Conclusion to VT vs. Bledsoe

[Zaxor]

Seems someone disagreed with my assesment and moved/deleted the post....

So I will attempt to finish what I started though my data may be incomplete now

From everything I read from those who responded it seems those that disagreed were predisposed to not liking Vinny from the get go...

the only counters to the argument that VT was better than Bledsoe was the number of TD passes and int's

but what was not taking into account was the receivers that each had to throw to... so I will forgive the 3 more int's and the 5 less TD's that VT threw because he had no Terry Glenn, no Dan Campbell, and a Key running around on a bad wheel...no Julius for 8-9 games and no Barber as back up..and VT had a worse Defense meaning he was having to play from behind alot

they both had the lack of a running game, poor o-line protection, pretty close the same strength of schedule but Bledsoe had the advantage of having a whole training camp as the starter

so with these things alone...one could easily make the arguement that Vinny did the better job at QBing the Cowboys in his year at the helm throw in the 10 extra Fumbles and the 15 extra sacks by Bledsoe and VT wins this baby in a landslide...

It might be unpopular but it is the truth as far as I am able to see it...

again no need to call me names as I did not create the numbers if you do not like the results ask Bledsoe to play better...

[Zman5]

VT was the starter pretty much for the whole training camp. I think QC got cut after 1 week of TC.

[Zaxor]

VT was the starter pretty much for the whole training camp. I think QC got cut after 1 week of TC.

my point still stands plus in Bledsoe's case his teammates knew he was the starter with VT he was suppose to be a backup and then the scandal came and might be used as handicapping in 2004

[Dale]

For what it's worth, Vinny threw 6 touchdown passes in 6 games with Terry Glenn.

[Zaxor]

For what it's worth, Vinny threw 6 touchdown passes in 6 games with Terry Glenn.

Wow that is pretty good thanks Dale no telling what he might have done had Glenn stayed healthy

[Dale]

Wow that is pretty good thanks Dale no telling what he might have done had Glenn stayed healthy

He averaged 1 touchdown pass per game with Glenn in the lineup. He finished with 17 touchdown passes in 16 games. Glenn's presence didn't hinder or help his touchdown total really, going just by the stats sheet.

[Zaxor]

He averaged 1 touchdown pass per game with Glenn in the lineup. He finished with 17 touchdown passes in 16 games. Glenn's presence didn't hinder or help his touchdown total really, going just by the stats sheet.

hard to say... didn't he throw like 3-4 300 yard games at the begining of the season and the threat of having T. Glenn has got to be considered a bonus...

but if it is true that he doesn't need good receivers VT is even more impressive wouldn't you say

[Billy Bullocks]

Im not the biggest fan of stats. I think they help tell the story,but in all reality, there's more to the game than numbers. Football is played on the field.

Vinny's Stats do portray that he tailed off near the end of the year, but that was obvious just by his performance.

Bledsoe has a better presence, and his arm is far superior.

Making this statistical comparison is quite ludicrous actually, because if you want to cross refence numbers, Aikman's best season in terms of yards was a 3445, the same year he also had his highest TD output with 23. Would you use these numbers and say Testaverde or Bledsoe are better QBs than Aikman?

Aikman>Bledsoe>Testy

[Dale]

Im not the biggest fan of stats. I think they help tell the story,but in all reality, there's more to the game than numbers. Football is played on the field.

Vinny's Stats do portray that he tailed off near the end of the year, but that was obvious just by his performance.

Bledsoe has a better presence, and his arm is far superior.

Making this statistical comparison is quite ludicrous actually, because if you want to cross refence numbers, Aikman's best season in terms of yards was a 3445, the same year he also had his highest TD output with 23. Would you use these numbers and say Testaverde or Bledsoe are better QBs than Aikman?

Aikman>Bledsoe>Testy

But Aikman had a better supporting cast.

Oh, I jest. :lmao:

My opinion is simple on the Vinny vs Bledsoe thing. Vinny is a fine backup quarterback, and I was a proponent for bringing him back this year in that very role. He can fill in in a pinch, IMO, and not be terrible for a game or two. And in reality, he didn't even embarrass himself last season -- quite remarkable for a player his age playing at this level.

With that said, from day one, I felt Bledsoe proved he was a better player on the field. In all these stats, how about mentioning the stat of comeback victories? I believe Bledsoe holds a much firmer grip in the leadership department and in the clutch performance department. Holding a .500 record this season when asked to lead his team back in the game's final drive (week after week) isn't shabby, IMO.

And for much of the season, he was a favorite to land a spot on the Pro Bowl roster.

The reality, also, is that both Vinny and Drew are aging quarterbacks who haven't played well in December recently. They are, indeed, similar in that regard. But without a doubt, Bledsoe has many more top-notch performances than Testaverde did, and he did so in the clutch.

From what I've seen of both players, Bledsoe has shown he can do more than Vinny with a similar cast. And I feel that with Bledsoe, we would be more likely to get the most out of free-agent signings along the offensive line or at receiver.

[Zaxor]

Im not the biggest fan of stats. I think they help tell the story,but in all reality, there's more to the game than numbers. Football is played on the field.

Vinny's Stats do portray that he tailed off near the end of the year, but that was obvious just by his performance.

Bledsoe has a better presence, and his arm is far superior.

Making this statistical comparison is quite ludicrous actually, because if you want to cross refence numbers, Aikman's best season in terms of yards was a 3445, the same year he also had his highest TD output with 23. Would you use these numbers and say Testaverde or Bledsoe are better QBs than Aikman?

Aikman>Bledsoe>Testy

the comparison with VT and Bledsoe was a year apart with some of the same parts in place..so they could not be compared to aikman...who is 5-6 years removed with no other same parts except 2 o-lineman with 5-6 years more on them

so I do not see your point at all... unless it is you simply do not want it to be so

[Zaxor]

Dale=But Aikman had a better supporting cast.

Oh, I jest. :lmao:

My opinion is simple on the Vinny vs Bledsoe thing. Vinny is a fine backup quarterback, and I was a proponent for bringing him back this year in that very role. He can fill in in a pinch, IMO, and not be terrible for a game or two. And in reality, he didn't even embarrass himself last season -- quite remarkable for a player his age playing at this level.

I said as much myself last year better to just keep VT as they are pretty much the same guy before we signed Bledsoe



With that said, from day one, I felt Bledsoe proved he was a better player on the field. In all these stats, how about mentioning the stat of comeback victories? I believe Bledsoe holds a much firmer grip in the leadership department and in the clutch performance department. Holding a .500 record this season when asked to lead his team back in the game's final drive (week after week) isn't shabby, IMO.

You wish to use come back victories as your arguement but in order to do so you have to factor in the defense and the skilled players around the QB and VT had less of both so it would be a very unfair comparison...don't you think so?



And for much of the season, he was a favorite to land a spot on the Pro Bowl roster.

was this a FAN poll?

The reality, also, is that both Vinny and Drew are aging quarterbacks who haven't played well in December recently. They are, indeed, similar in that regard. But without a doubt, Bledsoe has many more top-notch performances than Testaverde did, and he did so in the clutch.

How can you say that... both had 4 games with 100+ QBR both had one in the 30's or 40's I think.... and again keep in mind that VT was handicapped by the lack of playmakers but I would still like for you to show me the more Top Notch Performances


From what I've seen of both players, Bledsoe has shown he can do more than Vinny with a similar cast. And I feel that with Bledsoe, we would be more likely to get the most out of free-agent signings along the offensive line or at receiver.

they did not have a similiar cast and Bledsoe did not do more if I am wrong please show me and I will gladly admit I was wrong...Bledsoe adds much to much pressure on the whole team but especially the o-line so I don't see how we can be getting the most out of FA signing's again if I am wrong just show me...


