Two weeks into the season, the QB carousel's spinning out of control
The NFL's ever-spinning quarterback carousel is so minute-by-minute these days that the Eagles'
I don't know if Vick has been rendered dizzy from the crazy turn of events on Philadelphia's depth chart, but I certainly know I have. Especially in light of
Reid simply doesn't do flip-flops, and as recently as Monday had reiterated that a healthy Kolb would resume his team's No. 1 quarterback role at Jacksonville on Sunday. But when it comes to starting quarterbacks in the NFL, almost everything's written in pencil. So far in this still-young 2010 season, the only constant, as they say, has been change.
At least in the case of the Vick decision in Philly, I can understand the switch had to be made. He's played too well in the last six quarters -- leading the Eagles to 52 points -- to return to the bench, and Kolb didn't have enough capital stored up in the bank to force his way back into the lineup.
Even Reid apparently could see it was Vick who gave Philadelphia its best chance to win right now, not Kolb, who has been groomed for the starting job for the past three years. Especially with Kolb coming off a concussion and playing behind an Eagles offensive line that has been, at best, a work in progress. Vick can still elude any tackler in the NFL, and that's a pretty valuable skill to have these days as an Eagles quarterback.
But the re-emergence of Vick has been just one of the many quarterback situations to already surface this season. By my count, we're just 13 days into the NFL's regular season and already 10 teams -- about one third of the league -- have had to grapple with quarterback questions brought on by either injury or ineffectiveness.
That means after months of offseason and preseason planning and practice time invested in one quarterback, those clubs have reversed direction and either chosen or been forced to cast their lot with a different player at the game's most pivotal position.
What in the name of
And after proclaiming on Sunday afternoon that it was "way too early to say'' who would start in Week 3, Carolina's
Has the NFL's quarterback carousel ever been this active this early? I once covered a team --
• In Buffalo,
• In Oakland, Cable isn't saying if Campbell or
• In Carolina, what choice did Fox really have but to go with the untested Clausen over the struggling Moore, whose starting reign in Charlotte lasted all of seven games? The 0-2 Panthers have scored just two touchdowns, Fox is in the final year of his contract, and a home-opening loss to Tampa Bay has everyone in Carolina on edge.
• In Jacksonville,
• In Tennessee,
• In Arizona, it seems just a matter of time before
• And then there are the varying QB situations in Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and Detroit, where injuries and/or a suspension have impacted the early-season lineups of the Steelers (
There's a familiar sameness to the reasoning behind most of the impatience being shown at quarterback around the league. The Bills, Raiders, Panthers and Jaguars were all losing teams last year, and in each case the head coach is fighting for his job in 2010. Ditto for
Gailey, the first-year Buffalo head coach, is turning to Fitzpatrick, who started seven games for the Bills last season without emerging as the answer to the team's troubled QB spot. He has started games for three NFL teams (Rams, Bengals and Bills), and while serviceable, the ex-Harvard standout has been on the losing end of quite a few games in his five-year pro career.
No matter. He's not Edwards, and that's enough to warrant the promotion in Buffalo, where Gailey was quick to remind everyone that "the implication might be that it's all Trent's fault and that's not the case at all.'' Maybe not, but when Gailey was asked right after that if any other lineup changes were in store, he replied, "Not right now, no.'' Meaning Edwards is the only one paying for his part of the fault with his starting job. For now.
But stay tuned, because every week seems to bring a new look to the starting quarterback landscape in the NFL. As we all know by now, looking for a spark and actually finding one are very different things.
• As excruciating as the 49ers' last-second 25-22 loss at home to the Saints was on Monday night, here's one very sound reason San Francisco fans should not give up on their 0-2 team: Somebody's got to win the NFC West this year, and it might be an 8-8 or even 7-9 champion.
No scoffing. Three times in the past six seasons -- in 2004, 2006 and 2008 -- the NFC West winner finished 9-7. But with two-time defending champion Arizona (1-1) looking a lot less intimidating without Warner, and the 49ers, Seahawks (1-1) and Rams (0-2) all having played at least one uninspired game so far, it's certainly not beyond the realm of possibility that a .500 (or even sub-.500) record might get the job done in the NFL's weakest division. Especially since NFC West teams face the tough NFC South this year in intra-conference play.
• Between Michael Vick's boffo start in Detroit and
• On the flip side, Week 2 was a tough one for first-round offensive left tackles named Williams. Chicago's
• Here's what I believe to be the most pertinent statistic to explain
Without the injured
• It didn't generate the biggest of headlines with all the other subplots that Week 2 featured, but Denver getting eight receptions for 97 yards and a touchdown from first-rounder
And we can't help but notice that while former Broncos No. 1 receiver
• Because things had been going entirely too swimmingly for the Jets in the past 36 hours or so,
• The reeling Cowboys play at 2-0 Houston on Sunday, and the juxtaposition is just too rich. With all the preseason talk of Dallas gunning to become the first team to play a Super Bowl on its home field sounding emptier by the week, what if it's the home-state-rival Texans who wind up representing the AFC in Cowboys Stadium in early February? Could
And while we're on the topic of the rivalry between Dallas and Houston, which quarterback would you rather have right now: