Ryan Fitzpatrick Remains Very High On Donald Jones

by Brian Galliford on Aug 16, 2011 1:15 PM EDT in Buffalo Bills Opinion

Ever since last week's trade of receiver Lee Evans to Baltimore, there has been some question as to who would emerge as the Buffalo Bills' new starting receiver opposite obvious No. 1 target Steve Johnson. Ryan Fitzpatrick has been strongly vocal about that topic since Evans' trade, and didn't change his stance in a Tuesday appearance on PFT Live with Mike Florio.

Asked by Florio who would be the starter opposite Johnson, Fitzpatrick mentioned briefly that Roscoe Parrish's role is likely to expand, then reverted back to singing the praises of second-year wideout Donald Jones - calling him a player that fans will have to "watch out for."

Increasingly, Jones has been the topic of ardent praise from his quarterback, and he was the nominal starter in the Bills' pre-season opening loss to the Chicago Bears (a game in which Parrish did not participate). Jones spent his rookie season as the fifth receiver - an undrafted free agent out of Youngstown State whose true impact was as a special teams player, but who also caught 18 passes for 213 yards and a touchdown.

Curiously, the one player who hasn't gotten a lot of attention in this race is David Nelson, who had the most promising statistical year of any young Bills receiver a year ago. Our question to you, Bills fans: are you comfortable with Jones getting the first shot at filling Evans' shoes?

Tweet Comment 72 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

no jones may have fitzys vote

my vote would be roosevelt

Calling anybody a "career Redskin" when Dan Snyder is the owner is laughable. That dude make moves like he's some kid trading football cards. -greenwood1921

by Gpluehri on Aug 16, 2011 1:21 PM EDT reply actions

Yes

I’m comfortable with Jones starting for one reason. If he struggles, we have Nelson, Easley, Davis, and Roosevelt. I’m confident that at least one of those guys will emerge as a guy that can fill the no. 2 void.

by KileyJ on Aug 16, 2011 1:22 PM EDT reply actions

I have a feeling we will see them all get a chance to start.

"This is what happens Larry!, This is what happens! "-Walter Sobchak" "Did we give up when the germans bombed pearl harbor!!??"-John Belushi

by BigEasyBillsKrewe on Aug 16, 2011 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions

Ok

So it sounds like you’re comfortable with him starting because he can be replaced by another guy fairly quickly? Doesn’t sound like a reason to start Jones so much as a reason to start any of them.

http://blogabills.wordpress.com/

by blogabills on Aug 16, 2011 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions

Right.

GO BLUE!!!

by Kumario! on Aug 16, 2011 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions

If Fitz likes him, they’re comfortable. Him and Stevie became comfortable. Should be good just saying, we have so much talent so I’m more worried about other positions

by KileyJ on Aug 16, 2011 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions

I like Nelson, personally, but I have a hard time envisioning him as the #2 guy. Jones has the physical attributes and skill, let’s just hope he puts it together.

"Slowly all the roles we act out become our identity. And in the end we are what we pretend to be." - Jerry Cantrell.

by stetzwebs on Aug 16, 2011 1:22 PM EDT reply actions

And to answer the question, no, I’m not comfortable with it. I think there’s a huge void on this team where Evans used to be, and I won’t be comfortable with any #2 until someone proves to me he can handle the #2 spot.

"Slowly all the roles we act out become our identity. And in the end we are what we pretend to be." - Jerry Cantrell.

by stetzwebs on Aug 16, 2011 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions

Evans

With what Evans has done in the last three years how could you not be comfortable with him leaving?

by Winnie33 on Aug 16, 2011 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions

No offense intended, but I’ve explained about fifteen times why I feel this way in the other threads about Evans. The summary is that he brings a lot to the table that none of these guys have shown to possess. And until one of them does, his absence will be felt.

"Slowly all the roles we act out become our identity. And in the end we are what we pretend to be." - Jerry Cantrell.

by stetzwebs on Aug 16, 2011 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions

Yes Im fine with it.

Nelson and Roscoe are much better out of the slot.

