101 replies to this topic

[bills44]

I had a discussion with another poster in the Shoutbox last night regarding Fitzpatrick.

This is what the poster said:

"Is Fitz elite? No way. Is he reasonable? No. Is he as good as the average NFL QB? Probably"

So, my questions are this:

1. How would you categorize Fitz as a starting QB?  Elite? Above-average? Average? Below-average?
2. What other current starting QBs is he comparable to?  
3. If you feel that he is above-average, which QBs are better?
4. If you feel that he is average, which QBs are worse?

[JM57]

Average to below average.

Definitely worse (regardless of stage of career): Sanchez/Tebow, Gabbert, Locker, Weeden, Palmer, Quinn/Cassel, Foles, Skelton/Lindley/unhealthy Kolb

Probably comparable (depending on the day, most of these guys are pretty inconsistent...just like Fitz): Hasselbeck, Henne, Tannehill, Dalton, Vick (2012 version), Ponder, Newton, Bradford, Wilson, healthy Kolb

Edited by JM57, 03 December 2012 - 12:25 PM.

[section122]

He is average imo.   I would say worse than him are; gabbert/henne, kolb/skelton, wheeden, bradford (I don't care where he was drafted Rams should have traded him and drafted rg3), tannehill, sanchez, Locker, Quinn/Cassell, Carson Palmer, Nick Foles, and Ponder.

On a plain with Flacco, Dalton, and Alex Smith.

So I have him clearly better than 11 qbs and on a plain with 3 putting him somewhere between 17-21 which I think is reasonable.

Better than him without question; Brady, Brees, Roethlisberger, Manning x2, Cutler, Rodgers, Ryan, Freeman,

Early but likely better; Luck, rg3, Newton, Wilson

Probably better; Rivers, Stafford,  Schaub and Romo

Edited by section122, 03 December 2012 - 12:45 PM.

[NoSaint]

if you break it into quarters (1-8, 9-16, 17-24, 25-32) i think hes firmly in the 3rd. that would put him below average but not absolute disaster either.

as its easy to argue potential vs achievements, scheme, surrounding talent - i think its easiest to give an area/range.

section122, on 03 December 2012 - 12:33 PM, said:

He is average imo.   I would say worse than him are; gabbert/henne, kolb/skelton, wheeden, bradford (I don't care where he was drafted Rams should have traded him and drafted rg3), tannehill, sanchez, Locker, Quinn/Cassell, Carson Palmer, Nick Foles, and Ponder.

On a plain with Rivers, Flacco, Dalton, and Alex Smith.

So I have him clearly better than 11 qbs and on a plain with 3 putting him somewhere between 17-21 which I think is reasonable.

Better than him without question; Brady, Brees, Roethlisberger, Manning x2, Cutler, Rodgers, Ryan, Freeman,

Early but likely better; Luck, rg3, Newton, Wilson

Probably better; Rivers, Stafford,  Schaub and Romo

rivers listed twice,  the probably better group id be pretty much 100% confident about (though rivers seems to be descending) and id probably bump flacco up into that group, otherwise, more or less agree same idea as i was saying - rough groupings.

Edited by NoSaint, 03 December 2012 - 12:43 PM.

[section122]

NoSaint, on 03 December 2012 - 12:41 PM, said:

if you break it into quarters (1-8, 9-16, 17-24, 25-32) i think hes firmly in the 3rd. that would put him below average but not absolute disaster either.

as its easy to argue potential vs achievements, scheme, surrounding talent - i think its easiest to give an area/range.

rivers listed twice,  the probably better group id be pretty much 100% confident about (though rivers seems to be descending) and id probably bump flacco up into that group, otherwise, more or less agree same idea as i was saying - rough groupings.

Thanks I fixed it.  I'm up and down on Flacco, at home he is usually very good but on the road not so much.  Add to that the benefit of playing with the D he does and I have a hard time bumping him.  I thought to myself if we put Fitz on their team would they be better or worse and also conversely if their qb came to the Bills would the Bills be better or worse.  17-21 is where I ended up too
I had a real hard time with Rivers too.  He should be better than Fitz but I just don't see it translate.  I wonder if it is the lack of weapons and coaching but it appears something else has been happening these last 2 years.  Physical breakdown maybe?