If you ask me it was the idea of having and the jokes that came from having such an old QB that rubbed people the wrong way... Because they really are pretty close to the same guy even in Career Stats... So the love for Bledsoe versus the venom for VT is really uncalled for.... and again if you ask me it was a big mistake to bring in either one and a bigger mistake keeping them a 2nd year... no need for a over the hill veteran till we have an established somewhat young QB starter or at least have made a commitment to one...

[Cowchips]

So, we've established that Bledsoe and Vinny had conparable years, which were statistically pretty good and would have been a lot better with a better oline.

Is the suggestion to bring back a 45 year old Vinnie, who couldnt stay healthy with the Jets this year and dump Bledsoe who is 12 years younger and rarely ever gets injured? That would be pretty foolish, wouldnt it?

Unless you know of a 25 year old that can put up the numbers VT/Bledsoe do, I think I'd stick with Bledsoe over VT :)

[big_neil]

Vinny ... wins this baby in a landslide...


Can you post your IQ along with this theory?

While giving so much credit to having Terry, how about not having Flozell? How about 50% more wins? How many game winning drives did Vinny have? What was his rating again? What are you Vinny's cousin or something? If you call that a landslide, I suggest you see my poll Do You Want Drew Back Next Year, where only 1 in 6 agrees with you letalone to that degree.

[Zaxor]

Can you post your IQ along with this theory?

While giving so much credit to having Terry, how about not having Flozell? How about 50% more wins? How many game winning drives did Vinny have? What was his rating again? What are you Vinny's cousin or something? If you call that a landslide, I suggest you see my poll Do You Want Drew Back Next Year, where only 1 in 6 agrees with you letalone to that degree.

sure my IQ is 214

now back to your nonsense... you dismiss the loss of campbell, the loss of Julius and an ineffective defensive unit...we were playing from behind almost everygame...

the oline was just as attrocious check the stats...and the strength of schedule was about the same...

all you worshippers are not paying attention..and I have been forced on more than one occasion to repeat myself....

please pay attention and don't ingnore those mitigating circumstances...

[KingTuna]

I've got the FINAL Conclusion to VT vs. Bledsoe ...


Bledsoe is our Qb....VT is NOT......

Next topic please...........

[StanleySpadowski]

I really don't think that anyone would have preferred Testaverde be the starting QB of the Cowboys, he's just trying to show people who haven't seen it yet that Drew Bledsoe is a horrible mistake that will haunt this franchise.


A winning record may change some people's perception of how a player performed but if you really step back and look at things Bledsoe wasn't really any better than Vinnie.


I know people like Big_Kneel_and_bob worship at the altar but what is everyone else's excuse.


Now the season's over, can anyone give me one benefit from having Bledsoe on the roster let alone starting? Just one good thing about his signing?

[Cowchips]

I really don't think that anyone would have preferred Testaverde be the starting QB of the Cowboys, he's just trying to show people who haven't seen it yet that Drew Bledsoe is a horrible mistake that will haunt this franchise.


A winning record may change some people's perception of how a player performed but if you really step back and look at things Bledsoe wasn't really any better than Vinnie.


I know people like Big_Kneel_and_bob worship at the altar but what is everyone else's excuse.


Now the season's over, can anyone give me one benefit from having Bledsoe on the roster let alone starting? Just one good thing about his signing?


Unless you know of a 25 year old that can put up the numbers Bledsoe does, I think I'd stick with Bledsoe. Look what replacing him in Buffalo caused. There are very few Tom Brady's out there, Drew is a solid alternative vs. whatis.

[burmafrd]

That is what the Bledsoe haters will not admit- there is no real alternative that shows the likelihood of being as good, let alone better. And with the truly pathetic performance of our O line, the last 6 games in particular, how many QB's would NOT have been carted off - Drew is a tough one. Brunnell would have been toast 4-5 games ago.

[Zaxor]

That is what the Bledsoe haters will not admit- there is no real alternative that shows the likelihood of being as good, let alone better. And with the truly pathetic performance of our O line, the last 6 games in particular, how many QB's would NOT have been carted off - Drew is a tough one. Brunnell would have been toast 4-5 games ago.

Again and for the last time I am do not hate Bledsoe...

I think he is a mistake...

I think the whole offensive approach has been a mistake...

I think the O-line will never be good enough to protect Bledsoe... So I don't see any reasonable advancement in offensive production for the coming season...

Nothing to do with hate but everything to do with love of the Dallas Cowboys

now lets finally here why you have so much love for Bledsoe and so little for the Cowboys...is it the way he fills out his uniform?:flex:




WHAT you don't like to be labled...well I suggest you quit doing it to others

[Zaxor]

I really don't think that anyone would have preferred Testaverde be the starting QB of the Cowboys, he's just trying to show people who haven't seen it yet that Drew Bledsoe is a horrible mistake that will haunt this franchise.


A winning record may change some people's perception of how a player performed but if you really step back and look at things Bledsoe wasn't really any better than Vinnie.


I know people like Big_Kneel_and_bob worship at the altar but what is everyone else's excuse.


Now the season's over, can anyone give me one benefit from having Bledsoe on the roster let alone starting? Just one good thing about his signing?

Thank you Stan...

sometimes I am just so amazed at the ferocity of people wanting to be right even when they are wrong :D

[Jarv]

Unless you know of a 25 year old that can put up the numbers Bledsoe does, I think I'd stick with Bledsoe. Look what replacing him in Buffalo caused. There are very few Tom Brady's out there, Drew is a solid alternative vs. whatis.

Actually Kelly Holcombe is prefered to Bledsoe to the Buffalo fans I spoke with this year. If you want a veiw from a team that had no desire to bring Bledsoe back.

Look at Kelly Holcombe's career numbers vs Bledsoe's...No comparision, Bledsoe's blew him away.

So why is it that the Buffalo fans prefer Holcombe ?

Heck, Bledsoe probably has better numbers, or will by then end of his career than Troy, Montana, Brad Johnson, Joe Namath and quite a few HOF QB's.

Despite his gaudy passing numbers, Bledsoe is a sack and a fumbling machine.

That tends to de-moralise a team (and its fan base). Negative plays and turnovers are the bad, which outweigh the gaudy passing numbers.

Like I said in another post, put this same poll (want Bledsoe back) up on New England and Buffalo boards...ask them also why or why not they want him back.

Then we'll talk more.

[WoodysGirl]

Seems someone disagreed with my assesment and moved/deleted the post....

FWIW, your thread was moved to the Opinion Zone. You should try looking for it, before suggesting folks move threads cuz they don't like your opinion. :rolleyes:

There's no agenda attached to moving threads. More than likely it got past a certain page in this forum and moved.

[Typhus]

The most unappreciated stat that I like the most, is the 16 game starting this season with no serious injuries.
Considering the state of the OL and how often Bledsoe stood in the line of fire waiting for something to open up, I would say that atleast Bledsoe is durable and has a sack.

[Ashwynn]

All these bledsoe bashers arguements lose there appeal after the 9,452nd time you read the same tired arguements.

Bottom line, with a worse Oline then Vinny, he outperformed Vinny. If you want to compare him to someone, try Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, John Elway, Troy Aikman.

At least compare him to a winner, as thats what he is!!!!!!!

[Jarv]

All these bledsoe bashers arguements lose there appeal after the 9,452nd time you read the same tired arguements.

Bottom line, with a worse Oline then Vinny, he outperformed Vinny. If you want to compare him to someone, try Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, John Elway, Troy Aikman.

At least compare him to a winner, as thats what he is!!!!!!!

He is a winner, Brady got him a superbowl ring.

[Zaxor]

The most unappreciated stat that I like the most, is the 16 game starting this season with no serious injuries.
Considering the state of the OL and how often Bledsoe stood in the line of fire waiting for something to open up, I would say that atleast Bledsoe is durable and has a sack.

