2 weeks in, what teams already need a change at QB?

[Chinook]

Which is exactly what you did when you threw out the "they were 9th in passing and 4000 yards is nothing to look down upon" nonsense. Couple of things:

-4000yds may be nothing to look down upon, but it's obviously no longer something to look up to, either--especially when the likes of Tony Romo, Matt Stafford, and other BETTER inconsistent QBs do it all the time.

-Freeman was 19th in QB rating LAST YEAR AND HAS BEEN THE LAST IN HIS DIVISION FOR 3 STRAIGHT YEARS. But keep on cheery-picking stats to support ol' Sambo.

btw, stop bringing up 2010, he's been ridiculously unclutch and inconsistent (on his best days) since that season. As for 2012, a lot of empty stats there. 27-17 OMGZZZ! Fitzpatrick had 24 and 16 with only a b/u running back and a one-legged receiver last year. He also had a better QBR.

I'm telling it like it is and you tell it like it might be.

I didn't "throw out" those stats. I brought them up since you seemed to be arguing that he's been awful. You aren't awful if you're the statistical equal to two quarterbacks who just got big contract extensions. Also 19th in the NFL isn't terrible and needing to be replaced immediately. It's mediocre ... which is what I've been saying this whole time. You seem to think that 32nd is the same thing as 19th, and it's not.

No, Freeman has not been "ridiculously unclutch." That shows that you didn't actually watch Tampa last season. It's like saying he's been unclutch so far this season. He played very well on both of the offense's final drives so far. It wasn't he to hit Smith out of bounds, or who missed the field goal and let Brees march down the field. That's why I said the team has lost it's killer instinct. Freeman's been the same in the fourth quarter; the difference is the rest of the team fails to do their parts closing out games.

You're not telling it like it is. You're telling it like you think it is. You think it's like that because you've already made up your mind that it's Freeman's fault that the Bucs can't win without looking at what is actually going on. I AM telling it like it is. I said Freeman is mediocre, and the numbers bear that out. You seem to think I keep saying he's been good, and I keep stressing that I don't think that. But I also say that the Bucs best chance to win this year is hoping that Freeman has a good year. That is telling it like it is. What's not is saying that they should abort the season after barely losing two games.

[spurraider21]

Carson Palmer is better than Josh Freeman at this point in time

[Chinook]

7 points of offense yesterday (23 total on the season). If that's not putting your team in a position to win I don't know what is.

You seem not to. Putting a team in a position to win is literally driving them down the field and setting up a field goal with less than a minute left. That's pretty much what Freeman has done for the last two weeks. No one is saying that he's taken over the game and put on a passing clinic. But he has stepped up in the big moments.

[Holden_Caulfield]

i'd take freeman on the jags, at least he can stand tall and take hits.

[Chief Brody]

I didn't "throw out" those stats. I brought them up since you seemed to be arguing that he's been awful. You aren't awful if you're the statistical equal to two quarterbacks who just got big contract extensions. Also 19th in the NFL isn't terrible and needing to be replaced immediately. It's mediocre ... which is what I've been saying this whole time. You seem to think that 32nd is the same thing as 19th, and it's not.

No, Freeman has not been "ridiculously unclutch." That shows that you didn't actually watch Tampa last season. It's like saying he's been unclutch so far this season. He played very well on both of the offense's final drives so far. It wasn't he to hit Smith out of bounds, or who missed the field goal and let Brees march down the field. That's why I said the team has lost it's killer instinct. Freeman's been the same in the fourth quarter; the difference is the rest of the team fails to do their parts closing out games.

You're not telling it like it is. You're telling it like you think it is. You think it's like that because you've already made up your mind that it's Freeman's fault that the Bucs can't win without looking at what is actually going on. I AM telling it like it is. I said Freeman is mediocre, and the numbers bear that out. You seem to think I keep saying he's been good, and I keep stressing that I don't think that. But I also say that the Bucs best chance to win this year is hoping that Freeman has a good year. That is telling it like it is. What's not is saying that they should abort the season after barely losing two games.

Which is why you can't be taken seriously. You don't know anything about what Glennon could be--you only assume (which is what I did about him). All that's known is he has a big arm and has some upside. We know what Freeman is--4+ years of evidence tells us what he is.

You should be a GM. The "hope" and pray strategy you outlined is a great take

[Chief Brody]

You seem not to. Putting a team in a position to win is literally driving them down the field and setting up a field goal with less than a minute left. That's pretty much what Freeman has done for the last two weeks. No one is saying that he's taken over the game and put on a passing clinic. But he has stepped up in the big moments.

