sexy pick for many people. I think he's an ideal RB3 for where you can get him. His career YPC is astonishing given who he plays for.Keep being un-sexy. And keep falling to me where I will scoop you up.
I read somewhere where he was talking a lot about not trying to hit the homerun plays and just make sure he grinds out positive plays every time, even if they're not big yardage plays. Sounded like that's what the coaches are drilling into him. So now you have a ridiculously explosive back pounding it directly into the interior of the line when he runs the ball which is a complete waste of his talents.Buffalo ran almost exclusively between the tackles last year. That's fine for Fred Jackson, but it's downright stupid to run those plays with Spiller. They should be running stretch plays and counters with him.
I would agree they are misusing him.
I caught the first quarter and Spiller looked pretty good to me. He is getting school'd not misused.
I don't think it will make much of a difference behind that O line. Is it possible that they regressed this off season?
Hey Buffalo, nice job doing absolutely ZERO in the offseason to help out the offensive line. Taking a swing at Jared Gaither would have been preferable to trotting this dreck out there again. And maybe not cheaping out on Tyson Clabo could have really helped this team. Nice job morons.
What? "Denver should trade Tebow if they just planned on using him in the second half of preseason games instead of the first half!"? Denver's developing Tim Tebow just fine... but who on earth says you're only allowed to develop one quarterback on your roster, while all the others are required to remain stagnant? Quinn's been looking great in practices. He's a 27 year old former 1st round draft pick. After this season, Orton is gone. Smart management would be giving Quinn a chance to see how he can do in actual competitive situations. Which is what Denver is doing.
They're never going to "develop" Tebow into the type of QB they seem to want in practice. That is to say that he's never going to be a guy with sound mechanics, pinpoint accuracy, etc.He's a gamer. He's not the first of his kind. No matter how good he is or how good he gets in games he'll always look bad in practice. If they want to know if Tim Tebow is the future the only way they'll ever find out is by seeing him out on the field. It's a waste of time to sit there and wait for him to impress them in practice.
Again, how is any of this mutually exclusive with seeing what they have in Brady Quinn at the same time?
Given that the only way to judge Tebow is on the field, you'd think they could fit in more than two pass plays for him, and nine all preseason.They're mishandling him badly. Tebow knows that he's never going to impress anyone in practice and the only way he can do it is out on the field. He needs reps to do that, and since he's not getting them when he steps out onto the field he's going to press and make mistakes because he knows his opportunities to prove himself are so limited.
Tim Tebow will be the first person to acknowledge that he still has things to work on in his game. He doesn't need to be starting this season, and if Denver was a competitor, he absolutely SHOULD NOT be starting this season. Philip Rivers and Aaron Rodgers both sat for 2 or more seasons, and that didn't really adversely impact their development. I don't get how "not handing him the starting job without any competition whatsoever" or "giving another QB reps during the preseason" counts as badly mishandling Tebow.I also think it's crazy to suggest that John Fox "clearly" wants anything. He gave a guy who had been lighting up practices a dozen pass attempts. It's not like he's putting Tebow on the practice squad, here!
You're entitled to your opinion but good luck with Brady Quinn. If the Broncos want to go that route they might as well sign Kyle Orton long term now because he is a much better QB then Quinn will ever be. Also, FWIW, I wasn't suggesting that Tebow start over Orton but you do nothing for his development dropping him down to three and limiting his reps in not just preseason games but practice. They had him running with some with the first team not more than a mere few weeks ago (IIRC). This tells me they not only will shake his confidence with the club but are starting not to see him in their future plans. Reminds me of David Carr looking good in limited time in NY then San Fran bringing him in to realize he's David Carr. Much like Tebow may be what he is, Quinn is what he is, even if he plays like Joe Montana in preseason.
Tebow's footwork, mechanics, and delivery aren't going to change significantly. He's had them changed before and as soon as he walks out onto the field he changes back to what he's been doing all along, because that's what he's comfortable with.None of those things are Tebow's weakness, regardless of what the theorycraft scouts say to make it look like they're some kind of super experts. Tebow's biggest problem is his ability to read the field, which he's not very good at. To get better at that he needs to be in game situations doing it. Limiting him to two pass attempts in a preseason game isn't helping that at all, and just leads him to forgo reading the field and try to make magic happen on each of the few plays that he gets an opportunity to run.
You would know better than I, but is it really a foregone conclusion that Orton will be gone after this year? It seems to me that the more pertinent and immediate question would be whether Tebow is good enough to not try and re-sign Orton after this season, not to see if Quinn is good enough to step in if Tebow falters. At least, if Tebow were supposed to be the future that would be the plan. No one in their right mind would argue that the #3 guy is getting 16 pass attempts while the team's future gets 2 because they need to see if the #3 guy is good enough to step in if the #2 guy fails. It seems to me that if you told John Fox he had to cut either Quinn or Tebow and told him to forget about fan reaction, etc, he would laugh in your face for even thinking for a second that Tebow wasn't the guy he was going to cut without a second thought about it.
Interesting, consider both Steve Spurrier and Chris Doering said, literally, that Danny Weurrfel was the worst practice quarterback that either of them had ever seen. How did that translate to the field for them?John Brantley also looked better in practice than Tebow at Florida.