451 of them to be exact

[Zaxor]

All these bledsoe bashers arguements lose there appeal after the 9,452nd time you read the same tired arguements.

Bottom line, with a worse Oline then Vinny, he outperformed Vinny. If you want to compare him to someone, try Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, John Elway, Troy Aikman.

At least compare him to a winner, as thats what he is!!!!!!!

show me stat wise were that is the case about the oline...I already posted the links so go have a look see

and he "outperformed" VT with better weapons around him by 5 TD's...

but he fumbled 10 more times and had 15 more sacks...

Why in the world would you want to compare him to those guys....its like comparing a minnow to the Blue Whale

the guy is a .500 QB

do you need these things rubber stamped or something...

nobody is telling you an untruth...go look at the stats yourself...

[Zaxor]

He is a winner, Brady got him a superbowl ring.

Yeah talk about a guy being in the right place at the right time...he ought to be kissing Brady's boots

[iceberg]

That is what the Bledsoe haters will not admit- there is no real alternative that shows the likelihood of being as good, let alone better. And with the truly pathetic performance of our O line, the last 6 games in particular, how many QB's would NOT have been carted off - Drew is a tough one. Brunnell would have been toast 4-5 games ago.

well what the bledsoe lovers won't admit is it's not hate for the player but the direction.

it's even more odd for a "fan" of drew to follow it up with "no one is any better!" as if that helps "seal the deal" and no one will ever look and try again.

no one said drew wasn't tough. then again i never read too many I HATE DREW posts but yet if you critisize him or the overall direction, you're not a fan and you're a hater/basher.

i wish the kids would have their own forum so adults could talk w/o juvenile insecurities running rampant.

[RCowboyFan]

well what the bledsoe lovers won't admit is it's not hate for the player but the direction.

it's even more odd for a "fan" of drew to follow it up with "no one is any better!" as if that helps "seal the deal" and no one will ever look and try again.

no one said drew wasn't tough. then again i never read too many I HATE DREW posts but yet if you critisize him or the overall direction, you're not a fan and you're a hater/basher.

i wish the kids would have their own forum so adults could talk w/o juvenile insecurities running rampant.

Well, hasn't that been the case since Quincy Days? Don't ya remember, Quincy would have been good, only if the WRs got open or Line protected him better or all his Ints were really Punts? :lmao2: That is still a hilarious line.

Anyway, the lines are drawn, either you like him or you hate him. There is no middle ground ;)

[CowboyExpress]

Vinny looked like he needed wheelchaired off prior to Thankgiving Day even. The only thing imo that survived him through the rest of the year was the emergance of Julius Jones.

I don't need stats or anything to look at the them both and clearly see Bledsoe is the elite quarterback of the two. And really there is no competition. In fact in an open competition, Bledsoe would literally wipe the field with Vinny.

There are probably 15 teams at least whom would love the chance to have a starting quarterback of Bledsoes calibur...and we're supposed to just toss him away and try to find something better? Ha-ha. You don't "find" something better, something better finds you. Luck landed us that #1 pick to get Aikman when we did. Luck allowed Roger to be healthy after his military service.

Lets be real here. Until luck just simply lands us something better in our lap, we'd be wise to not be overly greedy. Hell, this could be the best it gets for 10-20 years. And don't kid yourselves either, it really could be. Ask Green Bay how many years it took them to find Farve after Bart Starr?

[Dallas]

I really don't think that anyone would have preferred Testaverde be the starting QB of the Cowboys, he's just trying to show people who haven't seen it yet that Drew Bledsoe is a horrible mistake that will haunt this franchise.


A winning record may change some people's perception of how a player performed but if you really step back and look at things Bledsoe wasn't really any better than Vinnie.


I know people like Big_Kneel_and_bob worship at the altar but what is everyone else's excuse.


Now the season's over, can anyone give me one benefit from having Bledsoe on the roster let alone starting? Just one good thing about his signing?

You people forget. Who were we SUPPOSED to sign if not Bledsoe last year?

[burmafrd]

there is no logic here- just emotions. Bledsoe is our QB and will be for at least next year. Deal with it. Or leave. I don't care.

[CowboyFan74]

let it go

[DLCassidy]

the oline was just as attrocious check the stats...

What stats would those be? In 2005 we allowed 7 more sacks from EACH tackle position over 2004.

[StanleySpadowski]

You people forget. Who were we SUPPOSED to sign if not Bledsoe last year?


They should have signed a journeyman type like Kelly Holcombe or Trent Dilfer as insurance and have Romo or Henson start the season and take their lumps.

Of course we'd have had a better idea of Romo and Henson if they would have seen the field over Testaverde when the season was lost. Come to think of it Dallas is in the exact same spot this offseason except Vinny Jr. took over for Sr.

[Clove]

Point blank for me, I'm not arguing over who is better, Vinny is not here and we have to deal with the now. Bledsoe did lead his team to 2 superbowls I think , If I'm right.

We need to get this line fixed now, and put some more speed in the receiving core, and I'm willing to give Bledsoe time to do. Meanwhile, I would still look for my future QB if we plan on being on top for awhile one day.

The only real problem I've had with Bledsoe all year, is holding on to the damn ball too long. Other than that, I think he's a much better QB than Vinny when it's all said and done.

[KingTuna]

let it go


DITTO!! :bang2:

[ABQCOWBOY]

You people forget. Who were we SUPPOSED to sign if not Bledsoe last year?


I think the problem is that most don't really like to options available but that isn't to say there were none. Johnson, Warner, Holcomb and Griese were all options at some point and time. All enjoyed pretty good success under difficult conditions this year. There were options available, just not options that were given the fans seal of approval.

[RCowboyFan]

there is no logic here- just emotions. Bledsoe is our QB and will be for at least next year. Deal with it. Or leave. I don't care.

And we should care that you don't care because ....??

[aznhalf]

What stats would those be? In 2005 we allowed 7 more sacks from EACH tackle position over 2004.

:clap2::clap2:

Sounds like a pretty relevant stat to me.

[Zaxor]

:clap2::clap2:

Sounds like a pretty relevant stat to me.

How about because Bledsoe ALWAYS gets sacked more how about 451 times in his career...

pretty silly as it proves my point

[superpunk]

Gotta love chest thumping threads started by people convinced they know more than anyone else in the room.

[aznhalf]

How about because Bledsoe ALWAYS gets sacked more how about 451 times in his career...

pretty silly as it proves my point

True, I guess it had nothing to do with Tucker compared to Adams at LT.

[superpunk]

True, I guess it had nothing to do with Tucker compared to Adams at LT.

Forget that. It really has no relevance that one of the most important positions in football was filled by a turnstyle for more than half the year.

I will submit this. There is NO more crucial position in football than the offensive lineman assigned to protect Drew Bledsoe's blindside. There are precious few positions more crucial to a teams success than LT anyway, one has only to look at the difference in offensive output this very year of the Chiefs and Steelers, when their starting LT was out.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Forget that. It really has no relevance that one of the most important positions in football was filled by a turnstyle for more than half the year.

I will submit this. There is NO more crucial position in football than the offensive lineman assigned to protect Drew Bledsoe's blindside. There are precious few positions more crucial to a teams success than LT anyway, one has only to look at the difference in offensive output this very year of the Chiefs and Steelers, when their starting LT was out.


I guess that would mean that I'm here to refute this. Tell me quick, who was Brett Favre's LT in GB? How about Vick's? Who is McNabbs for the past few seasons? Here's an easy one. Who's the Chiefs and the Steelers LT?

LT is definatly important but it's relative to the mobility your QB has. If you have Bledsoe and zero mobility then it's extreme. If you have a QB who can move around a little bit, you don't have to have Munoz playing LT for you.