God bless fanbois

[Chief Brody]

Carson Palmer is better than Josh Freeman at this point in time

Stoney Case is too.

[spurraider21]

You seem not to. Putting a team in a position to win is literally driving them down the field and setting up a field goal with less than a minute left. That's pretty much what Freeman has done for the last two weeks. No one is saying that he's taken over the game and put on a passing clinic. But he has stepped up in the big moments.

so basically tebow

[Chinook]

I agree Freeman is better than Boller, but it's funny to watch you go back to the stats argument to support your cause when you villified it earlier. You have a thing for Freeman, I get it. Game tape--and coincidentally, stats--say he's .

27 and 17 with one of the better offensive lines and running attacks. Well I am over ingwhelmed. Nobody does less with more than Josh Freeman. Give Cam Newton Doug Martin, Vincent Jackson, Mike Williams, et al. Blaine Gabbert is terrible but at least he can say the best option he's ever had is Cecil Shorts.

5 years of no progress in today's passing league tells me you're not a quality NFL starter.

Tampa had a bad offensive line. They lost Joseph in pre-season and Nicks mid-season. They had to replace Trueblood at RT and really wanted to get rid of Zuttah at center. They played decently all things considered, but they struggled in pass protection. Meanwhile, the Panthers have a stable of running backs who are each better than anyone Freeman's ever had outside of Muscle Hampster. They also have a better line. Not the best example. Gabbert has Blackmon as well as Shorts. Sure, Jackson is better than both of them, but it's not like receiver corp is the Jag's problem.

I said that some people "just" look at stats. I brought them up as a easy-to-see example in addition to talking about things that only come from actually watching the game and the general national opinion of him. You just sit on your haunches and declare 4,000 yards terrible and pretend that the whole world agrees with you and that you don't need to provide any more evidence for your claims.

Also, I didn't just cite Boller's stats. He pretty much checked out mentally when the Ravens fans booed him after he got injured his second season. Dude had no for ude.

[Chief Brody]

You seem not to. Putting a team in a position to win is literally driving them down the field and setting up a field goal with less than a minute left. That's pretty much what Freeman has done for the last two weeks. No one is saying that he's taken over the game and put on a passing clinic. But he has stepped up in the big moments.

When you go to the Tebow defense, you're an exposed fanboi and are deemed incapable of rational thought

[Chinook]

so basically tebow

This year, pretty much. Even so, was the 2011 Bronco's biggest problem that they had Tebow at quarterback? Seems like they did just fine. Then they replaced him in the off-season.

[Chinook]

When you go to the Tebow defense, you're an exposed fanboi and are deemed incapable of rational thought

No. Putting your team in a position to win literally means that. It doesn't mean having a good game in general, like you seem to be asserting.

Tebow put his team in a position to win, but he wasn't a long-term solution. The Broncos had a chance to upgrade in the off-season, and they took it. They didn't just bench him (even though Elway really wanted to) just because.

And you're the one with the minority view on this. I'm saying Freeman is better than Glennon. Almost everyone with a shred of objectivity agrees with me there.

[Chief Brody]

Tampa had a bad offensive line. They lost Joseph in pre-season and Nicks mid-season. They had to replace Trueblood at RT and really wanted to get rid of Zuttah at center. They played decently all things considered, but they struggled in pass protection. Meanwhile, the Panthers have a stable of running backs who are each better than anyone Freeman's ever had outside of Muscle Hampster. They also have a better line. Not the best example. Gabbert has Blackmon as well as Shorts. Sure, Jackson is better than both of them, but it's not like receiver corp is the Jag's problem.

I said that some people "just" look at stats. I brought them up as a easy-to-see example in addition to talking about things that only come from actually watching the game and the general national opinion of him. You just sit on your haunches and declare 4,000 yards terrible and pretend that the whole world agrees with you and that you don't need to provide any more evidence for your claims.

Also, I didn't just cite Boller's stats. He pretty much checked out mentally when the Ravens fans booed him after he got injured his second season. Dude had no for ude.

Holy what a dishonest fanboi you are. Freeman was the 3rd least-sacked full-time starter last year behind the Mannings and had one of the best running attacks in the game. Now you'll credit Freeman with avoiding these "offensive line struggles" that you've conjured up by saying he avoided all those--despite his notoriety for sitting in the pocket for an eternity.

2-3 mediocre backs (mediocre at best considering their production since 2009) is not better than a Top-5 RB. Don't be dumber than you're already making yourself out to be in this thread

[Chief Brody]

No. Putting your team in a position to win literally means that. It doesn't mean having a good game in general, like you seem to be asserting.

