Articles from around the Web
PDF VERSION NOW DISCOUNTED OVER 30%
Click here to buy PDF version.
Click here to buy PDF version
Official Account: @fboutsiders
Scott Kacsmar: @FO_ScottKacsmar
Ben Muth: @FO_WordofMuth
Aaron Schatz: @FO_ASchatz
Vince Verhei: @FO_VVerhei
-- plus --
Bill Connelly: @SBN_BillC
J.J. Cooper: @jjcoop36
Cian Fahey: @Cianaf
Brian Fremeau: @bcfremeau
Tom Gower: @ThomasGower
Andrew Healy: @AndHealy
Rivers McCown: @RiversMcCown
Chad Peltier: @CGPeltier
Matt Waldman: @MattWaldman
Rob Weintraub: @robwein
27 Sep 2010
Busy Monday. The Bills have released Trent Edwards, their starting quarterback as recently as two weeks ago.
Posted by: Bill Barnwell on 27 Sep 2010
98 comments, Last at
04 Oct 2010, 9:08am by
Boy, I'm really glad I have an office with a door and bother to keep it closed most of the time, because I literally started laughing when I say this.
To quote the NYT's Judy Battista: "Trent Edwards won a "competition" in camp to be the starter, loses job and a week later isn't good enough to even stay on the roster?"
See: Frye, Charlie.
I liked it better when Lombardi made the same point before Battista did.
"How do you go from starting week 1 to not even being good enough to be on the team? I wonder if the Bills think they need to draft a QB now?"
This is what happens when a senile 90 year old owner hires a 72 year old rookie GM and Reggie Ball's ole college coach.
Trent Edwards : "This is madness !". Chan Gailey : "This, is, BUFFALO", kicks him into the waiver wire.
The Brian Brohm era is nearly upon us!
Coming out of the Brohm Closet, I see...
Sports talk radio and sports message boards are the killing fields of intellectual discourse.
Edwards must have been unwilling to accept being a backup and bitched his way out the door. Otherwise it makes no sense to release a perfectly capable backup who knows the offense well.
You have evidence suggesting that Buffalo is a rational organization?
And evidence that Trent Edwards is perfectly capable?
Not really, I don't think you can assume much about a player based on a strange reaction by a strange front office.
Well, he DID say "backup" and Edwards did "win" an open "competition" for the job a few weeks ago... so yes, that seems like a reasonable statement. Remember, perfectly capable in Indy has a different meaning than perfectly capable in Buffalo.
I'm sad for my Bills fan friends--this is just very strange. A litle like indy dismissing Ed Johnson last year--he went from a DL starter to grocery bagger in one week, and it was not related to his prior year's pot arrest (for which he was cut). He just "suddenly" was not as good as the guys behind him, and was so much worse (apparently), that they didn't even want his stench on the bench. How could experienced coaches not foresee this?
I suggest Edwards join up with Tony Ugoh and other guys who seemed to have jobs not too long ago to start a 33rd NFL team. Young, seemingly capable, fatally flawed.
The Bills already are the 33rd NFL Team. They skipped 32nd.
The Bills won 6 games last season. To find Detroit's sixth-most-recent win, you have to go back to game 6 in 2007.
We may be heading up, and you may be heading down, but you haven't quite passed us yet.
Is this better or worse then when Cleveland traded Charlie Frye for peanuts a few weeks after having him winning the starting QB job?
Worse. Trading > cutting.
It's possible that Edwards is happy to be out of Buffalo. Seems like he's shown enough to get at least a shot as a backup somewhere else.
But if he wasn't trying to get cut, maybe it's time for some of these mediocre QB's to learn a little humility. Edwards and Leinart both got cut because they couldn't humbly accept a backup role.
Guys, you both had multiple chances to win the starting job. You just weren't good enough.
And Schefter says JAX is about to sign Keith Null.
If the Jaguars can get a phone call to Edwards, they need to consider him. Edwards is nowhere near starting quality, but Keith Null's performance last year would have made JaMarcus Russell ashamed. That man has no business anywhere near an NFL roster.
Unless his agent or the NFLPA voids the deal.
sorry, couldn't resist....
Just think of all the loser league team name possibilities if he's starting by mid-season!
