Dorkington

If it weren't for Romo's injury history, I'd like 'choose' him. Otherwise I don't see Tyrod and the other vet choices being hugely different in terms of overall talent, so if we're sticking with a vet, I'd rather keep him around. Since he's been here with the guys and has chemistry, and also because it's likely he'd actually be cheaper... I think? I don't know much about the rookies, other than it's supposedly a 'weak class'. I am a fan of taking another QB in the draft, probably somewhere in the 3rd or 4th round, though. Another developmental guy to compete with Cardale. I actually still have faith that Cardale could end up being good, though. I'm generally 'ok' with any of the vet options. The only thing that'd really make me go 'WTF' is if the Bills release Tyrod, and go into next year with a rookie and Cardale, and that's it.

Yup, another QB thread. But this time with a poll, so it's different... obviously. I just chose some of the names that have been floating around here, and the top prospects according to WalterFootball. Who do you want starting for the Bills in 2017, and why?

"Yay, you're healthy! Now I can fire you!" - Ryan L Billz, Buffalo Bills GM of Pettiness

Can you give us parameters for what determines if a QB 'sucks' or not?

A big part of YAC is the routes... our play calling was heavy on outs. That being said, were they designed that way because our QB can't see the middle of the field/slant routes?

That's a very concise way of putting it. I wish there was a poll attached to this discussion 1) Team carrying QB or bust, making the playoffs doesn't matter if you aren't likely to win the Superbowl 2) Make the playoffs anyway you can, sometimes a good defense can carry a mediocre QB to Superbowl victory

He's even better if you take everyone's rushing TDs and fumbles into account. He's a very good game manager, imo. Again, not good enough to carry a bad defense to the post season, but he's also not likely to lose a game due to his own mistakes. If our goal is to make the playoffs, we could do *a lot* worse.

Yup, copy pasta error.

I'd argue that both Tyrod and Fitzpatrick are in that larger middle of the pack starting QB category. Tyrod is certainly better at taking care of the ball. Fitzpatrick is better at making decisions quickly (for better or worse). Tyrod has a better deep ball. Fitzpatrick can make the quick/read throw. The only two years that Fitzpatrick had an average or better defense, his team's total record in games he played was 16-12, which isn't terrible at all. Obviously he's not good enough to carry a bad defense, and neither is Tyrod.

Top 11 QB rankings and team results: Completion % 8 out of the top 11 have a winning percentage 7 out of the top 11 made the playoffs TD% 9 out of the top 11 have a winning percentage 7 out of the top 11 made the playoffs INT% 7 out of the top 11 have a winning percentage 7 out of the top 11 made the playoffs ANY/A 10 out of the top 11 have a winning percentage 7 out of the top 11 made the playoffs Sack % (just for FC ) 7 out of the top 11 have a winning percentage 5 out of the top 11 made the playoffs

Sack% comes into play with the ANY/A stat, fwiw. Also, while Tyrod has a lot of sacks on paper, his yards lost per sack is pretty minimal compared to others due to some of the sacks happening with him trying to make yards when not seeing what he wants to see downfield (for better or worse) Example: Tyrod 42 sacks for 192 yards lost - 4.5y/s Ryan 37 sacks for 235 yards lost - 6.35y/s Wilson 41 sacks for 293 yards lost - 7.15y/s So, con is taking so many sacks, obviously... but a pro is, his athleticism helps minimize some of the loss compared to some QBs. As far as your other question, I'd assume it'd roughly line up with his rankings above... in that most playoff QBs are closer to top 11, with a few outsiders (ie middle of the road QBs with strong all around teams), but I'd have to take a longer look to fully answer your question. I think it fully depends on where you stand on the bolded. If your goal is team carrying QB or bust, then it doesn't matter if you keep him or not, because he's not that. If your goal is to make the playoffs, you could do a lot worse than Tyrod, especially if we have confidence we can improve the defense. If your goal is the Superbowl, the defense is going to have to be near elite.