[ACor58]

This debate needs to stop. Ryan Fitzpatrick is a back-up that is capable of putting up very good numbers in a pass happy offense when it plays bad defenses.

He falls somewhere between 30 and 32 on my list. In fact, the only worse situations right now:

Arizona (Skelton, Kolb, other guy)
Jets (Sanchez, McAlroy)

The super rookies (RG3, Luck, Wilson) are in a class by themself. The other young guys Locker and Cam Newton,  and rookies (Wheeden, Tanehill, etc.) still need a little more time to determine. All have showed promise in limited NFL careers and will mos likely be better than Fitz.

[Ed_Roch]

Just to be different I'll break it down into thirds. I'd rank him near the top of the bottom third.  Between 23 to 26. Will better receivers, may be a little higher.  Biggest issue I see are the wild throws.  If he could improve the accuracy, probably could live with the other issues like arm strength and would certainly become smaller problems.

[ACor58]

section122, on 03 December 2012 - 12:33 PM, said:

On a plain with Flacco, Dalton, and Alex Smith.

Not even close. If the Bills had any one of those three QBS we would be talking about the playoffs.

[section122]

ACor58, on 03 December 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

Not even close. If the Bills had any one of those three QBS we would be talking about the playoffs.

Do you actually watch other teams play?  Or do you only watch the Bills and then highlights?  To say that only the Jets and Cards have a worse qb situation makes me wonder if you even watch Bills games.  Or did Chad Henne show you he was the real deal yesterday?

[aristocrat]

There are probably 35-40 qb's better than him in the league

[jcbillsfan]

On his best days he is in the middle.    His won-loss record says it all.

[Glory Bound]

Way above average! We're talking about hat size here, right?

[JM57]

ACor58, on 03 December 2012 - 12:53 PM, said:

This debate needs to stop. Ryan Fitzpatrick is a back-up that is capable of putting up very good numbers in a pass happy offense when it plays bad defenses.

He falls somewhere between 30 and 32 on my list. In fact, the only worse situations right now:

Arizona (Skelton, Kolb, other guy)
Jets (Sanchez, McAlroy)

The super rookies (RG3, Luck, Wilson) are in a class by themself. The other young guys Locker and Cam Newton,  and rookies (Wheeden, Tanehill, etc.) still need a little more time to determine. All have showed promise in limited NFL careers and will mos likely be better than Fitz.

You're doing yourself a disservice by lumping Wilson in with Luck and RG3. Has he been good for a rookie? yes. Has he been winning the games? Not so much. That team lives and dies by the D and the run game. Evidence? 12 starts, only 3 games with > 30 attempts. If the defense allows more than 20 points, the Seahawks are 1-3 (the win being over the Patriots, which was arguably Wilson's best game along with yesterday). He's been solid, but unspectacular. RG3 and Luck on the other hand...well, they've been just flat out spectacular.

[bobobonators]

ACor58, on 03 December 2012 - 12:53 PM, said:

This debate needs to stop. Ryan Fitzpatrick is a back-up that is capable of putting up very good numbers in a pass happy offense when it plays bad defenses.

He falls somewhere between 30 and 32 on my list. In fact, the only worse situations right now:

Arizona (Skelton, Kolb, other guy)
Jets (Sanchez, McAlroy)

The super rookies (RG3, Luck, Wilson) are in a class by themself. The other young guys Locker and Cam Newton,  and rookies (Wheeden, Tanehill, etc.) still need a little more time to determine. All have showed promise in limited NFL careers and will mos likely be better than Fitz.

section122, on 03 December 2012 - 12:57 PM, said:

Do you actually watch other teams play?  Or do you only watch the Bills and then highlights?  To say that only the Jets and Cards have a worse qb situation makes me wonder if you even watch Bills games.  Or did Chad Henne show you he was the real deal yesterday?

LOL..it's pointless to argue with people like him.

[Like A Mofo]

ACor58, on 03 December 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

Not even close. If the Bills had any one of those three QBS we would be talking about the playoffs.