(I also like the Eagles)
Suddenly, Oakland and Cleveland fans have a reason for optimism--"Hey, at least we're not Buffalo!"
Excitement that, sadly, SF and Carolina fans cannot share.
How long until Edwards is on either the OAK or CLE roster?
Cleveland, Carolina, or Arizona seems like realistic possibilities. Maybe Jacksonville, but, you know, Keith Null is going to fix all their problems.
What are his pros and cons as a passer? To me, Arizona seems like it would be a good move for both him and the Cardinals but I can't figure out if he'd suit their offense. If not, Carolina would probably be a good fit.
That's all assuming he isn't permanently stained by the label of being cut by the Bills.
This post got me to thinking (I hate that!). Is there a stigma attached to being cut by a bad team? Then that got me to thinking about the difference between a bad team and a bad organization. To me, a bad team is just a collection of bad players, and possibly bad coaches (think 2007 Ravens, Texans for much of their existance). A bad organization implies that the front office is inept, which is a much bigger problem (think recent Raiders and Lions squads). The Bills definitely fall into the bad organization group.
With that in mind, I don't think there should be a stigma associated with being cut by a bad organization, because bad organizations are characterized by poor decision making. So I won't think any less of Trent Edwards today than I did yesterday. (And if you think that was a deliberately backhanded compliment, you're right.)
From that perspective, Edward's stigma isn't that he was released by a bad organization.
It was the fact that the bad organization once thought he could be an adequate quarterback in the first place.
Or, you know, he is a bad football player regardless of context.
Interesting question: who is the best player to be cut from a "bad organization" who found success elsewhere? Think the Raiders version of Randy Moss, since being traded for a 4th round pick isn't much different than getting cut.
How about the Chargers cutting Wes Welker? Or Drew Brees (albeit with the excuse "he was injured & we also had Phillip Rivers on the roster")
He said "bad organizations".
While the AJ regime has its warts and dysfunctions, you cannot legitimately consider it bad, especially not in comparison to the soul-sucking, regional-spirit-crushing incompetence of the Bills franchise.
Yeah, the bad organisations qualifier's what makes it tough. Otherwise it might have been the 1959 Browns cutting eventual hall-of-famer Dick LeBeau.
The best example I can find recently is the Ravens waiving Jeff Saturday in 1998, but even then they might get a free pass for it being only their third year in existence.
The Drew Brees situation is also different because the Chargers didn't actually cut him. They let his contract run out, and didn't re-sign him.
In addition to Jeff Saturday, a few years later the Ravens also cut undrafted free agent James Harrison. They also let Priest Holmes walk in free agency.
I didn't mean for the "the bad organizations qualifier" to be too strict. After all, I mentioned a trade when I was asking about released players!
After being a big A.J. Smith defender for several years, I would now list the Bolts as a borderline bad organization. Imagine if he had traded LaDanian Tomlinson, say, before the '08 season when he was still worth a first round pick and more, and had resigned Michael Turner to a long term deal. And sure, it's easy to criticize him for not making a tough move like that one that the fans would have hated at the time anyway. But this is also a guy who fired Marty Schottenheimer and hired Norv Turner to replace him. For that, there is no excuse. That was the move that made the Chargers a "bad organization."
It's interesting that the poster above listed Jeff Saturday, James Harrison, and Priest Holmes as good examples. Yes, all three turned out to be superstars, but they all also needed to find new homes where they fit into their new systems perfectly. I guess maybe no one is going to be a superstar without the right situation to be in.
I sorta think the problems Tomlinson's had the past few years have been Charger-related, given how good he's looked so far for the Jets, so Turner might not have looked much better
But isn't there something lovable about regional-spirit-crushing Bills franchise?
Johnny Unitas, cut from the 1955 Steelers.
We have a winner. Bad organization, greatest QB ever.
He was traded, but I can't help but think Steve Young requires mention.
A little more recent, but James Harrison was cut by the Baltimore Ravens.
Willie Brown was cut by the Oilers, became a 9 time Pro Bowler and HOFer with the Raiders.
Before he went through Baltimore, Harrison was cut by the Steelers once or twice.
...only to end up in the NFL Europe playing defensive end.