[DLCassidy]

How about because Bledsoe ALWAYS gets sacked more how about 451 times in his career...

pretty silly as it proves my point

I'm not picking on you but you asked us to "check the stats" and when we did now you say the problem was Bledsoe in any case. That doesn't wash on two levels:

1) Bledsoe's sack rate per attempt for the 1st 6 games with Flozell Adams was 1 every 15 attempts. For the last 10 games it was a wretched 1 in 8.4 attempts. The difference is FA. In case you're following at home, Vinny was sacked once every 14 attempts last year.

2) If you look at Bledsoe's career you can see he's only prone to sacks when he's had a poor line. Look at his sack rates for the first 6 years of his career in NE. His sack rate was right in line with what he was doing the first 6 games of this year- about 1 in 15 attempts which is really quite good. You see his sack rate spike up his last few years in NE when his LT Bruce Armstrong was hobbled by injury and then retired. Buffalo thought Bledsoe was the problem with sacks but this year the combination of Losman and Holcomb are taking sacks at a 30%+ higher rate per attempt than when DB was there in 2004. The fact is Buffalo had one of the very worst OL's in the league while he was there.

If you don't protect Bledsoe he will suck. If you do, he will perform well and is not overly sack prone. His fall off in the 2nd half this year can be directly traced to far worse pass protection. As you suggested, I looked it up.

[superpunk]

I guess that would mean that I'm here to refute this. Tell me quick, who was Brett Favre's LT in GB? How about Vick's? Who is McNabbs for the past few seasons? Here's an easy one. Who's the Chiefs and the Steelers LT?

LT is definatly important but it's relative to the mobility your QB has. If you have Bledsoe and zero mobility then it's extreme. If you have a QB who can move around a little bit, you don't have to have Munoz playing LT for you.

Did you notice the part where I said;

"There is NO more crucial position in football than the offensive lineman assigned to protect Drew Bledsoe's blindside."

I understand that Drew's mobility plays a big part in this, which is why it was so foolish to have noone but Torrin "Turnstyle" Tucker to back Flo up. Look at the difference in offensive production with Flo's injury as the dividing point. It's night and day.

For my other examples, Pitt and KC, the same thing happened. When their LTs went down, their offenses struggled badly. Ben R. can move around quite a bit. Trent Green shifts in the pocket to avoid pressure as well as anyone in the league. But still they suffered. It is a HUGE part of an offense, the tackle assigned to the blindside.

[aznhalf]

I guess that would mean that I'm here to refute this. Tell me quick, who was Brett Favre's LT in GB? How about Vick's? Who is McNabbs for the past few seasons? Here's an easy one. Who's the Chiefs and the Steelers LT?

LT is definatly important but it's relative to the mobility your QB has. If you have Bledsoe and zero mobility then it's extreme. If you have a QB who can move around a little bit, you don't have to have Munoz playing LT for you.

Im not sure what point you're trying to make.

GB and KC have some of the best LT's in the game. Are you trying to be sarcastic?

Mobile quarterbacks tend to make their line look better, but in the end I'd rather have a pure pocket passer with a solid line than have a Micheal Vick with whoever up front.

[superpunk]

I'm not picking on you but you asked us to "check the stats" and when we did now you say the problem was Bledsoe in any case. That doesn't wash on two levels:

1) Bledsoe's sack rate per attempt for the 1st 6 games with Flozell Adams was 1 every 15 attempts. For the last 10 games it was a wretched 1 in 8.4 attempts. The difference is FA. In case you're following at home, Vinny was sacked once every 14 attempts last year.

2) If you look at Bledsoe's career you can see he's only prone to sacks when he's had a poor line. Look at his sack rates for the first 6 years of his career in NE. His sack rate was right in line with what he was doing the first 6 games of this year- about 1 in 15 attempts which is really quite good. You see his sack rate spike up his last few years in NE when his LT Bruce Armstrong was hobbled by injury and then retired. Buffalo thought Bledsoe was the problem with sacks but this year the combination of Losman and Holcomb are taking sacks at a 30%+ higher rate per attempt than when DB was there in 2004. The fact is Buffalo had one of the very worst OL's in the league while he was there.

If you don't protect Bledsoe he will suck. If you do, he will perform well. His fall off in the 2nd half this year can be directly traced to far worse pass protection. As you suggested, I looked it up.

That is very interesting, the sack ratios. Excellent "stat" to use, which in addition to actually watching the games, sheds some light on what a difference Flo was making.

[DLCassidy]

I guess that would mean that I'm here to refute this. Tell me quick, who was Brett Favre's LT in GB? How about Vick's? Who is McNabbs for the past few seasons? Here's an easy one. Who's the Chiefs and the Steelers LT?

LT is definatly important but it's relative to the mobility your QB has. If you have Bledsoe and zero mobility then it's extreme. If you have a QB who can move around a little bit, you don't have to have Munoz playing LT for you.

So now Flozell Adams is Anthony Munoz?:laugh1: I like Flo, he's a good player, but let's face it, he wasn't getting a lot of love on this board before he got hurt. But would we take the 13 sacks in 6 games Bledsoe had if that rate continued all season? No doubt. Would we take the Bledsoe we saw in the first 6 games with FA in there? Another given.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Did you notice the part where I said;

"There is NO more crucial position in football than the offensive lineman assigned to protect Drew Bledsoe's blindside."

I understand that Drew's mobility plays a big part in this, which is why it was so foolish to have noone but Torrin "Turnstyle" Tucker to back Flo up. Look at the difference in offensive production with Flo's injury as the dividing point. It's night and day.

For my other examples, Pitt and KC, the same thing happened. When their LTs went down, their offenses struggled badly. Ben R. can move around quite a bit. Trent Green shifts in the pocket to avoid pressure as well as anyone in the league. But still they suffered. It is a HUGE part of an offense, the tackle assigned to the blindside.

The point is that it's only critical because we have a QB who has little to no mobility and has a difficult time securing the ball when hit.

I would also submitt the fact that most of Drew Bledsoe's problems occure when he sees the pressure. Not when he doesn't see it. Drew's biggest issue is when he gets pressure up the middle. That prevents him from stepping up which is about the only thing he can do in the pocket. That's what I'm trying to say here. LT may be crucial but it's no more curcial, IMO, then any other weak link on the line where Drew is concerned. That's the problem. He has real difficulty over coming and dealing with pressure from anywhere.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Im not sure what point you're trying to make.

GB and KC have some of the best LT's in the game. Are you trying to be sarcastic?

Mobile quarterbacks tend to make their line look better, but in the end I'd rather have a pure pocket passer with a solid line than have a Micheal Vick with whoever up front.

And see, I'd rather have a guy who can make good decisions and have the ability to move around in the pocket a bit rather then somebody who can do neither. Extremes are the problem here. You don't need Vick but we don't need the mobility of Bledsoe either. That's a true statement.

[superpunk]

The point is that it's only critical because we have a QB who has little to no mobility and has a difficult time securing the ball when hit.

I would also submitt the fact that most of Drew Bledsoe's problems occure when he sees the pressure. Not when he doesn't see it. Drew's biggest issue is when he gets pressure up the middle. That prevents him from stepping up which is about the only thing he can do in the pocket. That's what I'm trying to say here. LT may be crucial but it's no more curcial, IMO, then any other weak link on the line where Drew is concerned. That's the problem. He has real difficulty over coming and dealing with pressure from anywhere.

I know it's MORE critical, that's why I said what I said in the first place. I'd be a big fan of getting a more athletic QB in here, one that can make a play when the pocket breaks down, as it will from time to time. I'm begging for Josh McCown in the offseason. Denny Green appears to hate him, so he's probably not going to be resigned.

