Shaw66

I'm a Tyrod fan. And I think, and I said, he had a good game. But football games generally turn on five or six key plays, and the interception was one of those plays. It's worth discussion. And in the case of the Bills, it's worth discussion because most people agree that the best way to build a good team is to have a really good quarterback. Whether Taylor can be a really good quarterback turns on little things. Among the things people think needs to improve are accuracy on short balls, pocket management and quick decision making and throwing. Missing by 5 feet on a pass 10 yards down field is a big miss. Drifting back and left and thereby missing the throwing lane is a problem. Throwing late because he doesn't have a good throwing lane is a problem. I'm grateful for the discussion here, even if it did bother you, because it helped me understand what happened on the play. I still don't agree with everyone about what happened on the play, but my understanding of Tyrod's play has been enhanced.

Cam Newton 94 games, 58.4% completion, 138 Tds 79 INT 3569 yards rushing in 695 carries, 72 TDs Sacked 221

I really think you aren't seeing the catch of that ball correctly at all. It was higher than you keep saying, and it was behind him. As I've said before, it may have been that Taylor expected Clay to stop running and Clay didn't. It wasn't an easy catch, and unless your tight end is Jimmy Graham, it isn't surprising that the tight end didn't catch it. Should have, I agree, but it wasn't a gimme. I'm now more convinced that the whole play was a Tyrod problem. Shouldn't have drifted back - should have moved up to create a throwing lane. And should have thrown it earlier. Those are all things TT has been accused of - not managing the pocket properly and being slow to pull the trigger. As you said, I think, long ago in this thread, TT will say it was on him and CC will say it was on him, and I think they're both right.

Alpha - You make an interesting point about the throwing lane. When I look at the replay, it's pretty clear that Glenn and his man are right in the throwing lane. Taylor COULDN'T throw it low with any zip on the ball. What Taylor should have done, it's easy to see in retrospect, is step up into the pocket instead of taking a step back and to his left. That additional drop left Glenn right in the line of the throw. If he'd stepped up a step, the throwing lane was wide open. I say easy to see in retrospect, because at full speed, under fire, stepping up isn't the obvious move. I've been one who's advocated deeper drops for Tyrod, so that he can see the rush and escape more easily, but dropping deeper got him in a little trouble here. Given this view, I'd say Taylor knew he was taking a risk and let the pass go. The conservative move would have been to throw it away and take the three points, but I believe you can't learn to make the hard throws unless you take the risk and suffer the consequences when it doesn't work out. This was a good risk to take - 7 vs 3 points. Taylor watched the film this week and learned some things from that play. You're right about this decision making. Clay wasn't the first read, and Clay was open. If he wasn't going to throw to Clay, he needed to begin scrambling. Not likely he could run it in, and it isn't clear where he was going to find an open receiver. Throwing to Clay was the right decision.

You and me and about a million other Bills fans.

I'm more hopeful about TT than that. I'm not convinced he has any serious negatives. I think he will continue to get better and by the time his legs give out he may have the kind of savvy that Brees has. That throw wasn't a good throw, but there weren't many others in that category on Sunday. I calculated his passer rating if he'd completed that pass for a TD, and it would have been in the 120s or 130s. I posted it somewhere. That shows how good his day was. When you add the impact of his running, I don't see anything I'd call a negative.

That's generally true but it's also the difference between average play and great play. Taylor's job is to be accurate. He wasn't rushed. He missed by 4 or 5 feet too high. That is not NFL accuracy at the highest level. And his job is to be sure that whatever else happens there us not a turnover. He put it in a position that led to a turnover. Yes, everyone makes mistakes, but these guys are measured against perfection. Taylor wasn't perfect here.

Like I said, I'd like to know what the coaches told Tyrod. But this makes sense. Someone else said Tyrod did what you say expecting Clay to "settle into that spot instead of to continue running. Since Clay didn't slow down, it became a tougher catch for him - if he'd stopped, he could have gone airborne for easily and it's a score. If Clay was supposed to make that read and stop, then Tyrod's throw behind him was the right throw. Still too high - especially when the receiver is settling in front of a zone like that, the throw is supposed to be down. There are so many plays like this that I'd like to hear what the coaches say. They know what the players were supposed to do and they watch the films and see whether the player did it. We all just speculate, except for the occasional poster who has some serious football experience - like years playing or coaching D-I. Right. Not the way the coaches look at it, but you're right. The important point, however, is that the players' jobs on that play was to avoid the turnover to preserve the scoring opportunity. They failed.