But the question was 'player cut by bad organisation becoming good'. I think he wasn't cut by bad orginasations, he just wasn't that good back then and had too much competition to show off what he could do. Only when he came into the starting lineup, he got the coaching he needed.
Trent Edwards is terrible! Seriously. His statistics are misleading in my opinion because his completion percentage is good and he doesn't throw a ton of interceptions. That is what happens when you thrown the ball 2 yards on 3rd and 7. Or 7 yards on 3rd and 14. Or take a sack rather than thrown it away. He just WOULD NOT throw the ball down the field.
When they started out 4-0 that one year, look at who they beat: Jacksonville, Oakland, Detroit, St. Louis. All bad teams.
Proof if more were needed that the Bills are the most dysfunctional organization at the front office and coaching levels in football. The Raiders actually make good decisions sometimes, and keep good players. The Richard Seymour deal, paying Nnamdi, etc.
Trent Edwards is not a franchise quarterback, but he is a very good backup quarterback. He's Kyle Orton or Matt Cassel; able to succeed in the right circumstances and willing to play the game plan rather than ruining the game plan in order to be a star. Pittsburgh should snap him up, and he would be an instant improvement to a few other teams, too, starting with THE ENTIRE NFC WEST. He'd give Shaun Hill competition.
This also makes a mockery of the fact that Buffalo passed on Jimmy Clausen - twice - in the draft, taking (another) first round running back and Torell Troup, a DT who had one tackle on Sunday and was considered a reach. Not that Clausen had a good day Sunday either. But they could have tried.
Or maybe taken Brandon Graham in the first and a lineman in the 2nd. And why is this a 3-4 team again?
Anyway, the Bills are fools.
I was going to say that the Rams really, really don't need him.
However, I'd have to say it's likely he'd be better than Feeley, so never mind.
Don't lump Orton in with those others, he's a legit starting QB in the NFL.
µNot enough media attention on Orton's performance this year and last one : Is it McDaniels system, the OL, the WRs/TEs, Chicago's supporting cast being plain awful, or has he just improved that much (he has average to below average) ? I'm quite curious... Too much Vick, not enough Orton (coming from a Philly fan) !
He was top 10 in DVOA his last year in Chicago before his ankle injury. He's simply an average starting QB. He has a few flaws (deep accuracy, being slow), but he's very smart.
I'm sure he's somewhat better than 2 years ago, QBs tend to improve with experience, but he's mostly the same guy with better supporting cast and coaching.
He was an average QB his second year starting. There's a good chances hes quite better than that.
Trent Edwards is Joey Harrington. Only younger, for whatever it's worth.
Don't even suggest that. Trent Edwards' piano skills can't hold a candle to the mighty Joey.
Still better than Rick Mirer!
Wow, that is stunning. I happen to think it's possible that Edwards could function reasonably well in a pure West Coast offense, but because of the awkward timing, it's tough to say who is going to line up for his services.
Maybe C.J. Spiller will play quarterback.
It's sad- "Hey There Trent Edwards" was an awesome parody. Guess I have a reason to listen to it one last time.
In the Bills' sea of troubles, it's possible to forget last year's fiasco at the LT position. They traded a Pro Bowler for a 1st round pick, used the pick on a guard, committed to playing Langston Walker at the position, and then released Walker before the start of the season. They just managed to top that comedy of errors by an order of magnitude.
Trent Edwards: 4.9 career ANY/A (ANY/A+ of 93)
Ryan Fitzpatrick: 3.7 career ANY/A (ANY/A+ of 79)
It amazes me that Fitzpatrick has a starting job after the comedy of errors that was his tenure in Cincinnati.
Harvard secretly rules the world... and collects pictures of all the NFL coaches doing horrible things with goats, apparently.
Honestly, it's not all that secret.
Don't tell the Yalies!
It's not for blackmail or anything. They just like the pictures.
The Bills folly wasn't cutting Trent Edwards today. It was not cutting Trent Edwards every day before today, and really, drafting him in the first place. Other than very brief flashes of competence, Trent has been consistently terrible, and a painfully dull quarterback to watch. He's expressed contempt for the fans, is unpopular in the locker room, and generally doesn't deserve to be a pro QB.
Ryan Fitzpatrick isn't really any better, but at least he makes games watchable.