I probably won't get to it, since I'm feeling lazy Frankly this argument just boils down to One side: A QB capable of carrying a team to the playoffs, anything else is a waste of time Other side: Since finding the above is exceedingly difficult, might as well take a guy who is good enough to be a playoff caliber QB on a good all around team.

I know this is futile, but I was generally curious, given how many seem to think Tyrod is incapable of success. I'm looking at both Tyrod's 2016 season and his 'Bills career' (some argue Tyrod got worse, some argue Tyrod's weapons were missing time, so lets just do both). Doing per attempt/game/percentage stats due to various injuries, suspensions, coaching schemes, etc. across the league. Completion percentage: 2016: Tyrod 61.7% - 11 Playoff QBs ahead/1 Playoff QB behind Career: Tyrod 62.6% - 11 Playoff QBs ahead/1 Playoff QB behind TD percentage: 2016: Tyrod 3.9% - 9 Playoff QBs ahead/3 Playoff QBs behind Career: Tyrod 4.5% - 7 Playoff QBs ahead/5 Playoff QBs behind INT percentage: 2016: Tyrod 1.4% - 5 Playoff QBs ahead/7 Playoff QBs behind Career: Tyrod 1.5% - 5 Playoff QBs ahead/7 Playoff QBs behind Yards per game: 2016: Tyrod 201.5 - 11 Playoff QBs ahead/1 Playoff QB behind Career: Tyrod 208.9 - 11 Playoff QBs ahead/1 Playoff QB behind Net Yards/Attempt: 2016: Tyrod 5.92 - 11 Playoff QBs ahead/1 Playoff QB behind Career: Tyrod 6.32 - 10 Playoff QBs ahead/2 Playoff QBs behind Adjusted Net Yards/Attempt (takes into account TDs/INTs): 2016: Tyrod 6.07 - 10 Playoff QBs ahead/2 Playoff QBs behind Career: Tyrod 6.55 - 9 Playoff QBs ahead/3 Playoff QBs behind QB Rating: 2016: Tyrod 89.7 - 9 Playoff QBs ahead/3 Playoff QBs behind Career: Tyrod 94.2 - 6 Playoff QBs ahead/6 Playoff QBs behind ESPN QBR 2016: Tyrod 68.2 - 5 Playoff QBs ahead/7 Playoff QBs behind Career: Tyrod ~68 - 5 Playoff QBs ahead/7 Playoff QBs behind It should be noted in all of this, though, is that Tyrod is significantly more productive than other QBs on the ground, comparing his numbers to the playoff QBs there, he comes out ahead in almost every metric. Kinda wonder if adding passing + rushing for the playoff QBs and Tyrod, if there would be a significant change in rankings. (Example in total yards per game, it'd move Tyrod up at least a couple spots, just glancing at things. Same with TD%, and if you include fumbles, it'd further cement him near the top since other QBs have a bigger fumbling problem) Conclusion: Tyrod can be a QB of a playoff caliber team, but he's not good enough to carry a team to the playoffs. If the Bills keep Tyrod, they *need* to improve on defense, to have anything close to a chance. (which anyone who actually watches games could have told you)

Oh how I can't wait until we make a decision one way or the other... so that all the debate can go away. Eh who am I kidding, it won't go away.

Keeping it simple with this poll question. Do you approve or disapprove Trump's job performance so far? Feel free to expand on your answer in a post. For example, is how your feeling about him now different or the same as before the election? Are you happy with certain parts, and down on other parts of his performance? Etc.

I'm down with two scenarios: 1) The 'win now' scenario: Keep the offense in tact, but let Robert Woods walk, and draft a play making WR within the first couple of rounds. Shore up defensive depth with the rest of the draft. And hope for a solid RT somewhere in either the draft or FA. Idea is, maintaining offensive output, and improving defensive output with increased depth and improved coaching. This scenario hopefully gets us to the playoffs, but unless our defense is REALLY good, probably not the Superbowl 2) The 'future/tank' scenario: Start trading assets for draft picks. Let the expensive players leave, including Tyrod. Draft a couple QBs, and let them and Cardale battle it out. Likely have a horrible record, but hopefully with good draft position for the following year, and loading up on picks, we 'reset' our team, and grab some good young talent, and finally find a long term top 10 QB. High risk in this scenario, but possible high reward.