If Jones stumbles then Easley and roosevelt will be there to play the outside. But for now… Im cool with it. And if the QB likes it, then I like it.

Now attending the Univ. of Hockey.

by bflo on Aug 16, 2011 1:23 PM EDT reply actions

yes, in short

even before training camp last year, before we knew who are sure pass catchers in the team, i looked at the numbers of every WR in the team….

i looked at height, weight, 40 time and jumping ability… if you put all these together, donald jones was the 2nd best in the team even better than marcus easley… his best quality was his leaping ability and he has the speed to be deep threat…

the 1st in the team was james hardy at that time, so this analysis had obvious short comings… but jones proved he can perform in games… and combined with his now best ability in the team, i have confidence he can be that #2 in the team … even good for deep threat

by statcruncher on Aug 16, 2011 1:24 PM EDT reply actions

Hardy?

Any analysis that resulted in Hardy being a #1 is ipso facto a flawed analysis, one that leaves out most of the obvious measures, like catches, and intangibles, like a desire to play football.

by CGoetz on Aug 16, 2011 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions

what a nonsense reply

if you can quantify desire to play football then it is not intangible… anything that you can quantify is not intangible… :)

and right at the beginning i said i looked at numbers not a film review… and to refresh your memory, hardy was not a reach pick.. he genuinely had every potential… you are just wasting time by your retrospective snipe comments…

by statcruncher on Aug 16, 2011 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions

I got more snipe out of your comment than CGoetz’s. “What a nonsense reply”? Come on, man.

Editor-in-Chief, BUFFALO RUMBLINGS®
@BrianGalliford

by Brian Galliford on Aug 16, 2011 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions

No "snipe" intended.

If we’re refreshing memories, Hardy was, in fact, a “reach” pick. The Bills could have taken either of two WRs who had better accomplishments, one Devin Thomas (?) went to Pittsburgh and the other went I forget where.

The Bills’ “braintrust” took Hardy not because of his accomplishments in college and irrespective of his extracircular habits, but rather because he was tall and could, potentially, leap higher than DBs in the end zone to catch passes thrown high.

As to my post, read it again, I spoke of an analysis being comprised of “obvious measures… and intangibles”. I thought I was clear. You’re the one who said “quantify.. [an] intangible”.

by CGoetz on Aug 16, 2011 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions

We should’ve drafted Limas Sweed! uh…. oh……

"There is not a loser in this room." Marv Levy.

by SERGEANT MAJOR THOR on Aug 16, 2011 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions

if sweed couldn't get on the field

with a franchise QB and an offense that was just as pass heavy, and ran many multiple receiver sets… why is he going to succeed here??? should we grab Devin Thomas too? those guys were all part of a weak class @ WR, and proved ineffective. i am happier with giving “our” guys a chance ahead of someone else’s failed attempt. We aint the jets/pats. ; )

by ThaRealTruth on Aug 17, 2011 8:32 PM EDT up reply actions

sorry SMT

i believe that i missed your sarcasm the first time… unless you were serious in which case WHAAAA? ??

but yeah- my bad. those guys were all disappointing.

by ThaRealTruth on Aug 17, 2011 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions

Interesting

How did you compare those various attributes? Comparing weight seems like it would be quite subjective as the players have different heights and builds? Also how did weigh those various attributes? If you still have the data and results, you should make a fanpost.

by Wild_Bills on Aug 16, 2011 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions

I don’t see how a formulaic analysis of raw physical attributes could lead to any sort of useful sorting mechanism because different attributes have highly dynamic and symbiotic relationships, and the importance of particular skills changes drastically with style of play (the unique utilization levels of different skills). And that’s just to determine theoretic overall physical talent level, while only just beginning to touch on how it might translate to a game of football. As you readily implied, if one were able to account for these dynamic factors then you’d still only be left with half the picture; that half of the picture would be useful alongside statistical production analysis and observational analysis, but until such factors are accounted for I don’t see the advantage of a combined sorting mechanism over the traditional, single consideration of each measured physical attribute.

by paxon on Aug 16, 2011 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't know

I don’t think I see what others do in Jones. I hope he does become a great receiver. I hope who ever starts becomes a great receiver for that matter.