Nobody circles the wagons like the Buffalo Bills.
I think drafting Trent Edwards in the 3rd round is perfectly reasonable.
Do recall that JP Losman, about whom many of those criticisms apply in spades, was the starting QB when Trent Edwards was drafted.
If I were the 49ers, I'd look him up.
Possible landing spots (in rough order of how bad their current quarterback is):
1. Arizona: Trent Edwards is like a more serious, less good-looking Matt Leinart. It would be a tragedy for Larry Fitzgerald to spend even a moment with this man as his quarterback, but at least the angels would stop screaming in pain and terror at his current situation.
2. Seattle: The Seattle offense wouldn't miss a beat if they brought in a less injury-prone, less interception-prone game manager to replace the shell shocked game manager they have now.
3. San Francisco: Alex Smith, taken #1 overall and not only not the biggest #1 overall bust ever but not even the worst in the city over the course of three years. Just how much does Alex Smith owe JaMarcus for that one? Anyway, Trent Edwards and Alex Smith are basically the same quarterback, so at least they would be great injury insurance for each other. You could trade off weeks starting them - maybe even switch in the middle of a game! - and see if the rest of the offense notices.
4. Cleveland: Yeah, Seneca Wallace has played okay, by some measures. But he isn't meaningfully better than Edwards.
5. Detroit: See Cleveland.
6. St. Louis: Bradford isn't injured yet like the starters in Cleveland and Detroit, but the St. Louis offensive line is doing their best. And once it's Feeley time... see Cleveland and Detroit.
7. Carolina: Jimmy Clausen and Matt Moore have yet to demonstrate that they are even as good as Seneca Wallace. But they probably ought to have a chance to stink a little longer before Carolina gives up on both of them.
8. Oakland: Jason Campbell is actually better than either Edwards or Gradkowski. All three are disciples of the Captain Steve McNair Memorial Checkdown society.
9. Jacksonville: I'm not sure why Garrard suddenly stinks. But if he keeps doing it, Trent could hang out behind him and ruin his career as easily as he did Losman's.
10. Minnesota: Yep, he'd be an improvement at this point.
Actually? Bradford hasn't seemed particularly badly beaten up early on, from what I've seen. (Which is every snap of every game.) He's been sacked six times in three games, which is on a pace for being a little better than average, and while of course he's taken other hits, it hasn't seemed like an inordinate amount.
It could take off on them; they haven't been playing world-beaters thus far, but looking at the schedule, they don't play a lot of world-beaters all season.
So why didn't they at least try to trade him? You think that none of those teams would give up a 6th rounder?
This is clearly an overreaction to how well Fitzpatrick played against the awful Pats' pass defense. Edwards should land somewhere as a backup.
And yes, he is better than Losman.
I would rather have the absolute wretchedness of a JP Losman/Kyle Boller type than the sometimes promising/ultimately disappointingg aggravation of a Trent Edwards type. I'm currently experiencing the same frustration on a higher level with Garrard in Jax.
I'd even take a Rob Johnson type at this point.
At least KUBIAK likes Garrard!
fdirst thing thought when hear of this is Broom going to sweep job awyay from R. Fitzpatrick soin enough and he goign to be prtety good as Buffla qb. Remember when in enxt to last year at Losuiville Broom thought to be top prospect would maybe have gone 1st in draft if come out,. But then wrnt baxck to school and had crap year and then not get drafted at top of draft. Not even with tema who draft him. now with Bills.
LOL, wtf Raiderjoe, wtf???
Is that supposed to be the King's English? Is it so hard to proof read what you write before posting?
Raiderjoe speaks only wisdom. It's up to you to understand it.
Would help if he had managed to spell Brohm's name right, but I sorted it out eventually, once I realized he wasn't referring to some sort of "new broom sweeps clean" metaphor but an actual person.
You must be new here.
thought name was pronoucned Broom a couple years ago and then got told correct name here but deicided to keep spelling it like household cleaning tool way only becauuase other people liked it
He does proof read. The original read something like:
"The first thing I thought upon learning of this is that Brohm is going to..." and so on.
Don't you dare trying to correct Raiderjoe.
