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

[Chinook]

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

The Bucs have to play for the oft chance. Schiano doesn't have a year to waste on a young quarterback. That's why he isn't even letting Glennon be the backup. I'm not claiming I know what Glennon is going to do (I've said he COULD be the next Flacco for all I know). But he is likely to struggle and put up worse numbers than Freeman did last season. Again, being 19th means there are 13 or more worse quarterbacks out there starting games. Glennon could be better this season, but he's not likely to be.

I am not crying about stats. I just think that stat is pointless. Being the worst quarterback in a division with Brees, Ryan and first-overall pick Newton is not a bad thing. It's like lambasting the 2011 Browns for being the worst defense in their division, when they ranked 10 in the league.

The whole point of what I'm saying is that the Bucs could get a lot worse than they are. Sure, they could get better; but that's not very likely. You seem to think that Glennon almost has to be better than Freeman, and we disagree.

[Chinook]

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).

The summation of my argument is that the Bucs should do everything in their power to get to the playoffs this season. That means cutting Freeman loose and not running on 3 and 7 and missing a 50+ yard field goal. If Freeman plays like he did last season, the Bucs will be a lot better. The NFC is better, so I don't know if they make the playoffs, but I think it's very possible.

But because they won't, I don't think the Bucs are a playoff team. I would not take your bet, but Schiano should, since he'll lose his job in any scenario that doesn't involve Freeman getting there. You think Freeman is the black mark on the team, but he's not (or at least not the only one). You really should look up how bad things are getting between Schiano and his players right now. If they're really on Freeman's side, then replacing him is not going to motivate the team at all.

[Chief Brody]

The Bucs have to play for the oft chance. Schiano doesn't have a year to waste on a young quarterback. That's why he isn't even letting Glennon be the backup. I'm not claiming I know what Glennon is going to do (I've said he COULD be the next Flacco for all I know). But he is likely to struggle and put up worse numbers than Freeman did last season. Again, being 19th means there are 13 or more worse quarterbacks out there starting games. Glennon could be better this season, but he's not likely to be.

I am not crying about stats. I just think that stat is pointless. Being the worst quarterback in a division with Brees, Ryan and first-overall pick Newton is not a bad thing. It's like lambasting the 2011 Browns for being the worst defense in their division, when they ranked 10 in the league.

The whole point of what I'm saying is that the Bucs could get a lot worse than they are. Sure, they could get better; but that's not very likely. You seem to think that Glennon almost has to be better than Freeman, and we disagree.

Okay change divisions: I'd take Vick, Manning, RG3, and Romo over Freeman in the East. I'd take Rodgers, Stafford, and Cutler over him in the North. Unquestionably the least accomplished QB in the NFC West too. So he beats out Ponder in the NFC. yay.

In the NFC East, Manuel and Tannehill look good so far, but they are very early returns. Geno looks like the next Josh Freeman, but he's probably worse. He could start on the ans, Jags, Raiders, and Browns--all teams with incredibly inept QB play. He'd be a b/u or 3rd stringer on every other NFL team not mentioned.

[Chief Brody]

The summation of my argument is that the Bucs should do everything in their power to get to the playoffs this season. That means cutting Freeman loose and not running on 3 and 7 and missing a 50+ yard field goal. If Freeman plays like he did last season, the Bucs will be a lot better. The NFC is better, so I don't know if they make the playoffs, but I think it's very possible.

But because they won't, I don't think the Bucs are a playoff team. I would not take your bet, but Schiano should, since he'll lose his job in any scenario that doesn't involve Freeman getting there. You think Freeman is the black mark on the team, but he's not (or at least not the only one). You really should look up how bad things are getting between Schiano and his players right now. If they're really on Freeman's side, then replacing him is not going to motivate the team at all.

Yup, it's really Schiano's fault. It was Schiano's fault when the team quit in 2011 too.

[Chief Brody]

If you were a coach or GM Bledsoe would've gotten his job back when he was healthy in 2001. Judging by your rationale, it's safe to say Tommy Maddox would've been Pittsburgh's starter for a couple more years too.

[Chinook]

The Vikings made the playoffs with Ponder, but his backup was so awful that they got worked over by the Packers. The Chiefs made the 2010 playoffs with Cassel, and his backup was even worse. It's not easy to replace below-average quarterbacks mid-season. Usually, the backups aren't starting for a reason (especially third-stringers). It can get worse, and it usually does.

I don't have too much of an issue with your list, but that doesn't mean that Glennon is going to come in a be an upgrade.

[Chinook]

Yup, it's really Schiano's fault. It was Schiano's fault when the team quit in 2011 too.