The trouble is, Bledsoe's not that guy, but he is OUR guy. You can't argue the simple fact that when he did have a solid player protecting his blindside, he was dynamite for us. Take Flo out, and the offense went flat immediately, even though we continued to win on the strength of our defense for a time. With Flo gone, we had to compensate for two tackle positions, and not just our right side, which is enough of an inconvenience in the first place. The results showed in the stats sheet AND the win column.

[ABQCOWBOY]

So now Flozell Adams is Anthony Munoz?:laugh1: I like Flo, he's a good player, but let's face it, he wasn't getting a lot of love on this board before he got hurt. But would we take the 13 sacks in 6 games Bledsoe had if that rate continued all season? No doubt. Would we take the Bledsoe we saw in the first 6 games with FA in there? Another given.


I don't love Adams and I never tried to compare him to Munoz. The illustration I'm trying to make here is that you need a Munoz if your going to have a Bledsoe. How do you protect Bledsoe? You allow no pressure, at all. You have to not only be very good along the offensive line but you have to be deep and good. You can't afford to lose your LT or your doomed to get the Bledsoe of the last 6 games. What kind of plan is that? It's no way to run a railroad is all I'm saying.

[superpunk]

I don't love Adams and I never tried to compare him to Munoz. The illustration I'm trying to make here is that you need a Munoz if your going to have a Bledsoe. How do you protect Bledsoe? You allow no pressure, at all. You have to not only be very good along the offensive line but you have to be deep and good. You can't afford to lose your LT or your doomed to get the Bledsoe of the last 6 games. What kind of plan is that? It's no way to run a railroad is all I'm saying.

Now THAT I can agree with. BP knew what a disaster it would be if Flo went down, particularly with Pettiti on the other side, and he did nothing to improve our depth. Bledsoe is a good QB, and can play great if you give him what he needs. Bill didn't and he failed.

[StanleySpadowski]

I'm not picking on you but you asked us to "check the stats" and when we did now you say the problem was Bledsoe in any case. That doesn't wash on two levels:

1) Bledsoe's sack rate per attempt for the 1st 6 games with Flozell Adams was 1 every 15 attempts. For the last 10 games it was a wretched 1 in 8.4 attempts. The difference is FA. In case you're following at home, Vinny was sacked once every 14 attempts last year.

2) If you look at Bledsoe's career you can see he's only prone to sacks when he's had a poor line. Look at his sack rates for the first 6 years of his career in NE. His sack rate was right in line with what he was doing the first 6 games of this year- about 1 in 15 attempts which is really quite good. You see his sack rate spike up his last few years in NE when his LT Bruce Armstrong was hobbled by injury and then retired. Buffalo thought Bledsoe was the problem with sacks but this year the combination of Losman and Holcomb are taking sacks at a 30%+ higher rate per attempt than when DB was there in 2004. The fact is Buffalo had one of the very worst OL's in the league while he was there.

If you don't protect Bledsoe he will suck. If you do, he will perform well and is not overly sack prone. His fall off in the 2nd half this year can be directly traced to far worse pass protection. As you suggested, I looked it up.



You can make stats say some pretty interesting things. For example, you combined Holcombe and Losman for statistical sake. Holcombe actually took sacks at a lower rate than Bledsoe but Losman's particularly high rate skews the numbers to favor Bledsoe. It's not surprising to anyone that a QB in his first season struggled making timely reads.

You also neglected to note Bledsoe 50+ sack season of 2003 which was a marked increase from Buffalo's '02 season.


If you really want to play a statistics game, I'd suggest you look at Bledsoe's career numbers in inclement weather. Feeble at best and in the NFC East he'll have at least one poor weather division away game in December.

[superpunk]

You can make stats say some pretty interesting things. For example, you combined Holcombe and Losman for statistical sake. Holcombe actually took sacks at a lower rate than Bledsoe but Losman's particularly high rate skews the numbers to favor Bledsoe. It's not surprising to anyone that a QB in his first season struggled making timely reads.

You also neglected to note Bledsoe 50+ sack season of 2003 which was a marked increase from Buffalo's '02 season.


If you really want to play a statistics game, I'd suggest you look at Bledsoe's career numbers in inclement weather. Feeble at best and in the NFC East he'll have at least one poor weather division away game in December.

You could also look at the type of offense they ran when Holcombe was in there. Being a dismayed fantasy owner of Willis McGahee, I would often tune into Bills games to see how he was doing. When Holcombe came in there, the offense morphed into the dink and dunk show. He was throwing 5 yard outs and swing passes to RBs all day long. Not that it's a bad thing, but they ran an offense designed to get the ball out of the QBs hands immediately.

You're right, stats can be made to say anything. The only REAL way to know how to interpret them is to actually watch the games in which the stats are formed. Having watched all 16 games of VT and DB, I can honestly say that Drew is 10 times the QB Vinny was. This offense, which struggled running the ball no matter what, was much more scary with Flo in, than with Flo out.

[DLCassidy]

I don't love Adams and I never tried to compare him to Munoz. The illustration I'm trying to make here is that you need a Munoz if your going to have a Bledsoe. How do you protect Bledsoe? You allow no pressure, at all. You have to not only be very good along the offensive line but you have to be deep and good. You can't afford to lose your LT or your doomed to get the Bledsoe of the last 6 games. What kind of plan is that? It's no way to run a railroad is all I'm saying.

But Bledsoe was succeeding with FA as his LT, that's the point. Was he not?

We did have a decided and severe lack of depth at LT and RT. Tucker had never played the position, not in college or pro's. LT is just below QB in it's importance to many offenses, usually you lose your starter and if it's for more than a few games you're done. Look at the vaunted KC Chiefs offense this year. They lose Roaf for 6 games, lose 3 of them, 7-3 with him in there.

[ABQCOWBOY]

I know it's MORE critical, that's why I said what I said in the first place. I'd be a big fan of getting a more athletic QB in here, one that can make a play when the pocket breaks down, as it will from time to time. I'm begging for Josh McCown in the offseason. Denny Green appears to hate him, so he's probably not going to be resigned.

The trouble is, Bledsoe's not that guy, but he is OUR guy. You can't argue the simple fact that when he did have a solid player protecting his blindside, he was dynamite for us. Take Flo out, and the offense went flat immediately, even though we continued to win on the strength of our defense for a time. With Flo gone, we had to compensate for two tackle positions, and not just our right side, which is enough of an inconvenience in the first place. The results showed in the stats sheet AND the win column.

I don't dispute any of this. I've posted the same since before we signed the guy. That's the point. Why do we sign a QB and lock ourselves into him if the limitations are so obviouse? Bledsoe is an exceptional passer if he has no pressure. That is not even a thing that can be questioned IMO. However, when will the NFL ever be a league where by you can count on players not getting injured etc? I just hate the fact that we are handcuffed in such a way and we've done it to ourselves.

[RCowboyFan]

2) If you look at Bledsoe's career you can see he's only prone to sacks when he's had a poor line. Look at his sack rates for the first 6 years of his career in NE. His sack rate was right in line with what he was doing the first 6 games of this year- about 1 in 15 attempts which is really quite good. You see his sack rate spike up his last few years in NE when his LT Bruce Armstrong was hobbled by injury and then retired. Buffalo thought Bledsoe was the problem with sacks but this year the combination of Losman and Holcomb are taking sacks at a 30%+ higher rate per attempt than when DB was there in 2004. The fact is Buffalo had one of the very worst OL's in the league while he was there.

If you don't protect Bledsoe he will suck. If you do, he will perform well and is not overly sack prone. His fall off in the 2nd half this year can be directly traced to far worse pass protection. As you suggested, I looked it up.

They are stats and then they are lies like they say. By combining a rookie basically with veteran you are adding up as one QB.

But to do a Fair comparison with Holcomb only, since he is veteran. Kelly has been sacked every 13.5 times he attempted to throw this year

While Bledsoe was sacked 12.1 attempts last year, which ironically is one of the years he was sacked less seems like, probably because they used McGahee more.