"Sit down and watch my Buffalo Bills destroy your Kingdome" - Abayarde

by nickdaniels on Aug 16, 2011 1:26 PM EDT reply actions

yes

I like that he as the first shot to win it. However, to be fair, this should be his last start unless he has a monster game, and then Nelson should get the last two games to make his case. And this is coming from a guy who like Jones a lot as a #2. They both deserve two games to prove it.

The bandwagon will be full and fast and drunk and exciting - Undee

by poz on Aug 16, 2011 1:31 PM EDT reply actions

hmmm Atleast...

Atleast we can say our WR corps has improve since having Josh Reed as our #2, ouch, what were we thinking?

by SpiderWeb Sleeves on Aug 16, 2011 1:32 PM EDT via mobile reply actions 1 recs

Am I comfortable?

No, but there’s not really any other options on the team. I don’t think david nelson has the skillset yet or athleticism to play the X position.

by jdol1568 on Aug 16, 2011 1:32 PM EDT reply actions

the guy who wins it

Should be the best blocker.

They all have their pros and cons as receivers, but the fact of the matter is I don’t know that any one of them separates themselves from any of the others with just receiving skill. Whomever can at least stand out as a run blocker will have a similar level of receiving skill as the others…..

http://blogabills.wordpress.com/

by blogabills on Aug 16, 2011 1:34 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

yes, totally agree!

Im with you. I believe that Chan is giving the first nod to Donald precisely because he is an excellent run blocker. If you have to go with an unknown commodity at WR it makes sense to start off with the guy who can run block for you because at least you know you are getting one asset on the field you can count on.

I think what you say is the leading motivator behind Chan putting Donald up first over Nelson

The bandwagon will be full and fast and drunk and exciting - Undee

by poz on Aug 16, 2011 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions

I’m not sure I agree with that at all. Receivers need to be able to, you know, receive. I think his physicality makes him unique in this otherwise finesse receiving corps, and that’s why I think he’s getting the shot, but I don’t know that I’d point to run blocking specifically.

Editor-in-Chief, BUFFALO RUMBLINGS®
@BrianGalliford

by Brian Galliford on Aug 16, 2011 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions

sure receiving matters

but I think Nelson and Jones both showed they can do that. So I think Jones got the nod for his blocking.

The bandwagon will be full and fast and drunk and exciting - Undee

by poz on Aug 16, 2011 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions

I still don’t think that’s a convincing argument. It’s more likely that he got the nod because they like Nelson better in the slot than Gailey singled out one skill.

Editor-in-Chief, BUFFALO RUMBLINGS®
@BrianGalliford

by Brian Galliford on Aug 16, 2011 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Run blocking was probably not the primary determining factor but it has to be considered a luxury, especially while trying to run out of a spread/Pistol formation with CJ trying to get to the edge. I think Jones’ blocking IN ADDITION TO his physicality and speed make him a great compliment to Johnson on the outsides.

by Aden'sDaddy on Aug 16, 2011 2:07 PM EDT up reply actions

that’s my take – rec’d

by J2 on Aug 16, 2011 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions

I agree, receivers are similar to running backs. Running’s the most important thing, but you don’t get on the field unless you can pass block.

Check out buddynixon.com for more of my work.

by cjf4 on Aug 16, 2011 9:34 PM EDT up reply actions

why?

when are we running ever? that doesn’t seem to be part of the plan.

by ThaRealTruth on Aug 17, 2011 8:34 PM EDT up reply actions

Nelson

I dont understand why Nelson’s skill set does not translate to the Z position. I know he doesnt have the long speed for deep balls (i know) but he has the physical make up and hands to be a Brandon Marshal type on the edges. Can someone explain what the problem with him is?