Second replay makes it look a lot worse than the first one. Looks like he was leading with his shoulder but they ended up going helmet-to-helmet. I'm not sure what the penalties are for seemingly accidental (but certainly dangerous nonetheless) hits like that.Looks a lot less vicious on replay than it did at full-speed.
do you know which writer said this? I don't think the Bills beat writers are even on twitter.
Writer for the Buffalo News.http://twitter.com/#!/ByTimGraham/status/105077064448753666'Aaron Rudnicki said:
Wow, we're awfully quick to tag Brady Quinn with that "at this point, he is who he is" line, aren't we? The guy has 353 career pass attempts! He has fewer career pass attempts than Matt Moore! He has 60% as many pass attempts in his career as Sam Bradford! If you want to suggest that by age 27, quarterbacks "are who they are", then I'd love to point you to a long list of QBs who the public decided "were who they were" before age 27, only to later realize that they were not, in fact, who they were. Let's start with Eli Manning, whose best career QB rating prior to age 27 was 77, and whose worst career QB rating since age 27 is 85. Then let's move on to Michael Vick, who we were repeatedly told was incapable of ever developing into a quality passer, ever, period, end of story... even halfway through last season, when he had obviously already developed into a quality passer. Seriously, I can provide links to several posts where I was mocked for suggesting last year that it's possible that Michael Vick had actually improved as a passer- in everyone's mind, he still "was who he was". Ask any Packers fans what Aaron Rodgers looked like his first three seasons, and the most common words you'll hear are "putrefying dog vomit". Or hell, why go so far afield? You're saying he'll never be as good as Kyle Orton, because by this point he "is what he is". Why don't you go sometime and look at Kyle Orton's career stats through age 27 sometime. People said he was who he was when he came to Denver, too... and now apparently he's someone else.Brady Quinn's career is not set in stone. Just because he sucked several years ago when he was a young QB on a crappy team doesn't mean he's destined to suck for the duration of his career, and any attempts to improve him are Sisyphean wastes of time and effort. There's still a non-trivial possibility that Brady Quinn can develop into anything from an All Pro to a quality backup. Denver is not foolish for giving him the opportunity, everyone else is foolish for berating them for it. Seriously, stop the insanity!'Bojang0301 said:
That's an excellent point. I'm curious, though, why you're addressing it to me... because I never said otherwise. I think you're assuming that I'm just a generic Tebow basher, so you're bringing out your anti-generic-Tebow-basher arguments to use against me. I'm a Gator fan. I personally attended half of his home games. I've long been on the record saying that I think he's a gamer and I think he'll make a good NFL QB. I have him in the top 20 of my dynasty QB rankings (above Cam Newton, FWIW). As I said, though, unlike you, I combine that desire to see what is best for Tebow with another, even greater desire to see what is best for the Denver Broncos. You're a fan of Tebow, so you only see his side of the argument. I'm a fan of both, so I see both sides. And honestly, as much as I love Tebow and as much as I think he's going to be a starting QB in the NFL, I have absolutely no problem at all with how Denver is handling this situation. They need to see what they've got in Quinn. They have the luxury of letting Tebow develop at his own pace rather than throwing him into the fire. In the long run, I think that works in Tebow's favor.'FreeBaGeL said:
Oh really? To get better at reading the field, one needs to be in game situations? So if Philip Rivers had started on day 1, he would have been exactly as effective as he was in year 3? If Carson Palmer had started on day 1, he would have been exactly as effective as he was in year 2? If Aaron Rodgers had started on day 1, he would have been exactly as effective as he was in year 4? If Tony Romo had started on day 1, he would have been exactly as effective as he was in year 3? If Michael Vick had started in 2009, he would have been exactly as effective as he was in 2010 (which, in turn, was exactly as effective as he was in 2006, because playing is the only way to improve in this category, and that was the last time Vick played)? None of those guys improved even the slightest iota in their ability to read the field from the bench? That's really the position you're going to take?I honestly don't understand how anyone could seriously adopt the position that Tebow cannot improve his game from the bench given the glut of QBs recently who have had unreal first seasons as starters after spending a year or more on the bench learning and improving their craft.
The idea that some RBs need more carries to become effective is largely a myth, a convenient narrative that is applied selectively and which by and large does not accurately portray reality. Since I reject that narrative as too pat, obviously I question any similar narrative applied to Tim Tebow. Seriously, what is it about Tebow that leads you to believe he needs a lot of attempts to excel? There's absolutely no evidence from his college career that suggests that might be the case- he was just as dominant in the 1st quarter as the 4th, just as dominant on a per-play basis in low workload games as in high workload games. Possibly even more so.
interesting.I don't think Tim Graham covers the Bills anymore, but he's likely well connected. He used to cover the Sabres for the Buffalo News but then left to take a job covering the AFC East for ESPN.com. He recently came back to the News but not as a sports journalist from what I can tell.They really did seem to use Spiller a lot on the opening drive last night.
That was true on his 2nd catch yesterday....could have had a 20+ yard gain, but did a terrible job following his blocker. Is he a moron or something?
Spiller didn't "miss the assignment" - his left OT let the defender through immediately, and watching the play it was clear that the entire O-line messed up the protection call. Spiller would have had to be Spiderman to leapfrog Fitzpatrick to make that block.That said, Freddie Jackson will be the starter, if for no other reason than he has proven marginally effective behind what might be the worst O-line in the NFL.
