metzelaars_lives

Look I didn't break down his game film. You may be right. I usually follow the ball once it's snapped. From what I read he was much better against the run than the pass. All I know is the Bills' offensive line got great push in the run game and their pass protection was at least adequate by 2015 NFL standards. I think we actually agree here. And as another poster pointed out, they can and probably will address RT in the draft.

What does this even mean? The Bills have a good offensive line. Do you think every other team in football has five awesome offensive linemen and their QB can just hang out back there for like ten seconds before finding an open receiver? Yes, we have one question mark on the OL. The Broncos just won the Super Bowl. Presumably you would characterize them as a "good team." Their offensive line is in utter shambles and they may literally have five new starters next season. Sorry, the Bills' offensive line is good, deal with it.

I'd like to point out just how typical this post is. The neverending negative sentiment toward the Bills' offensive line on TBD. We have a top 5-10 left tackle in football locked up. We just re-signed maybe the best left guard in all of football. We have a center under contract who looked like himself again after Marrone left and made the Pro Bowl, albeit as an alternate, last year. We have a right guard entering his second season who was fairly highly touted coming out of college, was excellent against the run as a rookie, needs to improve against the pass, but again is only 23. We have some question marks at right tackle, no doubt. Although Mills played fairly well the last few games, hence why we re-signed him. And Henderson was pretty decent for a rookie and should return to full health this season. And of course, they can always draft a RT. The Bills running game was #1 overall last season. They were one of the better lines in the NFL- certainly one of the very best left sides of any team. But of course, these are the type of comments people constantly throw around. Believe me when I tell you that the Bills' offensive line is at the very bottom of their concerns as a football team.

I can't be in the minority of people on this site that remembers the 1980's.

Post-Unitas: 1. Brady 2. Montana 3. Manning 4. Favre 5. Elway 6. Marino (but those three are VERY close- I could go along with them being in any order) Then you got Rodgers, Young, Bradshaw, Aikman, Brees, Roethlisberger in some order.

Thank you.

I would be kinda pissed if I were Taylor and I had to play this season at whatever his salary is, knowing that freaking Brock Osweiler is making $15 per. Agreed on all accounts. Manning was quite literally the worst starting QB in the NFL this season. It will take a few years for some perspective but right now, he does not feel like a two time Super Bowl winning QB to me. Certainly not the way a John Elway is for instance.

For the millionth time, if our defense was even somewhere between the 2014 and 2015 versions, we would've coasted into the playoffs. It takes a whole team ya know. But it would be a cold day in hell before you ever acknowledged that our offense finished 12th in scoring and 13th overall. As another poster alluded to- and believe me when I tell you that I hate when people throw this term around loosely- I'm starting to question if your whole Taylor stance is an elaborate troll. In which case, I gotta hand it to ya, you win in the sense that you have successfully wasted a good deal of my time arguing with you.

And in your last post you said that winning a Super Bowl is a bigger accomplishment than going there only to lose? Obviously. Correct me if I'm wrong here. And forget about Brady vs. Montana for a second. I'm talking about the concept of 4-2 vs. 4-0. Me: Winning a Super Bowl is obviously huge. But making a Super Bowl counts for something (I cited a 5:2 ratio). You: Winning a Super Bowl is EVERYTHING. If you make a Super Bowl you better damn well make sure you win or else it HURTS your legacy for even making it. You are better off not making it at all rather than going there only to lose. Do I have it right?

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's the whole point. Of course he would have. So Montana is a more accomplished QB in your eyes because he lost the 1994 AFC Championship game at Buffalo rather than had he won it?? Think about what you're saying. The fact that he TOOK another team to the Super Bowl would have been yet another feather in his cap. Someone please help me out with this one. Kurt Warner. Period, end of story. Is his legacy tarnished because the Cardinals lost that Super Bowl? NO!!!!! It solidified him as a Hall of Famer!!!!!

I'm not partial to the Bills' four Super Bowl appearances. I know exactly where the Bills stand from an historical perspective. You can write a book trying to dissuade me but the bottom line is that winning a conference championship and then losing in the Super Bowl > losing in the conference championship. To argue otherwise defies logic. Who has a greater legacy? The Bills team that lost four Super Bowls or the Eagles team that kept losing in the NFC championship game? Your argument is that the Eagles team is necessarily a greater all time team and that McNabb is necessarily a greater all time QB than Kelly for having lost prior to the Super Bowl. I'm almost factually right on this one. You're trying to tell me that in your book, a QB gets 1 point for winning the Super Bowl, -1 point for losing a Super Bowl and breaks even for going 3-13 and not making the playoffs. I would contend that a QB gets 5 points for winning a SB and maybe 2 points for getting there and losing. Too bad Kurt Warner took that upstart Cardinals team to the SB and lost in a nailbiter, that really tarnished his legacy. If only he'd lost in the Wild Card round that year, he would be viewed as a greater all time QB. I could go all day on this one.

