NFL Roster Cuts: Oakland Raiders Will Regret Cutting Trent Edwards
The time for NFL teams to whittle their rosters down to at or below the 53-man limit has come and gone. In the process, teams have cut players young and old, experienced and inexperienced. With so many player cuts, it's inevitable that teams will regret some of the cuts they make.
Edwards wasn't going to be a franchise quarterback for Oakland. He has had plenty of chances to start and he hasn't taken advantage of any of them. That's not why they missed on him, though.
Every year, teams find out the hard way that you can never have too many experienced quarterbacks. Injuries happen and when you don't have a good starter, as is the case in Oakland, you need someone there to take over in case you need someone to right the ship.
I wouldn't pin playoff hopes on the performance of Edwards, but he is certainly someone who can come in and win you a game or two if you need to buy yourself some time.
In his career, Edwards has completed 60.5 percent of his passes for just over 6,000 yards. His best year came in 2008 with the Bills. In that season, he started 14 games and completed 65.5 percent of his passes for 2,699 yards and 11 touchdowns. He had 10 interceptions that season, but that's not a bad performance overall considering how poor the Bills have been of late.
Kyle Boller is also on this roster, but I'm not sure that Boller brings as much to the table as Edwards does at this point.
Edwards might have also been a good tutor for Terrelle Pryor after Pryor returned from his suspension.
Pryor has physical gifts that Edwards does not have, but he lacks the polish of Edwards. Edwards would be able to teach him some of the finer points of quarterbacking. If I were head coach Hue Jackson, I would have had Pryor standing right next to Edwards every game. That way, Edwards can keep a running dialogue with Pryor as the game progresses.
Edwards will find his way onto a roster before too long. Oakland's loss will be that team's gain.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?