by Supermansdaddy on Aug 16, 2011 1:39 PM EDT reply actions

I agree, I thought Nelson showed a lot more last year than Jones. Nelson seemed (to me at least) to be better at getting separation and his size gives him an important advantage over shorter receivers. I probably would have looked to him first over Jones.

by Wild_Bills on Aug 16, 2011 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions

All I care about regarding our #2 WR is that they can catch Fitzes sometimes erraticly thrown balls and still make something happen

I don’t care who it is whether its Parrish, Jones, Roosevelt, or whomever, they better be ready to catch the ball anywhere within 3 yards of their body

abayarde- "All off the pain will vanish The Whagonblaster will return and with a new MOTOR and attitude even BIGGER AND stronger THE EYE of the Tiger , will knock our enemies to the next Galaxy , WE the BUffalo Nation DO not know defeat , We do not know Surrender , We only know that if we fall we get up stronger , faster, better WE have the Technology to BUILD IT"

by WABillsfan on Aug 16, 2011 1:39 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

Yes and No

Of the receivers on the current roster, I’d prefer Jones in the two receiver sets. I really like what Nelson and Parrish bring to the slot (in the wake of the lost decade of Josh Reed) so I wouldn’t disrupt their roles, and Easley hasn’t seen the field yet (although I expect that to change this year- possibly early on). That being said, am I comfortable with Jones filling Evans’ role? No. Evans is a better player on a weak offense and removing him voluntarily is a self-inflicted wound. Jones probably makes the most sense out of what’s left, but handing an unproven prospect with a low pedigree and minmal production a starting job is never ideal- even if Buffalo continues to pretend it is.

"There's only one C.J. Spiller." -Buddy Nix

by Port Royal on Aug 16, 2011 1:46 PM EDT reply actions

that’s where i’m at Port – Jones is certainly unproven and he cannot replace Evans at this juncture – he might be able to and i’ll give him his shot but that position is tenuous at the moment.

IMO – Nelson and Parrish belong inside so really it’s between Jones and Easley and clearly Easley needs to stay healthy

by J2 on Aug 16, 2011 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions

Agree completely

by Coach Bob on Aug 16, 2011 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions

Our question to you, Bills fans: are you comfortable with Jones getting the first shot at filling Evans’ shoes?

I guess….?

I’m as comfortable with Jones as I am with any of the other WRs. I do believe that Roscoe is best fit for the slot though and putting him out wide will hurt his effectiveness.

"It’s like I’ve always said, don’t tell me about the labor pains, just show me the baby."
- Buddy Nix

"How can a guy with a name like Melo be such a pain in the ass?"
- George Lopez

by dnvrBillsfan on Aug 16, 2011 1:51 PM EDT reply actions

Vote of confidence

Certainly in the absence of much else to go on, Fitz’s comfort with him must count for something.

by CJ_Scudworth on Aug 16, 2011 1:55 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

rec'd

My sentiments exactly! If the QB who is throwing the ball to him likes throwing the ball to him, then his stock automatically rises in my book.

Obviously there’s more to it than that. Can he run crisp routes, how’s his speed, can he get open against an NFL DBack in a real game situation etc etc etc. But having the respect of your starting QB is most definitely a good sign. And say what you want about Fitz, he’s by no means a dummy. If he says something, you have to give it due attention.

by The Adam Bomb on Aug 16, 2011 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions

Underated element identified here:

Fitz is smart. I know, I should have spotted this earlier. He’s from Harvard after all.

by Defensewinsgames on Aug 16, 2011 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions

I would rather see Nelson

Especially if we cant find that deep threat or the Offense can’t provide the time for a deep threat. He’s a big target w/ great hands. I believe Nelson to be a better all around Receiver. Move Jones to the slot position behind Roscoe or use him as the 4th. However, if Fitz likes Jones out there then I have to take his word. This is the perfect time to try these different options during pre-season to get some game film of there capabilities. Plus, there’s Roosevelt who catches everything as well but likely a #5or6 WR. I just can’t see the justification of Buster making the team. Too many injuries and did not fare well in San Diego w/ there high potent offense. Nix is trying to save face for trading Evans.

by Dareurush! on Aug 16, 2011 1:58 PM EDT reply actions

Or...

Save face? Maybe. Or, maybe he thinks Davis still has all the qualities that made him a viable 1st Round pick and thus worth taking a no risk flyer on. If it works, then the Bills have a 1st Rounder on the roster who may actually be able to play football (all due apologies to Mr. Wood and Dareus).

by CGoetz on Aug 16, 2011 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions

Bad news yesterday

Buster is hurt again. Is it his twice-surgically-repaired groin? He’ll be out several days. Not looking good for his chances.

by Defensewinsgames on Aug 16, 2011 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions

What do we know????

The Amish Rifle should know who’s the best, shouldn’t he??

I love me some Amish Rifle.....

by coolness1 on Aug 16, 2011 2:14 PM EDT reply actions

exactly

QB/WR Chemistry is vital.

by BillinNC on Aug 16, 2011 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions

Do I love that nickname or hate it?

It’s so odd. Never heard anything like it in football before. What does it mean?

by Defensewinsgames on Aug 16, 2011 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions

Correct me if I'm wrong

The Amish Rifle = Amish – for the beard and Rifle – the arm or not afraid to shoot the football ala T.Edwards

by Bufbills on Aug 16, 2011 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions

I think you’re half right. I believe it’s because when Ron Jaworski played (he’s originally from around the Buffalo area) he was called the Polish Rifle. Amish Rifle is a play on that nickname, changing Polish to Amish because of the beard.

by The Adam Bomb on Aug 16, 2011 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions

i thought he’s more of a slingshot than rifle.

by Mperk on Aug 16, 2011 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions

Think of it as him being more of a gunslinger type player rather than a comment on his arm strength and it’s more befitting.

by paxon on Aug 16, 2011 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions

Since last season

I kept hearing about this WR group and felt Evans days’ as a Bill were number, (just follow football and know it part of the game) Now last season all the commotion on this group centered around Donald Jones. After watching David Nelson have a very good rookie season and hearing how much better Jones is …. Then yes I’m comfortable with Jones.. Just got to play him in preseason to get all toughs jitters out of his system

by Bufbills on Aug 16, 2011 2:17 PM EDT reply actions

Am I missing something?

I just don’t see it. From what I’ve seen in the very few practices I’ve been to last week and last weeks game, I don’t see the cause of this hype. I remember stevies first couple years, when he was on the field you could just tell there was something special there. He hadn’t had his break out year yet but he was gaining hype among the fanbase. I see similar hype growing with Jones but I don’t get the same vibe I got when johnson was out there.

by ByrdMan31 on Aug 16, 2011 2:31 PM EDT via mobile reply actions 1 recs

I don't see it either

Perhaps I’m also missing something, but watching the two of them at practice yesterday Nelson looked to me like a very special WR in almost every respect and Jones struck me as no better than ok. Jones ran two deep routes last night and the ball was there for him to grab it, but he missed it both times. Yes, Nelson is very effective out of the slot, but he would be equally effective in my judgment going down the edge (as Mark Gaughn also suggested last week).

In a word, they can certainly try Jones in this role, but I suspect they would be much better off with Nelson.

by Macktruck on Aug 16, 2011 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions

Completely agree ByrdMan

I had never seen Stevie in practice, but I liked what I saw in pre-season and the few opportunities he had. I specifically remember the nice catch he had against the Browns a couple of years back.

Your assessment is a fair one because I don’t think we have the second coming of Stevie on the roster. We’re basically dealing with the best of what’s left and we could probably continue this debate well into next year about who are best option is opposite SJ13.

Schmucks don't make it to the Pro Bowl... except Jason Peters!

by Run Thurmal Run! on Aug 16, 2011 6:49 PM EDT up reply actions

hmmm Atleast...

Atleast we can say our WR corps has improve since having Josh Reed as our #2, ouch, what were we thinking?

by SpiderWeb Sleeves on Aug 16, 2011 2:48 PM EDT via mobile reply actions

I don’t know that I’ve seen enough from Jones to know. Parrish and Nelson will stay in the slot. Easley hasn’t done anything yet. I might like to see how Roosevelt could handle it.