I actually agree that they are roughly the same. Hence why I think attributing records to them is kinda silly. If they are about the same, and cost about the same, then I'm going to take the younger guy with more upside.

I don't really understand blindly attributing a record to a QB. If so, one could say Philip Rivers a worse QB than Brock Osweiler over the same period of time.

We've had quite a few QBs come through, though most of them via free agency/trade. I'm not sure if taking shots at QBs in the draft is a luxury we had when we had holes to fill elsewhere and the immediate goal was a playoff appearance. I suppose that's an argument to be had 'Would you rather get a play off appearance or two sooner, or would you rather focus on being a consistent participant at an unknown future date?' So far we've approached the QB situation with getting a vet that's available to us, and having one or two young guys in development 2013: Kolb (vet)/EJ (developmental)/Tuel (developmental) 2014: Orton (vet)/EJ (developmental) 2015: Cassel (vet)/Tyrod (developmental)/EJ (developmental) 2016: Tyrod (vet)/EJ (vet)/Cardale (developmental) I do agree, that in either 2014 or 2015 we should have taken another shot at someone, but IMO probably not early in the draft. Also, I'm not sure who was available to us after Kolb got injured, but ideally another vet should have been brought in. Also the lack of QB coach in 2013 was stupid. I don't know what the answers are, I have certain beliefs, but again, I'm kind of an idiot. This is why I pose questions, even if they are 'stupid'. I have no idea if taking a QB early in every draft would net us a long term guy, or if it'd just screw with development and near term success. I'm open to ideas, because clearly what we've been doing for 17 years has not been working.

That's all I was looking for As far as Carr? Early to tell, no? Would you be happy with him if he only takes a team to the playoffs once? I wouldn't. So then we'd probably start harping on the GM again, if that were the case. The 'replace the GM counter' resetting at each playoff appearance? I know I'm in the minority in thinking that a mid level QB is 'good enough' to get a team to the playoffs and even a Superbowl victory, and since I'm in the minority, that means I'm likely the stupid one. Ideally I'd love to have a 'hall of fame' QB or 'top 10 qb' or whatever term suits you, since that's the more sure-fire way of getting to our goals. But I simply think it's easier said than done, so I'm not sure how angry I'm supposed to be at a GM failing in that regard (hence the question). As it is, most of the top 10 QBs in the league right now are on the older side.

Do you guys have a list of approved news sources so that I can get the real story?

I have no desire to look superior, and fully acknowledge that I'm an uneducated idiot on most topics. The general consensus of this forum tends to lean towards the need of a top 10 QB in order to carry this team to the playoffs/superbowl. You say what metrics? And gave examples, and I said 'yes' meaning all of the ones you listed. So again, how long do you (not specifically you, but anyone who wants to answer) give a GM before they find a QB that can carry the team to the playoffs/superbowl, put up top 10 QB numbers, etc? For *me* personally, I'm 'fine' with a middle of the road QB (which I consider Tyrod) as long as the rest of the team is strong (meaning a good defense, good running game, and good coaching). I feel like it's a pretty simple question for those who require a certain performance metric. 3 years? 5 years? 10 years? What's a realistic time frame to get an elite QB?

Thanks for the above links. I was reading through this, this morning: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/02/20/trump-asked-people-to-look-at-whats-happening-in-sweden-heres-whats-happening-there/ Seems like the crime 'wave' isn't as dire as some suggest. But I'm not sure if WaPo is an approved news source.

Listen, you guys constantly harp on various statistics as a reason why Tyrod isn't good enough. It's reasonable to assume you want someone better, and you want said better QB to be consistently better. If you get a QB that is better in total yards, completion percentage, total TDs, etc, they will be easily a top 10 QB in many metrics. And if said QB is top 10 in those metrics for multiple years, it's pretty likely they're going to the HoF (unless you happen to be hated like TO). So again, how long do you give a GM before they find a top 10/potential HoF QB?