View Single Post
11-26-2012, 01:31 PM
Embrace The Suck
SackTastic's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,274
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Pondslider View Post
Fitzpatrick is neither Kelly, nor Miller. Jackson and Fitzpatrick have almost identical career QB ratings. What is realistically the best case scenario if Fitzpatrick starts the rest of the year? Two or 3 wins against some bad teams? It's not that Jackson is the savior or that he will definitely win 5 games in a row, but that we know Fitzpatrick won't. He's never won more than 3 games in a row in the NFL. History says he's not going to run the table. So what's the point? We've seen this all before. Your logic is similar to Chan's whole "Jackson can't start because Fitzpatrick has to get the 1st team reps because he has to start" thing. Worst case scenario is Jackson is completely terrible and the Bills lose out. Chan gets fired and they get a better draft pick. Sounds just about ideal.
I wasn't implying that Fitz is Kelly, or Miller for that matter. It's the larger point; the most popular guy in town is the backup.

This is not a good team with Fitz. It's a worse team with Jackson. That's my logic.

Put your best team on the field every week. Don't tank for draft picks. If you want to make the argument that Jackson is BETTER than Fitz, and that's why he should start, then ok. I'll listen to that. Probably won't agree, but it's reasonable.

Saying Jackson should start because 'it can't be any worse' is a non starter for me.

SackTastic is offline