BarleyNY

Extending him early will cost us too - and sooner. Plus we might not even see a good return on that if he flames out/fails to live up to his deal. No, I'll wait and pay him fair market if he hits. That's fine. Our choices are: - Wait and possibly pay more, which will be market value - Pay him above his market early in hopes that we will get a deal and save some money, but also take the chance we might be overpaying him substantially I really do see your point, but I haven't seen enough and there is time. I wait and see what Taylor does. And here's the reason: What he hasn't proven he can do is the toughest part of being a quarterback. I really hope he makes it, but I'm skeptical.

I disagree with a lot of this. Start with your leadership comment. Why is he considered a great leader right now? I'm not saying that he is or that he isn't, just that there's precious little evidence either way right now. As for aspects of his game that are below average I'd say that his issues going through his progressions and reading defenses is a place where he is below average right now. Plus, as you noted, his height is below the generally accepted minimum (6'1" vs. 6'2"). Big arm? Yup. Can make all of the throws? Yup. Mobile? Yup again. But I want to address your comment that the Bills current offense is not built to take full advantage of TT's mobility. I couldn't disagree more. It is relied on too much, if anything. This isn't JT Barrett at Ohio State. TT is listed at 6'1", 215#. If he was better at his progressions - like he needs to be - they'd run him less because of how dangerous it is from a potential injury perspective. At that size it will be difficult for him to last if he continues to take hits. Notably, he has been doing a better job of sliding and otherwise avoiding hits since he's been back from injury. I don't mean to be overly critical of him, but he has important aspects of his game that he needs to improve upon. The Bills need to see at least some improvement in some of those areas before they commit big money to him.

Agree with this totally. He's played 7 games, people.

That's true. But I don't take that chance yet. He's got 7 games under his belt and even if he finishes the season healthy that's only 14 total, plus playoffs potentially. And that's really the only place he could really change my mind by this offseason - by lighting it up in the playoffs. Then I'd be on board. But there is also his side to consider. I definitely think he'd jump at a mid-tier (or below) contract this offseason, but you never know. Maybe he's a gambler and thinks he can make the really big bucks. Or say he does take a mid-tier deal and then lights it up for another year or two. Why wouldn't he ask for a new deal early if he thinks he has earned it?

I agree that it's tricky with QBs in particular, but there is no way that I jump the gun with Taylor. I see what he does the rest of this year and probably next. He's certainly does not have a large body of work, nor has he proven enough on the field to justify even a second tier deal. I hope he does earn that here, but he still has a lot to do before he does.

Most of the gripes about modeling like 538's are from people who expect some nerd to be able to plug in a bunch of numbers and tell the future. If that doesn't happen they decry their work as bogus and completely write it off. It's just odds and expectations and only gets as specific as the model and available information allow. Plus modeling things with a lot of inherent variance - like football - is only ever going to be so accurate. It's a nice tool, not a be-all-end-all.

You know what's worse than paying Cousins that contract? Losing him. It'd be pretty fair in that the team could cut ties quickly and easily if they had to, but Cousins would still get paid for what he's accomplished. If he blossoms then he wouldn't have to wait long to get a new deal at an increased rate. If not, then there's no long term commitment and no lasting cap damage to the team.

That's certainly possible, even according to 538's model. But that model has KC (ELO of 1588) as a significantly better team than Oakland (1428) and thus gives KC a much better chance of finishing with the better record since they play twice and have similar schedules. Incidentally Buffalo's ELO is 1530, which is a lot better than Oakland but not quite as good as KC. If the Bills win they will improve their rating and odds. If they lose, it'll go the other direction. In that way I really like models like this because they force teams to earn respect. Emotion is minimized even if there is a lot of variance.

You can see how this model is tracking if you look at not only KC and Buffalo, but also Oakland: KC: 4-5, 56% chance to make playoffs Buffalo: 5-4, 35% Oakland: 4-5, 7% The model is simply saying that the Bills have a tougher schedule (which they obviously do) and that currently KC is a much better team than Oakland, whom they still have to play twice. Things can change - injuries, development of players, hot streaks, etc. - but it's difficult to argue with those expectations today.