Tebow put his team in a position to win, but he wasn't a long-term solution. The Broncos had a chance to upgrade in the off-season, and they took it. They didn't just bench him (even though Elway really wanted to) just because.

And you're the one with the minority view on this. I'm saying Freeman is better than Glennon. Almost everyone with a shred of objectivity agrees with me there.

You mean all the black commentators on NFL Network? Yeah, they're all on your side, buddy

[Chief Brody]

When you're statistically the worst QB in your division for 3 years (and definitely going on a 4th), it's time to make a change. Most NFL GMs don't have the luxury of sitting idly by watching re-runs.

[Chinook]

Holy what a dishonest fanboi you are. Freeman was the 3rd least-sacked full-time starter last year behind the Mannings and had one of the best running attacks in the game. Now you'll credit Freeman with avoiding these "offensive line struggles" that you've conjured up by saying he avoided all those--despite his notoriety for sitting in the pocket for an eternity.

2-3 mediocre backs (mediocre at best considering their production since 2009) is not better than a Top-5 RB. Don't be dumber than you're already making yourself out to be in this thread

First, I didn't say they were better than Martin. I said they were better than anyone Freeman ever had besides Martin. Before criticizing people for their lack of intelligence, fix that reading comprehension.

I also didn't say anything about the Bucs not having a good rushing attack. They did, due to Martin being a great workhorse. But Schiano actually got criticized for not using Blount enough last year.

Anyway, I digress. You seem keep misunderstanding everything I'm saying. No one in this thread has claimed Freeman is a good quarterback. I've said two things: first that Freeman is not terrible (and the only argument you have that he is is just your opinion) and second that staying with him is most likely the best course of action for the Bucs this season. Somehow, you glean from that that I am saying Freeman deserves an extension and that nothing has been his fault. There's a big gap between not agreeing that Freeman needs to be benched in favor of a rookie and being a fan boy of his.

[Chinook]

When you're statistically the worst QB in your division for 3 years (and definitely going on a 4th), it's time to make a change. Most NFL GMs don't have the luxury of sitting idly by watching re-runs.

Yeah, and they can make a change next season. Being 19th in the league last season doesn't scream immediate overhaul to me.

[Chinook]

Incidentally, is anyone else getting posts deleted and new posts (from other posters) popping in later? It's weird.

[Chief Brody]

Yeah, and they can make a change next season. Being 19th in the league last season doesn't scream immediate overhaul to me.

It doesn't take 5 years for a QB to develop. When you can't break into the upper half of the league in half a decade, then yeah--an immediate overhaul is needed. He had every weapon at his disposal last year, finished last in his division in QBR, and 19th in the league. That's acceptable if you're A: a rookie or 2nd year guy or B: a proven winner that's not necessarily a stat .

When you make the Saints D look like the 85 Bears, it's time to ing go

[Chief Brody]

First, I didn't say they were better than Martin. I said they were better than anyone Freeman ever had besides Martin. Before criticizing people for their lack of intelligence, fix that reading comprehension.

I also didn't say anything about the Bucs not having a good rushing attack. They did, due to Martin being a great workhorse. But Schiano actually got criticized for not using Blount enough last year.

Anyway, I digress. You seem keep misunderstanding everything I'm saying. No one in this thread has claimed Freeman is a good quarterback. I've said two things: first that Freeman is not terrible (and the only argument you have that he is is just your opinion) and second that staying with him is most likely the best course of action for the Bucs this season. Somehow, you glean from that that I am saying Freeman deserves an extension and that nothing has been his fault. There's a big gap between not agreeing that Freeman needs to be benched in favor of a rookie and being a fan boy of his.

First, you said those stable of backs are better than anyone Freeman has had since Martin. Well that's a whole 3 years, and didn't the Bucs outrush Carolina in 2010? Not sure, but if so that puts it at 2-2--so, wrong again.

Second, since you didn't address the allegations that you conjured up the Bucs' offensive line struggles, I take it you concede that point. Injuries and struggles are 2 entirely different things. The Bills have had injuries along their line the last 2 years but they've been a damn good unit regardless.

Yes, you're just misunderstood. You can't see how sticking with a losing formula is stupid and ultimately wastes another year.

[Chinook]

It doesn't take 5 years for a QB to develop. When you can't break into the upper half of the league in half a decade, then yeah--an immediate overhaul is needed. He had every weapon at his disposal last year, finished last in his division in QBR, and 19th in the league. That's acceptable if you're A: a rookie or 2nd year guy or B: a proven winner that's not necessarily a stat .