Sometimes those of us who have been around for a while forget that RJ really is an acquired taste. I freely admit that when he first started posting here, I hated it. There's a learning curve there that the newer posters and one-time visitors haven't progressed through. They may not even be aware of the journey upon which they're about to embark.
Yeah, it's also easy to overlook his lunatic homerism once you get used to it... but man, in the beginning, it is truly crazy. Also, most observers won't immediately get a taste of his casually dropped-in encyclopedic knowledge of football history. Coming to terms with RaiderJoe takes time, it's a process - and while you may be a better man once that process is complete, it is nevertheless difficult as you experience it.
All true, and sometimes the neophyte response provides just the perfect icing on the Raiderjoe cake?
His is the good kind of lunatic homerism, though. It's clearly all in good fun, rather than in jackassery.
and the knowledge simply adds to it. Doesn't matter what decade we're talking about, he'll throw in some other related fact ... he knows stuff about the Lions I don't remember.
The spelling takes a while to get accustomed to, and he does value the Raiders highly, but the dude knows his stuff.
attempting to correct raiderjoe's spelling and grammar should result in account suspension.
Jimmy Smith was cut by the Cowboys not long after Jimmy Johnson resigned as the Cowboys coach. While the Switzer-led team may have won a SB, the front office under Jerry Jones was pretty disfunctional until Parcells took it over.
Ah, yes, remember all those dominate and dynamic Cowboys teams that Parcells built? Those brilliantly assembled teams without a shred of dysfunction? The glory days, I call them...
Besides a certain mercurial WR in 2006, what about dysfunction?
Parcells and his staff acquired some players. Maybe you've heard of DeMarcus Ware, Jason Witten, Tony Romo, Jay Ratliff, and Miles Austin.
And that staff? Guys like Sean Payton, Tony Sparano, and Todd Haley were there.
I don't know, chemical burn. I think I'd take some of those players and coaches on my team.
They're all tainted by having associated with the star.
I'm not sure what you mean by this statement.
Of course I meant TO, Parcell's handling of the QB situation for years (Quincy Carter? Drew Henson?) and the fact that they never won anything - did they even take the division title when Parcells was there? Plus, stuff like having Roy Williams (the safety) hanging around made those teams feel plenty dysfunctional to me. Certainly, Parcell's tenure didn't feel notably less dysfunctional than the one we're in right now or even those late 90's Cowboys teams. He brought in some good players, sure, but it's not like Jerry Jones disappeared for several years and they brought glory back to Dallas. He did an above average job, for sure, the Parcells Cowboys crated a lot of media firestorms and stupid controversy and seemed... dysfunctional.
Justanothersteve didn't say anything about the current regime. He said the front office was dysfunctional until Parcells got there. Which means from the time Parcells arrived it hasn't been dysfunctional.
Right, I agreed about Owens above.
Roy Williams was still a good player when Parcells first came there. Quincy Carter was only there in 2003. Drew Henson started one half of a game in 2004. Parcells and his staff were responsible for acquiring Tony Romo.
Anyway, I don't see how the things you listed above made Parcells' tenure dysfunctional. He inherited a really bad roster; a team that had won 15 games in 3 years. He went to the playoffs twice, and the 2003 team wasn't an especially talented team. The first year he left the team went 13-3, won the division, and I think it would be ridiculous to assert that Parcells didn't have a large part in the success of that season.
By your own admission Parcells "did an above average job," yet you state that his teams weren't much more successful and equally dysfunctional than the preceding teams? I just don't think that's the case, and I think most (if not all) Dallas fans would agree with me here.
I'm convinced this is all part of some bizarre strategy by Buffalo to lose all 16 games, get the first overall pick, claim that they can no longer be competitive in the city of Buffalo, move to Toronto, and suddenly flourish because they're no longer in friggin Buffalo.
Wait, all that would require a lot of planning and some really devious decisionmaking from Ralph Wilson.
I retract my previous theory and substitute "Ralph Wilson sucks." in its stead.
Rumor mill has Edwards going to the Jaguars. We'll see if he picks up his game or they drown in mediocrity.
The Vikings need offensive line help, while the Bears, Lions, and Packers have significant defensive concerns.
See All XP | NFL XP | College XP
© Football Outsiders, Inc. // Site powered by Stein-Wein // Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties