transplantbillsfan

Pointless post.

I'm sorry dude but it's not all that specific. TONS of NFL QBs were on the bench throughout almost all of their rookie contracts. It's the next 2 criteria that separates Taylor. I know you aren't seeing it, but you might want to reconsider the notion that Taylor can't improve just because of years of service

No, you don't just draft a QB in the first "no matter what." I can't believe anyone actually thinks this is a smart or even reasonable approach What Tyrod did in his 5th and 6th years after riding the pine for 4 years was the unlikely thing. Given that Taylor's already the exception rather than the rule we can throw any ridiculous rules like "NO WAY HE IMRPOVES IN YEAR 7!!!!" out the window

So your answer is no, then. You would no longer feel "bleh." Okay, now I'm going to ask you to do something I asked another poster to do because both of you share the same belief that what we've seen is what we've got simply because of age and number of years on an NFL roster. Throughout history, name me 10 QBs who going into year 7 in the NFL: -Rode the bench almost exclusively for the entirety of their rookie contract (4 years) -Given the opportunity to start in year five after earning the starting job -After earning the starting job, plays years 5 & 6 at "NFL starting QB" level That was the criteria I originally set forth. And I set it forward because of the arbitrary "sixth year" as some kind of watermark. My point was simply to establish how unique Taylor's case is. But if you can find me a number of QBs who meet that criteria, maybe you're on the right track, after all.

This is such an excellent point. Quarterbacking in the NFL might just be at a really high level right now. And if that's the case, even the 20th best QB in that type of year would still be perceived as a good QB in many other years. Seriously? Draft a QB in the first no matter what?!?! Absolutely not! Wow... this is ridiculous... It absolutely can easily be much worse.

That wasn't a "yes" or a "no." Ever heard of "sophomore slump?" It happens. Plus, 2015 will not be an easy year to match in terms of production and efficiency, anyway.

First of all, it's not about questioning him as a QB, it's about defining him. I still have questions about him, which is why I'm glad he has another year to try to define himself. I'm glad you acknowledge our low passing attempts was essentially because of an elite running game. I agree. As to the end of your post I just want you to answer a very simple "yes" or "no" to the following question: If 2015-2016 were Taylor's rookie and sophomore years and he played as he did, would you still feel "bleh" about him?

The bills called 35 passing please per game with Tyrod Taylor at the helm and 2016. 29.1 attempts per game 42 sacks (192 yards) 47 scrambles (371 yards) He lost 4.6 yards per play on every sack. He gained 7.9 yards per playing on every scramble. He also scored four of his six touchdowns on scrambles. Since last off-season I have been a proponent of a new stat: YPD (Yards Per Dropback) I haven't done this for any QBs in 2016, but I did look at Newton compared to Wilson compared to Taylor in 2015. And their numbers looked like this: Tyrod Taylor 6.9 YPD 33.1 DPG 52.1% passing plays for the offense Cam Newton 6.8 YPD 34.5 DPG 51.8% passing plays for the offense Russel Wilson 7.1 YPD 36.3 DPG 56.5% passing plays for the offense Hope that helps to quantify had a bed for you

You included sacks in your discussion as a negative without also (and fairly) including the positive alternative, which are the scrambles. That's what I'd call cherry picking. If we get the Tyrod from 2015 and he passes for 30 times a game rather than 27 and maintains the same efficiency on every play as he did in 2015, it's good enough. At that point, the rest of the team needs to hold up their end of the bargain and the bills are a playoff team for sure.

Wait. If you want to include sacks in this discussion, that's fine. Those were passing plays, you're right. Let's include the other passing plays: the scrambles. The plays where the QB is pressured, escapes pressure, and gains positive yardage instead of negative yardage. Happydays recently posted a football outsiders study that examined all passing plays. Including sacks and scrambles. On such plays, the bills had of the second highest DVOA in the NFL, behind only Aaron Rodgers and the Green Bay Packers. I can tell you from having done my own scrupulous research, Taylor gained 8 yards per scramble in 2016. Those are passing plays. I agree. Just like sacks are. The problem is that people want to talk about sacks as the negative without talking about scrambles as the positive. And when Taylor scrambles, he gained more yards per scramble and all but the top five QBs in the NFL in the category of YPA. What you're doing here is cherry picking.

Is "Tyrod" the 2015 or 2016 "Tyrod"?

If his play changes in what way? The bills were at the bottom of the NFL and "passing offense" essentially because they pass the ball less than anyone else. And I know above you guys were pointing to examples like the Falcons and chargers and Steelers having a "balanced" attack, but the bills were absolutely an incredibly dominant as a run offense in 2016. The head coach was a ground and pound head coach. The approach was clearly to stick to the ground. There is only one football. The team was an incredibly effective running offense last year. That was a reflection of the offensive approach. The 2016 Falcons were a rarity and having an elite passing and rushing offense. I don't know where Teeflebees was getting his numbers above but the Chargers and Steelers certainly weren't really high in the ranks in terms of both passing and rushing offenses. The Chargers were at the bottom of the league is rushing, actually. There is only one football. There are only so many snaps in a game. What you want is much more passing. Shady is one of the best backs in the NFL. It's kind a hard not to give him the ball, isn't it? I think Taylor is going to get more passes this year and we are going to see what he does with 30 to 35 passing attempts per game. But it's really just in the offensive approach.

I think you've missed my point.

I bumped it for Thurm so he doesn't lose track of something that seems so easily found

Just so you don't forget, since I know you're in a unique time zone, i'll do you a favor and bump this post so you are sure to see it. Remember, you said 50, just give me 10 names that fit that criteria should be easy, right?

