transplantbillsfan

Oh man.... helluva post and spot on

https://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/194613-article-on-why-2017-passing-game-can-make-giant-leap-forward/ That debate inevitably devolved, too

I thought you guys decided on Root Beer? I prefer the real thing myself

BWAHAHAHA!!! Love it!

Wow, 19th? That's actually higher than I thought it would be. Considering that the Bills as a team had at least 3 more rushing TDs than any other NFL team not located in Dallas even without Taylor's 6 rushing TDs, 19th for Taylor seems pretty okay.

RF... you say some negative and some positive in here. I still don't think your feelings have changed, but this is the most balanced post I've read in a very long time and it's the type of posting and perspective I think we should all aspire to. I'm being serious, too

I think John's point is that if this was right, defenses would always be doing this and Taylor wouldn't even be able to function on the football field. If what you're saying is correct and defenses know that all they have to do is to dare him to beat them, they would always do it.

Oh good gawd!!! Thurm's gotten to you!!!

Okay, I am just going to assume you intended to put the word "consistently" after "TT" in every one of those questions because obviously ​Taylor does every single one of those things to some degree during the year. You just believe he needs to do all of them more, correct? I'm assuming that's what you mean. If you think he never does those things there's just no sense talking to you. But to each task, I think Taylor commands and orchestrates the offense a lot more than you seem to think as he's specifically stated in post game PCs that in looking for something the D is giving he'll audible to different plays... from a pass to a run or a run to a pass. He's also the "ball-handler," so even when he has an option or a triple option with a run play, he's obviously the one commanding and orchestrating where the ball goes. I guess that touched on the first 2 questions. Taylor needs to work on pocket presence. I agree. He could stay in the pocket longer, at times. Though as I've pointed out to you before, Taylor stays in the pocket with pressure closing in on him or coming straight at him fairly frequently. More than half of his TD passes came under pressure and for 80% of those TD passes, he remained in the pocket. Even when he leaves the pocket, he always has his eyes downfield and is always looking for open WRs. I think identifying and delivering to those (NFL) "open" WRs is what he needs to get better at. Does he make multiple reads? Yes, he does. You just want him to do it "consistently," but I'd rather he makes the best pre-snap read possible and knows where he's going to the football when it's snapped. Listening to Greg Cosell the other day on the Colin Cowherd show, he was asked about Drew Brees and how age is affecting him and one thing he said that I thought was interesting was that Brees has continued to be able to play at such a high level because he knows where he's going with the football when the ball is snapped on the vast majority of plays. He does most of his reads pre-snap rather than post-snap. And I think that's what you'd rather have your QB do. Taylor and throwing with anticipation is another one. Does he do it? Yes. You just want him to do it "consistently." One of the things people often tie this to is YAC because the belief is that Taylor isn't leading his guys to gain more yards. Except that (according to Cian Fahey) the average depth/distance of Taylor's throws was the 5th highest in the NFL. And he was still top 10 in accuracy %. When you're throwing downfield, those aren't passes designed to get YAC. Short passes and screens are those types of plays. And head-scratchingly Buffalo had like the fewest screen plays in the NFL in 2016, despite having Shady McCoy and Sammy Watkins. Does TT use the entire field? Of course he does. I don't even know what you mean here.

I agree, if he really wants to do something without money, I'd be willing to do the signature thing.

Well, then no bet. Sorry. Trying to find common ground. I figured a bet where the money goes to a good cause would be even better than "harmless fun" because it would result in helping a good cause of some sort, whichever one we both choose.

Love the snarkiness. Those aren't numbers he has to reach for the Bills to keep him. Those are just the numbers at which point I have absolutely no doubt we would keep him. and... Do you not like giving money to charity or something? I already said I won't do naming rights. But if you want to do some amount of money towards your favorite charity, I'll take your total yards bet.

I just put up the numbers I think absolutely keep him in Buffalo no matter what. I'm not saying if/when he gets numbers lower than that we don't keep him, I'm just saying if he reaches those numbers, it's pretty much a lock he's not going anywhere.

Who are you talking to?