Second, Bledsoe became Sack prone once BP left NE. I think when BP was there, according to Bledsoe he would in practice be constantly at his back yelling to get rid of it etc. Which probably attributed to less sacks when BP was there. You can see the sack total increase each year after 97, since BP left in 96? or was it 97? I doubt thats just a co-incidence.

Now other hand, if you take Tom Brady, you see during his first year, he was sacked a lot, again Rookie factor, But since then it has steadily decreased and its amazing how less he was sacked this year, considering they lot their LT and half of their OL to injuries.

So look it up again.

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/187741 - Tom Brady
http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/493000 - JP Losman
http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1624 - Kelly Holcomb
http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1041 - Drew Bledsoe

[RCowboyFan]

I don't dispute any of this. I've posted the same since before we signed the guy. That's the point. Why do we sign a QB and lock ourselves into him if the limitations are so obviouse? Bledsoe is an exceptional passer if he has no pressure. That is not even a thing that can be questioned IMO. However, when will the NFL ever be a league where by you can count on players not getting injured etc? I just hate the fact that we are handcuffed in such a way and we've done it to ourselves.

:hammer:

[ABQCOWBOY]

But Bledsoe was succeeding with FA as his LT, that's the point. Was he not?

We did have a decided and severe lack of depth at LT and RT. Tucker had never played the position, not in college or pro's. LT is just below QB in it's importance to many offenses, usually you lose your starter and if it's for more than a few games you're done. Look at the vaunted KC Chiefs offense this year. They lose Roaf for 6 games, lose 3 of them, 7-3 with him in there.

OK, but the point here is that we had options. We elected to cast the dye with a QB we knew had this type of limitation. A track record of 12 season no less.

I honestly don't believe there is anything that can be done for the situation at this point but, those who paint Bledsoe as a Pro Bowl QB or what have you are failing to fill in all the blanks. He is a QB with flaws. For us to win, we are going to have to compensate and be extremely lucky in the process.

[superpunk]

I don't dispute any of this. I've posted the same since before we signed the guy. That's the point. Why do we sign a QB and lock ourselves into him if the limitations are so obviouse? Bledsoe is an exceptional passer if he has no pressure. That is not even a thing that can be questioned IMO. However, when will the NFL ever be a league where by you can count on players not getting injured etc? I just hate the fact that we are handcuffed in such a way and we've done it to ourselves.

But it can be done. It was being done before Flo went down. Unfortunately, BP has shown a complete inability to draft Olinemen in his tenure in Dallas, and so we have zero depth along our Oline. If that is fixed, Bledsoe can be dynamic. That's already been proved. I am not a fan of Bledsoe's. I hate watching him, and my wife hates watching me watch him. The official count of times the phrase "THROW THE DAMN BALL!!!" has been uttered in my house this year is astronomical. But I can see by watching, that given the proper protection, Drew Bledsoe can be a very dangerous QB for the Dallas Cowboys.

[RCowboyFan]

You could also look at the type of offense they ran when Holcombe was in there. Being a dismayed fantasy owner of Willis McGahee, I would often tune into Bills games to see how he was doing. When Holcombe came in there, the offense morphed into the dink and dunk show. He was throwing 5 yard outs and swing passes to RBs all day long. Not that it's a bad thing, but they ran an offense designed to get the ball out of the QBs hands immediately.

You're right, stats can be made to say anything. The only REAL way to know how to interpret them is to actually watch the games in which the stats are formed. Having watched all 16 games of VT and DB, I can honestly say that Drew is 10 times the QB Vinny was. This offense, which struggled running the ball no matter what, was much more scary with Flo in, than with Flo out.

And you think, BP hasn't designed the offense based on Dink and Dunks most of the time? Do you remember what Parcells said about Drew Bledsoe getting sacked too often, when they signed him, as to how he will avoid that? Drew simply doesn't like to dink and dunk, and hence takes unneccessary sacks etc. Its an admirable quality, in that he is curageous. But at the same time he puts the OL and hence the whole Offense in a bind.

Now as far as Vinny vs Bledsoe, yeah, I would rather go with Bledsoe than Vinny. Thats not an argument I would make. But if you give me Vinny of 98 or was it 99? Anyway the year when he had the best year, no doubt I rather take him. But then you could say that about Bledsoe too.

But really, Vinny and Bledsoe are not all that different, i.e., they both cause the team to lose or make critical mistakes in their own way,except Vinny is too old to play QB in NFL anymore.

[superpunk]

Second, Bledsoe became Sack prone once BP left NE. I think when BP was there, according to Bledsoe he would in practice be constantly at his back yelling to get rid of it etc.

So why can't he be less sack prone here? It's already been shown the difference in his sack ratios with and without Flozell. If our depth issues along the Oline can be fixed (granted, BP has given me NO confidence that it can be done, but IF...) then he can be very good.

[RCowboyFan]

But it can be done. It was being done before Flo went down. Unfortunately, BP has shown a complete inability to draft Olinemen in his tenure in Dallas, and so we have zero depth along our Oline. If that is fixed, Bledsoe can be dynamic. That's already been proved. I am not a fan of Bledsoe's. I hate watching him, and my wife hates watching me watch him. The official count of times the phrase "THROW THE DAMN BALL!!!" has been uttered in my house this year is astronomical. But I can see by watching, that given the proper protection, Drew Bledsoe can be a very dangerous QB for the Dallas Cowboys.

Well, thats why Rob Johnson survived in NFL for the length time he survived. And same with Bledsoe. People (NFL), gets mesmerized by the great throws they make when they have time, and ignore all the other negatives they bring. Same as Jeff George or any other great "Potential" Qbs NFL has seen, that never amounted to anything great other than maybe stats.

[ABQCOWBOY]

But it can be done. It was being done before Flo went down. Unfortunately, BP has shown a complete inability to draft Olinemen in his tenure in Dallas, and so we have zero depth along our Oline. If that is fixed, Bledsoe can be dynamic. That's already been proved. I am not a fan of Bledsoe's. I hate watching him, and my wife hates watching me watch him. The official count of times the phrase "THROW THE DAMN BALL!!!" has been uttered in my house this year is astronomical. But I can see by watching, that given the proper protection, Drew Bledsoe can be a very dangerous QB for the Dallas Cowboys.

It can be done for a time. Never long enough to win a Championship.

I will be honest with you. I like Bledsoe, as a person and even as a pro player. I hate him as a QB but I honestly like the guy. He does things in a way that I feel is admirable. I just keep coming back to the fact that he's a guy who has played in a league with a lot of very smart people. In 12 years, nobody has been able to design an offense that he could win it all in. Granted you must have some luck to win a championship but to me, that is all the more reason you don't pigeon hole yourself with the kind of QB you can use. I guess I just believe that with all the smart guys in this league, somebody would have already found a way to design an offense that worked with Bledsoe. It hasn't happened yet and I don't think it's going to.

[superpunk]

And you think, BP hasn't designed the offense based on Dink and Dunks most of the time? Do you remember what Parcells said about Drew Bledsoe getting sacked too often, when they signed him, as to how he will avoid that? Drew simply doesn't like to dink and dunk, and hence takes unneccessary sacks etc. Its an admirable quality, in that he is curageous. But at the same time he puts the OL and hence the whole Offense in a bind.

Now as far as Vinny vs Bledsoe, yeah, I would rather go with Bledsoe than Vinny. Thats not an argument I would make. But if you give me Vinny of 98 or was it 99? Anyway the year when he had the best year, no doubt I rather take him. But then you could say that about Bledsoe too.

But really, Vinny and Bledsoe are not all that different, i.e., they both cause the team to lose or make critical mistakes in their own way,except Vinny is too old to play QB in NFL anymore.