Wait, that was Freeman's fault? Are you under some illusion that Raheem Morris was a good coach?

Anyhow, it can be both of their faults. The whole point is that if players like Freeman more than Schiano, then benching Freeman is not going to make them like Schiano anymore.

If you were a coach or GM Bledsoe would've gotten his job back when he was healthy in 2001. Judging by your rationale, it's safe to say Tommy Maddox would've been Pittsburgh's starter for a couple more years too.

I don't even...

You act like Glennon's already proven to be better. If he had come in for Freeman for a few weeks and looked awesome and got wins, then it would be obvious he could get the job done. But it's not. Neither Brady or Roethlisberger started over their veteran challengers for the of it. They came in due to necessity and then produced. If anything, they're counter examples to your point.

[Chief Brody]

The Vikings made the playoffs with Ponder, but his backup was so awful that they got worked over by the Packers. The Chiefs made the 2010 playoffs with Cassel, and his backup was even worse. It's not easy to replace below-average quarterbacks mid-season. Usually, the backups aren't starting for a reason (especially third-stringers). It can get worse, and it usually does.

I don't have too much of an issue with your list, but that doesn't mean that Glennon is going to come in a be an upgrade.

At what point did I say he was going to be an immediate upgrade? He's new blood, which is what that team with a 2-year quitting stench needs. If he plays well and TB finishes 8-8 with excitement for next year, maybe Schiano keeps his job. If your whole argument is "what's in the best interest for Schiano?," then you might have somewhat of a point. If the argument is "what's best for the franchise?", well...that's just too ing easy.

[Chief Brody]

Wait, that was Freeman's fault? Are you under some illusion that Raheem Morris was a good coach?

Anyhow, it can be both of their faults. The whole point is that if players like Freeman more than Schiano, then benching Freeman is not going to make them like Schiano anymore.



I don't even...

You act like Glennon's already proven to be better. If he had come in for Freeman for a few weeks and looked awesome and got wins, then it would be obvious he could get the job done. But it's not. Neither Brady or Roethlisberger started over their veteran challengers for the of it. They came in due to necessity and then produced. If anything, they're counter examples to your point.

Are you under some illusion that 2 straight years of quitting is somehow not his fault? When he gets coach #2 fired and still fails to make the playoffs, will you stfu and get with the program?

[Chinook]

At what point did I say he was going to be an immediate upgrade? He's new blood, which is what that team with a 2-year quitting stench needs. If he plays well and TB finishes 8-8 with excitement for next year, maybe Schiano keeps his job. If your whole argument is "what's in the best interest for Schiano?," then you might have somewhat of a point. If the argument is "what's best for the franchise?", well...that's just too ing easy.

We're both talking about major hypotheticals here. You're saying if Glennon turns out to be better, the Bucs will have hope for next year. And I don't think he will and that starting him will almost certainly cost Schiano his job, especially if the players quit on him. I think that if Freeman plays like he did last year, the Bucs will be compe ive for a playoff spot. You don't think so.

To me, I think the franchise needs to put it all in to making the playoffs this season and completely blowing up their braintrust if it fails. I would rather them get a top-tier quarterback in the draft than try to ride with Glennon if Freeman can't get it done. But there are indeed scenarios where having Glennon as the young quarterback make sense. But that's only if they could get an starting-caliber quarterback in free agency so they don't have to hand the reigns over to Glennon simply because he's the only one there. If there was any single thing that torpedoed the Bucs' roster, it's the lack of competent vets to compete with the team's high draft picks.

Are you under some illusion that 2 straight years of quitting is somehow not his fault? When he gets coach #2 fired and still fails to make the playoffs, will you stfu and get with the program?

It's like you're being purposefully obtuse. I expect them BOTH to go this off-season. I don't think the Bucs should keep either of them. Schiano's been terrible, and Freeman is nearly checked out on the team. That being said, Freeman loved Morris, and he wasn't one of the players who quit on him. You act like he's Deron Williams or something.

[Chief Brody]

It's all speculation, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and say Mike Glennon produces more than 125 yards and 7 points at home against the Saints. Crazy, I know. Just looked it up, the defense set up that lone TD with an interception in NO territory

and you have the gall to put that loss on the Bucs D. What a shameful, shameful display by you today.

[spurraider21]

I think the Raiders would prefer to evaluate Pryor than play Freeman tbh. We know what Freeman is. This is his 5th year in the NFL and 4th as a full time starter. He also started for the last 2/3 of his rookie season. By now he is what he is. Can he string some good games and make some good throws? Maybe. But right now he's got an awesome running back, a legit #1 receiver, a high end #2 receiver, and still isn't doing much. The Bucs aren't going to be making the playoffs in that division anyway. Whats the upside in playing Freeman? I'm with Brody on this one. Just get Glennon's feet wet since there won't be expectations. Let him build rapport with the offense. Better than throwing him in next year with high pressure during his first actual shot at playing time.