What? The criteria I gave Thurm that he told me at least 50 guys met consisted of 3 things: 1) Rode the bench all or the vast majority of entire rookie contract (4 years) 2) Given the opportunity to compete for a starting QB job, he won the starting job 3) Played up to the end of year 6 at "starting QB level," meaning somewhere in the middle or better of the 32 starters My reasoning for #1 specifically is because of the arbitrary criteria set forth about how "if a QB hasn't proven to be a franchise QB by his 7th year, he's not one." Well, if you're on the bench for all but 35 pass attempts of your first 4 years, that gives you 2 years to prove your a franchise QB, which just isn't something that always happens for QBs in their first 2 years. You'd love it if they played lights out or absolutely horribly so that you know, but that leaves out that very large number of NFL QBs who are learning the game and showing both flashes and struggles in their first 2 years. What I think Thurm did was what a lot of folks here do, like what Crusher has been doing a number of times in this thread, he latched onto one thing without considering the rest. Thurm's right, lots and lots of QBs meet #1. That much is obvious. I'm still waiting for QBs who meet #2 or #3. If #2 and #3 don't exist, then Taylor's situation is incredibly unique.

Crusher did it just a few posts after you asked that very question when he said he's "an athlete playing QB." That's the same thing even if it's not the exact same wording. I'm not going through other threads to prove something like that. It's like you telling me the sky isn't blue, you've never actually looked up. If Taylor looks exactly like he did in 2016, we're definitely drafting a QB in the 1st, as we should. Making the playoffs matters, but that's not a QB stat. My numbers for Taylor staying in Buffalo after this year are this: >/=4000 yards passing, >/=30 passing TDs, </=10 INTs, >/=7.0 YPA He gets there, he's doing something really right, and he remains the starter in Buffalo. If it's less than that, it would depend on how much less and whatever other factors.

Who's pretending? I've never hidden the fact that I only like talking about the Bills starting QB. And I haven't hidden the fact that I think Taylor's shown enough positive on the field to warrant more time in order to determine if he can be a Franchise QB. That's been my stance. I have no clue what you think it really is. You seem to just be deluded by your strange infatuation with disagreeing with every word I post. Awww, you just can't quit me, can you? When I feel nauseated, I step away from whatever I'm doing for a good long time. Just a bit of advice

Yep You're joking, right?

I'm good. Sunshine and surf keeps me glowin 3 in like 7 months is numerous? Do you have trouble counting? I didn't add anything. My criteria always consisted of three very specific things. Thurm found a few QBs who matched the first set of criteria I set forth. He couldn't find a single one that matched the other two. You have a selective reading problem. Don't worry though, you're not alone in this thread

I think it's kinda sad that you find it worthwhile spending time talking about how another poster posts rather than talking about football stuff on a football message board. I notice you do that a lot. I explained my reasoning for the way I post. I actually kind of hoped you'd be respectful in a response. I spent that time typing out that response only because of the respect I had for you as a poster. Instead, you choose to be a jerk. Oh well, people disappoint and the world is full of jerks. And whatever previous posters you want to compare me too, I will always be here under the same username rooting for my team and my quarterback. I'm a diehard Bills fan before anything else within the team. I've used YPT, too. I distinguish YPD from YPT simply because (and I am not going to bore everyone to tears with my explanation again) a designed running play is very different from a designed passing play. Just consider the fact that net passing yards factors sacks into the equation. By that same logic, scrambles should be factored into the equation. YPT is very easy to calculate, but it includes designed runs and scrambles altogether. YPD is much more difficult because you have to go through the play by plays and count up the scrambles and the yards for every single quarterback. I've done it for Taylor and Taylor alone. It would take time to do everyone else, although the NFL should really just keep track of those differences between the scramble and the designed run.