Hey, at this point, he is what he is, there's no changing him. I'm not happy about it, but I know he can be a successful QB with a good Oline and Bill Parcells. We've got one of those things, and seemed to have both early on. I'm anxious to see which of them gets addressed next year.

(BP, I'm starting to get REALLY PISSED about you stringing us out like this. I'm putting you on notice!) ;-)

[RCowboyFan]

So why can't he be less sack prone here? It's already been shown the difference in his sack ratios with and without Flozell. If our depth issues along the Oline can be fixed (granted, BP has given me NO confidence that it can be done, but IF...) then he can be very good.

You will see, next year, it wont matter if Flozell is there. I will bet by this time next year, you will be saying Flozell is crappy LT. Teams will now know how to attack Bledsoe, with Cowboys that is, and it will never be a good going for Bledsoe, now unless BP starts yelling at Bledsoe to get rid of the ball.

[RCowboyFan]

Hey, at this point, he is what he is, there's no changing him. I'm not happy about it, but I know he can be a successful QB with a good Oline and Bill Parcells. We've got one of those things, and seemed to have both early on. I'm anxious to see which of them gets addressed next year.

(BP, I'm starting to get REALLY PISSED about you stringing us out like this. I'm putting you on notice!) ;-)

Amen to that.

[Doomsday101]

So why can't he be less sack prone here? It's already been shown the difference in his sack ratios with and without Flozell. If our depth issues along the Oline can be fixed (granted, BP has given me NO confidence that it can be done, but IF...) then he can be very good.

Your wasting your time. The O-Line is great it is Bledsoe who is the problem at least in the eyes of some around here. I'm watching defenders blow by our guys but that is Bledsoe fault I see our guys getting stuffed in the running game but that is Bledsoe as well. Dallas O-line has been a problem and not just the past 2 years it has been a while since Dallas offensive line proved they could even block in short yardage or goal line situations.

[superpunk]

I will be honest with you. I like Bledsoe, as a person and even as a pro player. I hate him as a QB but I honestly like the guy. He does things in a way that I feel is admirable. I just keep coming back to the fact that he's a guy who has played in a league with a lot of very smart people. In 12 years, nobody has been able to design an offense that he could win it all in. Granted you must have some luck to win a championship but to me, that is all the more reason you don't pigeon hole yourself with the kind of QB you can use. I guess I just believe that with all the smart guys in this league, somebody would have already found a way to design an offense that worked with Bledsoe. It hasn't happened yet and I don't think it's going to.

Only one man has, he's the current coach of our team, and the two of them were one Desmond Howard out of his mind performance away from winning it all. Hopefully he can fix the problems next year, and we can have the same result, except without the crazy returns.

[superpunk]

You will see, next year, it wont matter if Flozell is there. I will bet by this time next year, you will be saying Flozell is crappy LT. Teams will now know how to attack Bledsoe, with Cowboys that is, and it will never be a good going for Bledsoe, now unless BP starts yelling at Bledsoe to get rid of the ball.

How can you say that? This team was completely different without Flozell. When I can point to a singular event like that, and say "Look at this. Look at when this happened, and look at their performance before and after this event. Look how different they are." Then I have to believe that Flo's injury played a HUGE part in Bledsoe's falloff. It is only logical.

[Billy Bullocks]

the comparison with VT and Bledsoe was a year apart with some of the same parts in place..so they could not be compared to aikman...who is 5-6 years removed with no other same parts except 2 o-lineman with 5-6 years more on them

so I do not see your point at all... unless it is you simply do not want it to be so

My point is that numbers only tell part of the story. Testy had a line that was more capable of protecting him, while Bledsoe didnt. Bledsoe had Glenn, Testy didnt, but like someone pointed out, Vinny didnt do much better with Glenn.

I like stats alot...for baseball. You can't only use stats to compare players. Bledsoe is a better leader, with a better arm, and finnished with a better record.

VInny threw away plenty of games last year with his limp armed out routes.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Only one man has, he's the current coach of our team, and the two of them were one Desmond Howard out of his mind performance away from winning it all. Hopefully he can fix the problems next year, and we can have the same result, except without the crazy returns.

I think that you have to qualify that. That was a different time in the NFL and what's more, they didn't win it. The window of opportunity is 2 years with Bledsoe, IMO. In two more seasons, we have to get to a place where we are solid enough on the OL to be able to provide a clean pocket for Bledsoe. I just don't see it unless one Columbo is much better then I think we all anticipate.

[RCowboyFan]

How can you say that? This team was completely different without Flozell. When I can point to a singular event like that, and say "Look at this. Look at when this happened, and look at their performance before and after this event. Look how different they are." Then I have to believe that Flo's injury played a HUGE part in Bledsoe's falloff. It is only logical.

Because, like someone said, if you don't learn from history, you are bound to repeat the mistakes made previously. I have watched Bledsoe a lot, even before he came to Dallas. One thing constant is his holding the ball and sometimes just getting into sacks. Its one thing if he did it a rookie season or 2nd season, and there is a chance of correcting the issue. But when he has played 12 seasons in NFL, but still does that, then its obvious, he is what he is.

Now, he might not get sacked 49 times next year with Flozell, but maybe around 35-40, if OL really plays well. But I bet the sack ratio is around 12 or so. Hey you can feed me crow, like I have been saying to anyone who thinks I am wrong, when I am proved wrong.

[mr.jameswoods]

Statistics don't tell the entire story. Furthermore, you can't select statistics that only support your argument and ignore the stats that reject it. Plenty of people here raised statistics that rejected your theory, but you didn't acknowledge those stats. This is why you have no credibility in regards to this issue.

In short, you are acting like Terrel Owens (only you are right and everyone is wrong, Me Against the World)

[mr.jameswoods]

Because, like someone said, if you don't learn from history, you are bound to repeat the mistakes made previously. I have watched Bledsoe a lot, even before he came to Dallas. One thing constant is his holding the ball and sometimes just getting into sacks. Its one thing if he did it a rookie season or 2nd season, and there is a chance of correcting the issue. But when he has played 12 seasons in NFL, but still does that, then its obvious, he is what he is.

Now, he might not get sacked 49 times next year with Flozell, but maybe around 35-40, if OL really plays well. But I bet the sack ratio is around 12 or so. Hey you can feed me crow, like I have been saying to anyone who thinks I am wrong, when I am proved wrong.

This argument is so foolish to me. I don't like Bledsoe or Testaverde yet I feel like I have to defend Bledsoe because he is being compared to Vinny? I agree with everything you have said. You forgot to add that Bledsoe eyes receivers. He always has and is known for that. This is why he still struggles with interceptions. It's because DB's can see him eyeing particular receivers. But be fair, Drew has played so much better than Vinny did last year.

[RCowboyFan]

This argument is so foolish to me. I don't like Bledsoe or Testaverde yet I feel like I have to defend Bledsoe because he is being compared to Vinny? I agree with everything you have said. You forgot to add that Bledsoe eyes receivers. He always has and is known for that. This is why he still struggles with interceptions. It's because DB's can see him eyeing particular receivers. But be fair, Drew has played so much better than Vinny did last year.

Agreed, I have said so too. But I only differ on so much better part, due the D that Vinny had to play with and Recievers he had to play with and almost no running game. But at the end of year, even with Running game, he stunk, so thats the damning part for Vinny.

[DLCassidy]

You can make stats say some pretty interesting things. For example, you combined Holcombe and Losman for statistical sake. Holcombe actually took sacks at a lower rate than Bledsoe but Losman's particularly high rate skews the numbers to favor Bledsoe. It's not surprising to anyone that a QB in his first season struggled making timely reads.


You also neglected to note Bledsoe 50+ sack season of 2003 which was a marked increase from Buffalo's '02 season.


If you really want to play a statistics game, I'd suggest you look at Bledsoe's career numbers in inclement weather. Feeble at best and in the NFC East he'll have at least one poor weather division away game in December.