[Chief Brody]

We're both talking about major hypotheticals here. You're saying if Glennon turns out to be better, the Bucs will have hope for next year. And I don't think he will and that starting him will almost certainly cost Schiano his job, especially if the players quit on him. I think that if Freeman plays like he did last year, the Bucs will be compe ive for a playoff spot. You don't think so.

To me, I think the franchise needs to put it all in to making the playoffs this season and completely blowing up their braintrust if it fails. I would rather them get a top-tier quarterback in the draft than try to ride with Glennon if Freeman can't get it done. But there are indeed scenarios where having Glennon as the young quarterback make sense. But that's only if they could get an starting-caliber quarterback in free agency so they don't have to hand the reigns over to Glennon simply because he's the only one there. If there was any single thing that torpedoed the Bucs' roster, it's the lack of competent vets to compete with the team's high draft picks.



It's like you're being purposefully obtuse. I expect them BOTH to go this off-season. I don't think the Bucs should keep either of them. Schiano's been terrible, and Freeman is nearly checked out on the team. That being said, Freeman loved Morris, and he wasn't one of the players who quit on him. You act like he's Deron Williams or something.

Of course he said that...why would he purposefully cop to tanking? (even though it was obvious).

[spurraider21]

Freeman's teammates no longer believe in him. He wasn't voted captain after serving that position for a few years. The news of him missing a team meeting doesn't speak volumes either. They need to move on. He'd be a high end backup

[Chief Brody]

We're both talking about major hypotheticals here. You're saying if Glennon turns out to be better, the Bucs will have hope for next year. And I don't think he will and that starting him will almost certainly cost Schiano his job, especially if the players quit on him. I think that if Freeman plays like he did last year, the Bucs will be compe ive for a playoff spot. You don't think so.

To me, I think the franchise needs to put it all in to making the playoffs this season and completely blowing up their braintrust if it fails. I would rather them get a top-tier quarterback in the draft than try to ride with Glennon if Freeman can't get it done. But there are indeed scenarios where having Glennon as the young quarterback make sense. But that's only if they could get an starting-caliber quarterback in free agency so they don't have to hand the reigns over to Glennon simply because he's the only one there. If there was any single thing that torpedoed the Bucs' roster, it's the lack of competent vets to compete with the team's high draft picks.



It's like you're being purposefully obtuse. I expect them BOTH to go this off-season. I don't think the Bucs should keep either of them. Schiano's been terrible, and Freeman is nearly checked out on the team. That being said, Freeman loved Morris, and he wasn't one of the players who quit on him. You act like he's Deron Williams or something.

Look, I've already explained to you why your rationale is stupid. First you blamed the defense, then you tried to make excuses for Freeman saying that his 7 pts (basically defensive points too) and 125 yds put them in a position to win. Then you went to the Tebow defense, then semantics.

If something looks like and smells like , it's probably . Got 4+ year of mostly on game film.

[Chinook]

Of course he said that...why would he purposefully cop to tanking? (even though it was obvious).

I'm surprised you don't just think Freeman wasn't very good that year. He wasn't. He wasn't good when they won, and he wasn't much worse when they lost. If anything, he threw more interceptions in desperation.

Anyway, yes, the defense failed in the clutch. Does that mean that a better offensive performance would not have prevented that situation? Nope. But they don't have a right to point the finger at the offense when all they had to do was stop Brees once more. But really, what killed the Bucs was them not going for the first down on the 3rd and 7. They played for the field goal and missed it. It was a poor coaching decision that had just cost them the game (along with David's penalty) the week before. I know it's easy to say that Schiano should not have trusted Freeman to make that throw after the day he had, but Freeman had just converted two third and longs to get them to that point.

[Chinook]

Freeman's teammates no longer believe in him. He wasn't voted captain after serving that position for a few years. The news of him missing a team meeting doesn't speak volumes either. They need to move on. He'd be a high end backup

We already talked about that earlier in the thread. Apparently, the players called a players-only meeting a week or so ago because a fair number of them voted for Freeman and some felt Schiano rigged the vote. He denied it, and so did Freeman. But it was a strange case nonetheless.

[Chief Brody]

I'm surprised you don't just think Freeman wasn't very good that year. He wasn't. He wasn't good when they won, and he wasn't much worse when they lost. If anything, he threw more interceptions in desperation.