Agreed. I don't think it's a coincidence that these numbers are being floated out there right after his recent quality performances, including the Saints game. He's got a smart agent. Yes. Here is a link: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/tyrod-taylor/

Lol. Honestly, the ONLY reason to pick up Brandon Weedon is to get inside info on how to defend the Dallas offense. He should never step onto a football field again for any NFL team.

Actually it'd be unusual for a statistical model like this to NOT have "bad" weeks like this. Here's a simple example: Flip a regular coin 100 times. A result of 50 heads and 50 tails is the statistical average, but it's a very unlikely result. No one who gets 36 heads and 64 tails is going to think it's a "bad" result. Statistically it would make perfect sense. The above example is for a situation with precisely known odds that don't change over the course of the event. The models for football games use odds that are much less presciently known and, as noted already, those odds change during the game and season. Those changes are incorporated into the models as the season goes on. You have to understand what a model is really telling you. For instance, 538's preseason model of final records showed a narrow band of records, from about 5.5 wins to about 10.5 wins. That isn't to say that the model doesn't think there will be teams at 3-13 or 14-2. It just doesn't know which ones will. One projected with 10 wins has better odds of getting to 14-2 than one projected with 6 however. Their predictions aren't gospel, but they do shed light on things if used and considered properly.

Lmao

I assume he was keeping the animals as an additional food source.

They both put a lot of pressure on the CBs, but Rob really takes that to the extreme. Those CBs are on islands in man coverage. And if it's not working he leaves them there. Totally inflexible. Rex does it a lot too, but not like that.

It's similar to how young QBs should be brought along. The only better comparison is the offense Denver ran with Tim Tebow. Running the QB wasn't an important part of the offenses with Roethlisberger and Brady, but was with Tebow and is with Taylor. Honestly, when I watch Taylor I see a much better version of Tebow. Looking at his stats and watching him play it easy to see who Taylor is now: A QB who has been very efficient in a role with relatively limited passing and who is asked to run the ball regularly. He's also a guy who runs from the pocket a lot - either to buy time or gain yards. What I haven't seen a lot of is multiple read progressions and that's a concern. I've seen some of it and I've seen him look off on screens, but usually he buys time rolling to the side of field he's watching and goes from there. Where he needs to develop is properly getting through his progressions across the whole field. Hopefully he develops that skill because sooner or later he'll be called upon to be a bigger part of the offense with his passing. It's a lot to ask for that to happen overnight, but he's going to need to show he can do it before he really gets paid.

It's complicated, or at least it can be. Division records would only ever factor into tiebreakers between teams within the same division. Tiebreaking procedures: http://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures

Some guys just get promoted above their ceiling. Rob Ryan seems to have been a good position coach, although the deserves an asterisk since that was under Belichick. He will get another job, but "quality NFL coordinator" seems to be beyond his skill set. I don't want him here.

Please, God, no! Rob Ryan is horrible.

Yeah, the Bills have a tougher road ahead than their competition. Fivethirtyeight had their playoff odds jump up to 42% after TNF, but fell back to 36% after Sunday. I was surprised it wasn't higher due to where they sit now (6th spot) until I started looking at schedules. A tough, but not insurmountable, task. http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2015-nfl-predictions/

Sunday to Thursday is a shorter week than Monday night to Sunday, but both are short. Having to travel twice makes it tougher. What's the typical schedule after a MNF game away? Do teams fly back the following day or red eye it back? Either way they aren't practicing on Tuesday and they'll be traveling on Saturday too. Not the end of the world, but it isn't going to help.

I don't think people around here know what "math" is.

The Chefs beat down of the Donkeys really hurts. I'm not liking having to play the Cheatriots in Foxboro on Monday night followed by the Chefs in KC on a short week.

Yup. And until the record's a bit better.

http://www.uni-watch.com/2015/02/01/uniform-histories-of-the-patriots-and-seahawks/ Not sure if they ever wore the red pants with the red jerseys, but they had both. And white helmets with an emblem.