Holcomb's sack#'s were slightly worse than DB in 2004 and he's a dinker and dunker. Losman is a 1st year starter but he's also supposed to be a LOT more mobile and by no means do all 1st year starters take a lot of sacks. 2002 and 2003 the Bills played a different offense with a lot more vertical passing under Kevin Gilbride who ran a version of Mouse Davis' "run and shoot". You'd better have a good OL or you're going to get your QB killed in that offense (which the Bills did not), ask Warren Moon who did have a good OL but took a lot of hits. The sack #'s in 2003 weren't that much worse per attempt than 2002. In fact they were bad both terrible, just a bit worse because the Bills got rid of Price, and Moulds was hurt for most of the year.

I'm not playing any game, just answering a point that was raised and the #'s back up my point. You want to talk about QB's in inclement weather? Start another thread.

[MichaelWinicki]

You people forget. Who were we SUPPOSED to sign if not Bledsoe last year?


I would have taken Holcomb or Brad Johnson in a heart-beat.

[DLCassidy]

It can be done for a time. Never long enough to win a Championship.

I will be honest with you. I like Bledsoe, as a person and even as a pro player. I hate him as a QB but I honestly like the guy. He does things in a way that I feel is admirable. I just keep coming back to the fact that he's a guy who has played in a league with a lot of very smart people. In 12 years, nobody has been able to design an offense that he could win it all in. Granted you must have some luck to win a championship but to me, that is all the more reason you don't pigeon hole yourself with the kind of QB you can use. I guess I just believe that with all the smart guys in this league, somebody would have already found a way to design an offense that worked with Bledsoe. It hasn't happened yet and I don't think it's going to.

Here we go. It's not tennis, you know? Are you hinting that THIS team, the team we watched get overmatched on the OL in losses to the Giants and Redskins on the road was better QB play away from winning a SB? Please. You can't really believe that. Is that what you're saying? Winning it all is hard to do and it takes a lot more than a great QB. Marino was a great QB. He never won a SB. Manning is a great QB, so far he's never won. You could make quite a list. And I'm not even arguing DB is a great QB. But IMO he's plenty good enough to win a SB surrounded by a great team. Great TEAMS win SB's. Aikman was great but who can deny the quality of the entire squad. When the talent level dropped, so did Troy.

The design of this offense is identical to the one DB played in in NE. It suits him well. He got to a SB in it and NE lost to a superior opponent, a team that had the #1 defense in the league. He was playing lights out in it this year until FA got hurt. The injury to FA was bad luck- the 1st games he's missed in 8 years. It's impossible to overestimate how badly his injury hurt our offense. ALL the #'s dropped like stones, particularly when we played a team that could rush the passer well.

If you put DB on the Redskins I'd give him a good chance to get to the SB this year. Win it? Have to go with Indy. Better team.

[StanleySpadowski]

Holcomb's sack#'s were slightly worse than DB in 2004


I don't know where you're getting your numbers from but using just NFL.com I show that Holcombe dropped back to pass 247 times (230 attempts plus the 17 times he was sacked and didn't get a pass off) and was sacked 17 times or once every 14.5 drops.

Bledsoe had 487 dropbacks and was sacked 37 times or once every 13.2 dropbacks.

Now this doesn't even take into account the times that they dropped back to pass and ran, hence avoiding a sack because one site has Holcombe at 14 of those and another has 13 so I chose not to factor that in seeing that whichever it is only further puts Holcombe in front because Bledsoe only had 22 carries (which obviously includes sneaks and kneel downs) in '04 so the gap would have widened further.

[DLCassidy]

I don't know where you're getting your numbers from but using just NFL.com I show that Holcombe dropped back to pass 247 times (230 attempts plus the 17 times he was sacked and didn't get a pass off) and was sacked 17 times or once every 14.5 drops.

Bledsoe had 487 dropbacks and was sacked 37 times or once every 13.2 dropbacks.

Now this doesn't even take into account the times that they dropped back to pass and ran, hence avoiding a sack because one site has Holcombe at 14 of those and another has 13 so I chose not to factor that in seeing that whichever it is only further puts Holcombe in front because Bledsoe only had 22 carries (which obviously includes sneaks and kneel downs) in '04 so the gap would have widened further.

You're right, I meant slightly worse than Holcomb but that difference isn't a big deal either way. 1 in 12 or 1 in 13 sacks per attempt is quite good behind Buffalo's OL. It requires playing a certain style though which is not ideally suited for a guy with Bledsoe's arm. Holcomb is actually a very good QB IMO, particularly for a team like the Bills that has major problems protecting the QB. Losman's sack #'s were higher because right now his only real asset is a decent deep ball and that menas holding onto it, which won't work with that OL.

[StanleySpadowski]

You're right, I meant slightly worse than Holcomb but that difference isn't a big deal either way. 1 in 12 or 1 in 13 sacks per attempt is quite good behind Buffalo's OL. It requires playing a certain style though which is not ideally suited for a guy with Bledsoe's arm. Holcomb is actually a very good QB IMO, particularly for a team like the Bills that has major problems protecting the QB. Losman's sack #'s were higher because right now his only real asset is a decent deep ball and that menas holding onto it, which won't work with that OL.


I somewhat disagree with you about Losman's problems with sacks (I think that it has to do with him being dumber than a box of rocks not the deep ball) but I pretty much agree with what you're saying but wouldn't you say that a decent deep ball is Bledsoe's biggest asset if not his only one as well?

I've said this before but I think Bledsoe could be a decent bus driver if he could realize that he's a bus driver and not a formula one driver.

[Kilyin]

I somewhat disagree with you about Losman's problems with sacks (I think that it has to do with him being dumber than a box of rocks not the deep ball)

This suspicion was confirmed when I heard him quote Yoda in a postgame conference. And I'm completely serious.

[DLCassidy]

I somewhat disagree with you about Losman's problems with sacks (I think that it has to do with him being dumber than a box of rocks not the deep ball) but I pretty much agree with what you're saying but wouldn't you say that a decent deep ball is Bledsoe's biggest asset if not his only one as well?

I've said this before but I think Bledsoe could be a decent bus driver if he could realize that he's a bus driver and not a formula one driver.

You could be right about Losman's brains. The Bills had him learning that offense for over a year and he still was lost in space. But he was only successful throwing a straight fly pattern which is kind of a tough game plan to go with every week in the NFL, especially with no line.

Bledsoe has the arm for all the throws. He throws not only one of the best deep balls but the best middle to deep out's in the league.

The bottom line? You can surely find QB's that can get more out of a bad OL than Bledsoe because DB can't run and he's not a scrambler. But at the end of the day, you can't win a championship without a good OL. So it really doesn't matter, you still need the line. Fix the OL and DB will be fine.

[The Curly One]

Nothing in the last 5 years has changed. Larry Allen is still totally useless. Flozell has been hot and cold plus a bunch of false start penalties. And the Quarterback has not been the problem since before aikman left. The fact is if you do not protect the Qb (who ever it is) they will get sacked, fumbles, intercepted and hurt. You have to protect the Qb and it has not been happening. Now with the poor offensive line we have the best Qb would have been Quincy because he was the most mobile. Still Quincy was not a good overall Qb just more mobile than the others we had.
Bledsoe is of the quality of Aikman and if he had the offensive line that Aikman had with Eric Williams and them Bledsoe would be amazing. The fact is our current O-line is no where near as good as 92 -95 was.

I definatly like Bledsoe much more than Vinny. Aikman is one of my favorites and always will be but he had the best overall team that I have ever seen with the totally dominant offensive line we had, Emmitt Smith, jay Novechek and on and on. Point is I think on the same team Bledsoe could be as good or close to Aikman. Bledsoe does not have nearly the same players around him that Aikman had. Curly