Anyway, yes, the defense failed in the clutch. Does that mean that a better offensive performance would not have prevented that situation? Nope. But they don't have a right to point the finger at the offense when all they had to do was stop Brees once more. But really, what killed the Bucs was them not going for the first down on the 3rd and 7. They played for the field goal and missed it. It was a poor coaching decision that had just cost them the game (along with David's penalty) the week before. I know it's easy to say that Schiano should not have trusted Freeman to make that throw after the day he had, but Freeman had just converted two third and longs to get them to that point.

As a friend, I'm telling you to stop this foolishness. Each post you make where it even insinuates blame on the defense is so intellectually dishonest it's almost criminal. 7 points (courtesy of the defense). Another 7 straight up scored by the defense. Freeman: 9/22, 125 yds, 1 td, 1 int. He was heinous and the definite culprit.

[spurraider21]

What is the point of continuing to play Freeman? Plain and simple. If its a lost season, you might as well lose it giving the youngin some experience. Its why the Raiders started Pryor and not Flynn

[Chinook]

Look, I've already explained to you why your rationale is stupid. First you blamed the defense, then you tried to make excuses for Freeman saying that his 7 pts (basically defensive points too) and 125 yds put them in a position to win. Then you went to the Tebow defense, then semantics.

If something looks like and smells like , it's probably . Got 4+ year of mostly on game film.

No. I said Freeman got the Bucs down the field on the last drive in a position to win. That's what the term means. You mean something completely different, and you are trying to twist the definition to mean that he was consistently good. He wasn't but he stepped up and the end of the game. The coach went conservative on third down, the kicker missed and the defense let Brees walk down the field. That doesn't absolve Freeman for his faults, but that does mean that blaming him solely for the loss (and especially calling him unclutch as you did when you started that whole line) is wrong.

Anyway, that had nothing to do with the post you quoted. You think Glennon's going to lead the Bucs to a .500 record or at least give them hope. I don't think so. I think they're best chance to do anything is to ride with Freeman this year and replace him in the draft. The fact that you seem to believe in Glennon and I don't does not make your point any more valid. We're talking bird in the hand versus two in the bush, but instead of there being two in the bush, there's an undisclosed number that's likely less than one.

[KoolAid Mans Brother]

This 3 page argument can be summed up in 1 sentence:

Josh Freeman sucks donkey and as long as the is the QB of the Bucs, the team is ed.

The end.

[Chinook]

As a friend, I'm telling you to stop this foolishness. Each post you make where it even insinuates blame on the defense is so intellectually dishonest it's almost criminal. 7 points (courtesy of the defense). Another 7 straight up scored by the defense. Freeman: 9/22, 125 yds, 1 td, 1 int. He was heinous and the definite culprit.

Don't forget the lost fumble.

You sound like Spurs fans who think Leonard deserves no responsibility for the Spurs losing Game 6. They act like his missed free throw doesn't matter just because he had a good game besides that. That's not how it works. If you fail in the clutch, then you deserve blame. The defense played well, but they also allowed the Saints to march down the field easily and score the game-winner. The offense succeeded in the clutch while the defense, special teams and coaching failed in the clutch. That's just as true as the fact that the offense failed for the other 55 minutes of the game.

[Chinook]

What is the point of continuing to play Freeman? Plain and simple. If its a lost season, you might as well lose it giving the youngin some experience. Its why the Raiders started Pryor and not Flynn

Freeman isn't Flynn, either. Plus, it's not a lost season for the Bucs yet. There's no reason why Tampa should feel they can't beat the Saints when they play them again. Atlanta has a loss, and Carolina has two already. Tampa just needs to get it together, whether that means bringing in Glennon or just fixing their penalites.

[Chief Brody]

What is the point of continuing to play Freeman? Plain and simple. If its a lost season, you might as well lose it giving the youngin some experience. Its why the Raiders started Pryor and not Flynn

"bu-bu-because they can still go 10-4 despite playing in a tacked division and with other tough opponents left. Here, I'll be very generous with their 2013 prognostications:
@NE, L
AZ, W
PHI, W
@ATL, L
Car, W
@Sea, L
Miami, W
ATL, L DET, W
@Car, W
Buf, W
SF, L
@STL, L
@NO, L

That's being extremely generous, especially considering there's a strong possibility they drop the Philly, Miami, Detroit, and one of the Carolina games.

So 7-9/8-8 is the best case scenario with Coach Killer...time to make a change.

[Chief Brody]

Freeman isn't Flynn, either. Plus, it's not a lost season for the Bucs yet. There's no reason why Tampa should feel they can't beat the Saints when they play them again. Atlanta has a loss, and Carolina has two already. Tampa just needs to get it together, whether that means bringing in Glennon or just fixing their penalites.

now I know you have a Freeman fathead