When you make the Saints D look like the 85 Bears, it's time to ing go

I don't get it. So what if it doesn't take five years to a quarterback to develop? We're not talking about extending Freeman. We're talking about keeping him this season. If he's the best quarterback on the roster, then he should play. In general, 19th is not horrible. It's below average, but only barely. There were 13 worse quarterbacks out there last year. That means something. If Freeman is 19 in QBR this season, the Bucs should be a playoff team. If the Bucs passing defense were 19th last season, the Bucs would have at least been .500. The Bucs can win with 2012 Freeman if they clean up their penalties. But are they likely to win if Glennon comes in and is 28th or worse? No.

And would you please stop repping division QBR? What does that even have to do with anything? It's not like they're H2H records or something (which is actually concerning).

[Chinook]

First, you said those stable of backs are better than anyone Freeman has had since Martin. Well that's a whole 3 years, and didn't the Bucs outrush Carolina in 2010? Not sure, but if so that puts it at 2-2--so, wrong again.

Second, since you didn't address the allegations that you conjured up the Bucs' offensive line struggles, I take it you concede that point. Injuries and struggles are 2 entirely different things. The Bills have had injuries along their line the last 2 years but they've been a damn good unit regardless.

Yes, you're just misunderstood. You can't see how sticking with a losing formula is stupid and ultimately wastes another year.

So the year that the Bucs got more production out of the their backs than Carolina did out of theirs, Tampa finished 10-6 with Freeman having a QBR of 96.2, and you consider than a plus for your argument? I was actually referring to the talent of the backs rather than the stats they put up, but since that's ambiguous, I don't have a problem saying I was wrong about 2010, whatever satisfaction that gives you.

The line played decently (16th and 17th in run and pass blocking according to PFF), but they weren't world-beaters. I fail to see how 16th is "one of the better" while 19th is incredibly horrible.

The Bucs don't have "another year." They just have this year. The way things are going for Schiano, he needs to produce this season. If Freeman is going to help him do that more than Glennon, he has to keep him in.

[Chief Brody]

I don't get it. So what if it doesn't take five years to a quarterback to develop? We're not talking about extending Freeman. We're talking about keeping him this season. If he's the best quarterback on the roster, then he should play. In general, 19th is not horrible. It's below average, but only barely. There were 13 worse quarterbacks out there last year. That means something. If Freeman is 19 in QBR this season, the Bucs should be a playoff team. If the Bucs passing defense were 19th last season, the Bucs would have at least been .500. The Bucs can win with 2012 Freeman if they clean up their penalties. But are they likely to win if Glennon comes in and is 28th worse? No.

And would you please stop repping division QBR? What does that even have to do with anything? It's not like they're H2H records or something (which is actually concerning).

You're talking about delaying the inevitable for the off-chance TB somehow goes 10-4 the rest of the season. Also, stop claiming Glennon is such a worse option when in reality you have no ing clue what he is. He's not Josh Freeman, which right now (and for over 75% of his career) is a good thing.
You brought up stats first, so don't go crying when I give you some. He is statistically the worst QB in the division--that's kind of important in a QB-driven league. He's been the face of a team that's visibly quit the last 2 seasons. 10 game losing streak in 2011, losers of 5/6 to finish 2012--lone win in the finale against Atlanta's B-team.

Give the white guy who doesn't have the 1000-yd stare a crack at an offense with such a sweet display of weapons. Give the fans something different than a loser and a quitter

[Chief Brody]

So the year that the Bucs got more production out of the their backs than Carolina did out of theirs, Tampa finished 10-6 with Freeman having a QBR of 96.2, and you consider than a plus for your argument? I was actually referring to the talent of the backs rather than the stats they put up, but since that's ambiguous, I don't have a problem saying I was wrong about 2010, whatever satisfaction that gives you.

The line played decently (16th and 17th in run and pass blocking according to PFF), but they weren't world-beaters. I fail to see how 16th is "one of the better" while 19th is incredibly horrible.

The Bucs don't have "another year." They just have this year. The way things are going for Schiano, he needs to produce this season. If Freeman is going to help him do that more than Glennon, he has to keep him in.

Okay, so in summation your entire argument for the Bucs keeping Freeman in there is "we can only hope he gets better" and/or "I guess it could be worse?"

No thanks, I'd try to re-energize the team with new blood while the season is still young. If it doesn't equate to wins then at least the young gun is getting valuable work. We sure as know Freeman's not taking them to the playoffs (if you disagree then I'd love to make a wager with you).

[Chief Brody]

It comes down to this: Chinook, would you be willing to bet $500 on Freeman taking them to the playoffs? Someone should ask Schiano if he's willing to bet his job on it. If the answer is no, then there's no reason Freeman should be in there.