You just brought up what may have been his six worst starts of the season (excluding KC), two of which he won. You can do that for any QB ya know. Cousins lost 7 games last season. I could go through those games and paint a dubious picture of his prospects as well. You're not fooling anyone. Once again, when you only point out negative things about a guy- and never one single positive, of which there are many- day after day after day, it becomes clear that you have an obsession with Taylor.

Yeah and last year are two other games were against Kansas City and Cincinnati. Next year they are against Jacksonville and Oakland. It'll all even out.

Fact: the Bills finished with the 4th hardest schedule in the AFC last season. Can we please stop with this idea that the schedule is going to be our ultimate demise? If the Bills get their own s**t together on defense they will be just fine.

EJ played well in the second half against Jacksonville. I've never said anything to the contrary. As far as the first New England game, we had the ball within a score with a reasonable amount of time on the clock at the end of the game. Again, it's not like every TD that, I don't know, Ben Roethlisberger threw all season was when game was within 7 points. It all evens out. The Bills were undoubtedly involved in less garbage time situations than most teams.

Great post. As I have noted before, the Bills' schedule turned out to be the 4th hardest in the AFC and their strength of victory was 5th highest in the AFC. http://espn.go.com/nfl/standings/_/view/playoff But people hate facts and will say, "well that's only because..." when every team has their "only because's." Best example being "well Taylor put up garbage time numbers." Really? He threw 2 TD's in garbage time all season (against WAS). Every QB puts up garbage time numbers. You would think on a website dedicated to the Buffalo Bills that people would spin numbers and such in a positive direction but it's almost always the opposite round these parts.

Andrew Luck?

First off, it's ridiculously early. But I'll partake. I picked them to be one game better. No reason to think the offense can't be better. They have one of the best running backs, one of the best wide receivers and quite possibly one of the very best offensive lines in football. As far as the defense is concerned, I am willing to give Rex one more year to see through this "scheme" I keep hearing about. As far as the schedule, we get possibly the two worst teams in all of football, both at home. Save for the depleted Cowboys team, I'm not sure we got any real cupcakes like that last year. But agreed, assessing the schedule at this point is absurd.

There's a shocker. The entire anti-Taylor brigade chimes in on page 1 to tell us that the Bills will be worse than last year. Consider me one of the few who does NOT find the schedule particularly daunting, at least as of now. That being said, they're still the Bills. 9-7. No.

So Joe six pack, who went on this whole ridiculous crusade that Ryan Fitzpatrick was way better than Tyrod Taylor back in December, is incorrect in his assertion that 33% of the people in this thread are advocating paying Taylor over $20 million per year- as much as Roethlisberger, Rodgers and Wilson? Is there even one person who advocates that? Where are these "fanboys" he speaks of?

I haven't read one page of this thread (unless I looked at it last week) and I can assure you, with utmost certainty, that no one is advocating the Bills pay Tyord Taylor $20 million per year. Once again, you and your cronies have created this false narrative; a straw man if you will, who is going around saying that Taylor is an elite QB already. You call them "fanboys." Sorry to report that nobody thinks that however. I am apparently regarded as a "fanboy" and I think he is between the 15th-20th best QB in the NFL. Which I think is pretty good considering it was his first year as a starter. Anyone who doesn't think that is irrationally against the guy. And the people who are irrationally against the guy are, to a man (with the exception of FireChan who hates everybody), the same exact bunch who were all pro-EJ even after it had become exceedingly obvious that it wasn't happening for the guy. So there you have it.

In the world of Ryan L Billz, stating that Tyrod Taylor is between the 15th and 20th best QB in the NFL = "blind fanboy." Coming from a guy who was still optimistic about EJ Manuel who, quite literally, never showed himself to be among the league's top 50 QB's through two years in the league. Noted.

How good do I think he is? I think he's probably around the 15th best QB in the league. Maybe between 15-20. Same range as Cousins. I just think it's hysterical that you only point out the games he lost and then Hoyer? He beat a great Texans D that was playing out of its collective mind the 4-5 weeks leading up to that game. He was 8-6. Better record than Cousins at 9-7. Not sure Cousins would have made the playoffs if he had to play in the AFC East last season, are you? It's just so amusing that you have never once said, "well he does have a nice deep ball" or "he didn't make too many mistakes" or "he's a hell of a runner..." It's only the negatives. Which leads me back to my original question- what is your personal grudge against him? I know the answer, I just want you to admit it.

You are the one talking about last season. And I would say the defense got pantsed vs. the Redskins, particularly on the aforementioned Cousins' TD run. Cousins looked good in some games, not as good in others. So did Taylor. At the end of the day, they played on a pretty similar level last season, though it was Taylors' first year as a starter while Cousins had started games in each of the previous three seasons. But keep insisting you are objective about Taylor.

Halfrod? What? Why? Taylor was 8-6 last year, which is a better winning percentage than Cousins' 9-7. Cousins got "pantsed" by the Dolphins, whom Taylor beat twice, handily. Why are you so obsessed with demeaning Tyrod Taylor? I see you are in Virginia- is this personal between you two? Did you know him when he was at VA Tech? There's gotta be an explanation.