Are you really feigning ignorance now? I know that you read the post. But since you need a reminder: -Rode the bench almost exclusively for the entirety of their rookie contract (4 years) -Given the opportunity to start in year five after earning the starting job -After earning the starting job, plays a significant number of games at "NFL starting QB" level Almost everyone of those guys on your "list" got a significant number of snaps by year five. And very few of them even ever played at "starting QB level" for an extended period of time the way that Taylor did over the span of 29 games. That was the criteria I originally set forth. And I set it forward because of your arbitrary "hasn't proven self as franchise QB by sixth year" rather than fifth, or fourth, etc. My point was simply to establish how unique Taylor's case is. That was the criteria you responded that there were at least 50 other guys in the NFL who met it. So I ask again, name 10...

What a joke! Steve Young started zero games and his fifth year and threw 92 total passes. That year established him as a franchise QB?!?! Are you nuts? You're being stubbornly ridiculous.

Wow... this might be the biggest pile of crap I have ever read from you. Not even going to try to put some lipstick on this pig? You can't separate his running from the whole QB thing because it's obviously part of it, much like it was/is for Fran Tarkenton, Steve Young, Randall Cunningham, Michael Vick, Cam Newton, Russell Wilson, Aaron Rodgers, Andrew Luck, Marcus Mariota, etc. The escapability and scrambling and running are all part of the whole QB thing for Taylor. It factors in. You don't separate it as you just did. And, I'm sorry, full stop? What you say here is speculative at best. The fact of the matter is that McDermott not only decided to keep Taylor but also passed up opportunities to address the QB position all the way until the team's 2nd 5th round pick. Say there weren't feasible options if you like, but you're reaching and creating your own narrative because it suits you... or because you lost your keys Go back to dressing the pigs up a little... makes it more presentable Since you brought this up, do you remember that question I asked you recently about quarterbacks that fit certain criteria that Taylor fits? Remember how you said there were about 50 guys? I asked you to come back with a list of 10. I'm still waiting... And don't try to make up some new criteria. Find the post, it was in one of our recent interactions; you likely ignored it because you knew you were actually mistaken but find it impossible to admit fault. Find the criteria that you yourself said about 50 other quarterbacks fall into. Name 10 of them...

Okay... so your definition of franchise QB has nothing to do with level of play, it's purely about tenure...? Rojah:thumbsup:

Dak and Jameis on that list already? Seriously? Seems like a real prisoner of the moment mentality to me. Kinda like back in 2012-2013 when everyone was calling Kaepernick and RG3 and Tannehill franchise and even elite QBs. And that talk was widespread. wait it out. Despite what you may have a label to me, I don't think Taylor is a franchise QB, much less an elite one. But it's still too early to know for sure. He's done some things and has some tools that indicate he could to be, which is a sentiment apparently shared by McDermitt and OBD. I think the most outlandish belief on this message board is that Taylor is no better than a good backup.

At this point in time he's still auditioning. It's that simple. Minds (other than random message board guys mind) have not been made up yet. 2018 will go along way to determine what he is. What we do know is this: he played well enough in 2015 and 2016 to earn another year of audition. Taylor is in the middle of his career. Right now, he just looks like an average QB who will never be elite but will never be horrible either. Maybe 2018 changes the narrative. I'm eager to see it unfold

Kind of a reactionary definition, isn't it? So let's go through this logic: you're a bills fan as we all are and all of us are looking for a franchise QB, correct? If that's the case, you would be content (by your definition) with Joe Flacco, Andy Dalton, Ryan Tannehill, or Jay Cutler (if we could coerce him out of retirement) if we could acquire them and hand them the reins to the franchise for the next several years over Taylor without hesitation?

We don't know if Taylor is above average, really good, below average or what, yet. In 2015, at worst, he was above average. I think he was really good. Really good being a top 10 to 12 QB. In 2016, he was average to below average. I'd say he was in the 15 to 20 range, despite the fact that there are some metrics like total QBR and PFF that put him in the top 10. But the problem is that in 2016 there were a ton of variables that came into play and may have seriously affected his play. Robert Woods and Sammy Watkins missed a combined 11 games. Rex was a disaster. There was a change in OC after week two. The list goes on. We need to find out what he is. Personally, I don't think he's any worse than an NFL starting QB, but I don't know if he's the answer for the franchise. This year should answer that question.

Except that the defenses valleys were much lower than Taylor's valleys. When you give up three different 200 yard rushing games, it's virtually inevitable you've lost three games. The defense was abysmal and multiple games in 2016. Taylor was bad against the ravens and the Bengals. Those three games with the 200 yard rusher's are mostly on the defense. Not entirely, but mostly. I think you could throw in there also the first Jets game where the defense allowed Ryan Fitzpatrick to pass for almost 400 yards. And then the defense blows a 15 point lead in the second half of the Raiders game allowing the Raiders offense to score and score and score and score. And while those three and outs that came on consecutive drives in the third quarter of the game didn't help, the defense literally had no excuse for not being rested on the first two Raiders touchdowns of the third-quarter. They had an entire half to rest, and then the Raiders had the ball for less than a minute before the bills offense put us ahead by 15 points. When the defense was good, they were really good. But it's hilarious that people dismiss Taylor's victory against the patriots because of who is starting QB on the other team. I'm sorry, were the patriots missing any of their defense? If that game should be dismissed for anyone in terms of praise, it's for the defense. The defense when it was bad, it was abysmal. Taylor wasn't. Like it or not, QBs who don't turn the ball over really aren't ever abysmal.

Buh Bye then. Got to say, I completely disagree. Year after year after year we've had that same middle of the road record. So putting your money on it happening again is probably a decent bet simply because it's the safe one. But I have a pretty sneaky feeling that this year is going to surprise a lot of people in a good way. Playoffs, here we come! ...too bad you'll only be watching the highlights