Alex Smith? Does the 49ers elite defense, elite TE, very good WR's and stout Ol come with him?

[CodeMonkey]

Williams & Williams, on 03 December 2012 - 01:24 PM, said:

Alex Smith? Does the 49ers elite defense, elite TE, very good WR's and stout Ol come with him?

That will always be the answer for some.  That you aren't comparing apples to apples due to the other factors.
And it is of course true to a point.  But simply watch Fitz throw the ball more than 10 yards then watch some others.

[yungmack]

I wonder just how much attention Fitz's critics pay to the other QBs around the league.  Because of where I live -- Los Angeles -- I am afflicted with more Raiders, Rams and Chargers games than you'd ever want to watch, which naturally includes their divisional rivals.  And one thing that this seemingly endless repetion has given me is lots of exposure to QBs who probably don't get nearly as much national game exposure as Romo, Vick, Eli, RG3, Brady or Rodgers (mostly this is because of the entrenched bias towards the NFCE, Green Bay & the Pats).  And it's only after watching them in multiple games that you can come close to a reasonably informed opinion.  Based on my viewing over, say, the last three years, it is my opinion that there are only 3 or maybe 4 truly elite QBs in the league (with maybe 2 more just starting out who it seems will be elite), and probably about 4 or 5 who are not very good at all.  The other 24 or 25 are in that grey area of "average," meaning they are capable of great performances one week and poor ones the next.  There is no sense in trying to rank this middle group as their individual performances are too erratic to say this one is better than that one over a 16 game season.  And that's the group Fitzpatrick belongs to. If you want, you could rank him 26th or 27th best.  Or you could rank him 5th through 10th.

Let me give an example of a QB who is generally considered one of the elite: Drew Brees.  As you know, he threw FIVE interceptions this week, and has generally been "off his game" all year.  Yet he's held up as being much much better than Fitz.  Now, considering that San Diego found him expendablde, an opinion which most of the league shared at the time, would it be fair to say that he wasn't always considered elite?  And if he's now supposedly elite, to what can we attribute that?  Well, considering that he was elevated by the media and fandom into elite status under the tutelage of Sean Payton, and that he's having an off year in the absence of Payton, could not the case be made that the real difference in Brees' career has been coaching rather than some innate "elite-ness"?  So if Brees was once considered to be a resident of that vast "average" level of QBs, and even thought to be in the bottom 5 or 6, and yet now is considered elite, does this suggest that other supposedly "average" QBs have greatness in them if only they have the good fortune to hook up with a coach who can bring that latent ability out of them?

I don't know whether or not Fitz is one of those guys but I don't think he'll ever even have that opportunity so long as Chan is this head coach.  While it's true that Gailey rescued his career and has been doggedly loyal to him, I have a growing conviction that Chan's play calling is the major cause for offensive failure, and a significant factor in Fitz's erratic performances. His penchant for head-scratching decisions is too widely discussed around here to need me to list some of them.  In order for me to come to a more definitive judgment about Fitzpatrick, I'd like to see him operate as his own play caller for the rest of the season.  Because he hasn't been allowed to do that up to now, I have no factual basis to believe we'd see an improved offensive.  But I have a feeling that he's smart enough to not have CJ on the bench on the goal line, or to call a play that puts Brad Smith in at QB at critical points.  Or to go with an empty backfield on the opponents two yard line.

Bottom line for me is that those of you who think Fitz is a bottom-dwelling bum simply do not realize just how average the vast majority of QBs are in this league.  And in that average category I would include several QBs who are considered elite.

[peterpan]

Below average, easily bottom third of the league as far as starters go, likely even bottom 5.

Jax, Ariz, Jets, KC.

I can't think of any other team worse off at QB than the Bills.

(I thought about Tenn for a while but their backup -Hasselback - is better than our starter)

Edited by peterpan, 03 December 2012 - 02:19 PM.

[Nervous Guy]

Is Fitz rank?   Yes indeed...conspicuously and outrageously bad or reprehensible.

[Ryan L Billz]

bottom 20%


i go with 4 out of every 5 qb's have him beat.