47 plays that are scrambles and you're trying to insinuate that on every single one of them he had these wide-open receivers running all over the field and that in not passing the football and running instead he left yardage on the field. Yeah, sure, there were absolutely some plays where he could have passed the football to someone rather than run. And some of those same plays him running was still not just a positive play, but it may have been a touchdown or a first down, considering that the majority of his scrambles actually did gain a first down or a touchdown. So, whine about getting a first down or a touchdown one way but not another, to me, that's a really simple minded approach. Yards are yards. First downs are first downs. Touchdowns are touchdowns. Point out your one or two plays that you keep focusing on. That's fine. Don't bother considering the numerous sacks he avoids and turns into positive yardage, often a first down or a touchdown. Instead, focus on that receiver that he missed on those one or two plays you're focusing on. Don't bother considering the fact that even though she is the most sacked QB in the NFL, he loses among the least amount of yards per sack (it might be the least, actually) of all NFL QBs on a per play basis. This is likely a reason or at least a factor in why Buffalo was one of the best and most efficient teams in converting a first down after a sack. Taylor has things he can improve upon, for sure. There are definitely plays where he runs when he should have passed. But in general, even saying that those plays where he ran instead of past hurt the offense is misguided nonsense. Happydays has brought up and pointed out that outside of the Green Bay Packers and Aaron Rodgers, the Bills as an offense were the best in the NFL on plays where the QB was pressured; this includes those plays where a QB chooses to scramble, like Taylor. That means something.

Okay, QBs who will make a difference during the regular season in terms of Ws and Ls. Sorry, I don't care to waste time talking much about a single backup until he's not a backup anymore. Better? He doesn't care. He's always right and you never are unless you agree with him. That's him approach at the beginning of every single discussion here.

I'll give you this, at least you actually discuss the topic rather than piss and moan about the fact that people are talking about Taylor. That said, I didn't cherry pick because I brought up the sacks. I brought up the fact that he lost 192 yards on sacks. I brought up the fact that I believe there should be a stat called YPD or yards per dropback. Taylor's YPD in 2016 would have been 6.1 versus 6.9 in 2015. Definitely a drop. He was definitely less effective in 2016. But Taylor's lost sack yards were the 18th most in the NFL, not the most as his number of sacks were. Go through other QBs who don't run much and just convert even all of their rushing yardage to the YPD format and see what you come up with. Sam Bradford passed for 7.0 YPA, but he was sacked for 276 yards and rushed or scrambled for only 53. At best, his YPD in 2016 was exactly 6.0, and that's only if all his runs came on designed pass plays. Carson Palmer averaged 7.1 YPA but his YPD was also just 6.1. I know that you think I was cherry picking the way that you clearly did, but again, I've brought up the sacks as both lost plays and yards. You consider nothing but your own narrowly (yet bizarrely complex in its arbitrarily defined manner) defined position

Why does it honestly matter so much to you and others, apparently? Do you actually want me to justify this? I'm going to explain this one more time, QB is the position I enjoy talking about the most. I hope you read it, consider it, and stop hassling me about the fact that generally I only post in Taylor threads. Yes, I'm a die-hard Bills fan and have been for approaching 3 decades now. And yes, I love other players on the team. Kyle Williams is one of my other favorite players. He's gone now, but I don't know if you remember when Freddy was on the team that I'd start other threads about him. I got into it a few times with a couple posters who are probably over here now about CJ vs. Freddy. I still love Freddy and even had some fleeting hope he'd sign with the Bills again this offseason and try to battle it out and end his career in Buffalo. I love McCoy and think he's maybe the most talented RB in the NFL right now. The NFL is turning into another sport where players just move from team to team to team. But in general from team to team to team it's the QB who remains with different teams if he's good and so that's generally the position it's probably safest to become familiar with in terms of the player. I don't just sit in front of my computer all day reading and responding to a whole bunch of different threads with one-liners because I'm busy either with business or play and don't feel like sitting there doing that. I don't have a smartphone as a daily phone so that's not an option as I'm sure some just check in at random points. Once the preseason starts I'll probably post more about other players, but I haven't seen anything from them. When I get on this message board, I don't get on here planning to sit here forever. So I check to see if there are any startlingly fresh or new topics. When I don't, I come into the select few topics I've chosen to engage in, which are generally about Taylor because, again, that's the position I'm most interested in talking about because it's the most important position in all of sports. And I begin reading from where I last posted to the end of the thread. That's the reason I know some of my posts can come in an annoying "machine-gun" style because I sit here, read a post a few posts after my last post, respond to it, and then continue from that same post and do the same thing. I understand that might be annoying, but sorry, I'm going to read the thread sequentially and respond to posts I feel warrant a response. I try holding my tongue now especially with certain posters, but I'll probably still post 3-5 posts in a row. That is at least in part my reasoning for posting the way I do. As I just said above, I'm not going to spread my discussion (and time) to other topics I'm not as interested in talking about just in order to change some general perception of me.

Thank you