Give a monkey a typewriter and infinite time, and he’ll eventually release Maybin. -- stetzwebs
Unfortunatly, experience doesn't always lead to wisdom - Joe P.

by thefourwinds on Aug 16, 2011 3:54 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

Yes!

Go Roosevelt!

by ChuckBuffInFlo on Aug 16, 2011 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions

Trust Fitz

Fitz got so tight with Stevie, and Stevie exploded. The TD against Cincy where instead of a fade at the goaline, Fitz zipped it at the endline to Stevie showed how incredible their understanding and connection was. Leon Hall was looking at the pylon while Stevie was dragging his feet for six. If Fitz trusts DJones, then I gotta believe that he should be starting.
Anyway, isn’t this largely an irrelevant conversation due to the amount of spread formations we’ll be seeing this year? Nelson, Parrish, and Jones will all get to the field plenty regardless of who lines up on the boundary.

by WV2Buffalo on Aug 16, 2011 4:02 PM EDT reply actions

I'd say yes for Jones

He showed a couple of flashes last year and I think the coaches would be foolish to not give him a shot to excel.

Stevie showed a few flashes the year before he got the nod, albeit a year later and a few more flashes.

All of that being said, I think it’s a minor detail honestly. I would expect the percentage of plays with only 2 WR’s on the field to be very small. He’s going to be on the field a lot either way.

by lonestar_ak on Aug 16, 2011 4:03 PM EDT reply actions

I think Jones should have to win the job.

Roosevelt runs such precise routes,and from all reports catches everything thrown His way.Jones should have to do all that and win the job with better speed,IMHO..I really don’t see where just handing the job to Jones helps this team move the ball effectively..

by 3nOutNoMore on Aug 16, 2011 4:14 PM EDT reply actions

Nelson

I think Nelson earned it on last year’s performance.

by Coach Bob on Aug 16, 2011 4:40 PM EDT reply actions

Fitz got so tight with Stevie, and Stevie exploded.

twss? man i hope not

by C-Barbs on Aug 16, 2011 5:40 PM EDT reply actions

Haven't seen anything from Jones

I think this Preseason they need to try a few players at the #2 spot…shake it up a bit and move players around…see who fits best…my confidence is with Easley just b/c i heard he was someone to watch out for…now if he can get/stay healthy…

by Dingus Day on Aug 16, 2011 5:54 PM EDT reply actions

I've liked jones since we drafted him

He’s big physical and has soft hands. However even last year he had some dropsies. Hopefully thats something we can work out going forward.

The player I would like least at #9 would be my sister’s cat, Captain Creamsicle. She does have a great work ethic and agility, but I’m really concerned that at 9 lbs., she’s too small to play safety in the NFL. She also bites way too often on play action and is easily distracted by someone waving string in the crowd. Lastly, her wonderlic score was pretty awful, answering "meow meow meow" for most of the questions- Dr. Brackish Okun

by mob16151 on Aug 16, 2011 6:15 PM EDT reply actions

eric moulds similarities

I’m not saying Donald Jones will be the next Eric Moulds, but the body type and physicality are similar. Seems like he can be a deep threat and also be a possession guy if necessary. Moulds was a kick returner in his first year and didn’t become a true #1 receiver for a while. Who’s to say that Stevie J and Donald J can’t be like Moulds and Peerless Price?

by soxinterloper on Aug 16, 2011 7:25 PM EDT reply actions

It’s funyy, but for me, Moulds and Price will always sound like the budget version of Reed and Beebe.

by cmeid on Aug 17, 2011 6:50 AM EDT up reply actions

I’m hopping all these guys get a chance to start in live preseason action, I really like Easley he has so much potential, if not him i’ll give nelson a shot i loved his play last year, and was always hopping they give him more looks. He’s in the slot but has the potential and size to play outside i think.

by TheFranchize on Aug 17, 2011 2:38 PM EDT reply actions