I don't agree with the title or with the notion that the Panthers or Falcons are vastly superior. They may be, but as you say, we won't know until the games are played. I don't agree with the title because EVERY team in the NFL is changing over the fist 4 to 8 weeks of the season. The good teams emerge later in the season, as they have gotten really good at executing what the coaches have given them. When the Bills D was so good under Schwartz a few years ago, it wasn't until the second half of the season that the D got dominant. We won't know whether the Jets are as bad as everyone thinks until they've played a half dozen games. It's especially true with a new HC and new offensive and defensive systems. We won't know what the Bills are like until the players really settle into the systems. So the Bills could start 1-3 and still be a good team in December. The problem with starting 1-3 is that it makes it difficult to make the playoffs, but that doesn't mean they should tank after that start. Most of these players will be on the team next season, and tanking for the last 12 games means that you've given up the opportunity for those players to learn and grow in the system as much as possible. I agree, Panthers, Broncos, Falcons looks like a really tough stretch of games, but you don't know until the Bills play them. Maybe one or more of those teams isn't as good as we think they are. Panthers lost their defensive coordinator, except for short stretches Newton hasn't been a better QB than Taylor. Really, check the stats - lower career passer rating, never had a season with a higher passer rating than Tyrod, has lower yards per attempt rushing than Taylor. Yes, it's on the road. Broncos have a really suspect QB, and what looks to be a mediocre offense. Bills offense is perfect to play Denver - they aren't very good against the run, and the short passing game negates the pass rush. Atlanta? Have they recovered from the Super Bowl? Their rushing defense isn't very good either. Bottom line, the Bills could be 4-0 to start the season. Am I dreaming? Yes. I'd be happy to be 2-2, and that's what I expect. I don't think the Bills will lose the next three.

I should let this go, but I'm replying for several reasons: 1. I have a big ego. I like being right and I like arguing. 2. I learn things in these discussions. 3. Someone who reads this may learn something. YOU may learn something, but you seem more intent on arguing than listening and thinking. 4. Others may enjoy reading this, may even be amused by it. Okay, are you ready? You really misunderstand some basic things about this aspect of football. 1. Where do I get the notion that the ball shouldn't be thrown high? It's very simple: quarterbacks are taught that when the defenders are BETWEEN the QB and the receiver, to throw it high so only the receiver can get it. When the defenders are BEHIND the receiver, QBs are supposed to throw low so that only the receiver can get it. Throwing high to receivers when the defenders are BEHIND the receiver leads to the possibility of tipped balls and INTs, which is EXACTLY what happened here. If Taylor had thrown low to Clay, there may or may not have been a completion, but there would have beeen no interception, and the Bills would have kicked a field goal. The best example of this general rule is this exact case. When the receivers are at the back of end zone, the defenders are in front and the QB is supposed to throw high. If the ball goes off the receiver's hands, it carries out end zone and there's no INT. But when the receiver is on the goal line, as in this case, the defenders typically are behind the receiver, so the QB is supposed to throw low. 2. There was no reason for Taylor to throw high. There's no advantage to throwing high in that situation, and there's a higher probability of an INT. You seem to think because it's OK in some circumstances to throw high that it's OK in this instance, and it isn't. Much of football decision making is about probabilities, and this case is a good example. THe probability of completing the pass is the same, whether it's thrown high or low, so long as the ball is within a reasonable catching radius. The probability of an INT is higher if the QB throws high. So the QB is taught to throw low. Simple. 3. You don't understand what high-pointing is. That is a term used to describe what the RECEIVER does, not what the QB does. High-pointing describes the receiving jumping to catch a pass at the highest point off the ground possible. By high-pointing, the receiver to reduce or eliminate the number of defenders who can make a play on the ball by virture of the receiver's height and jumping ability. It's a technique that is applied on passes with air uner them, because it's only those passes that give the receiver options as to where to catch the ball. The ball is coming down, the receiver could try to catch the ball when it is 6 feet, 8 feet or 10 feet off the ground. The best play is to high point it, to catch it 10 feet off the ground. A receiver running downfield has a chance to do that by jumping earlier rather than continuing to run and letting the ball fall to him. This wasn't one of those situations. Clay was running across the field and the throw was going downfield. Clay's only option was to catch the ball at the point wher his path and the ball's path intersected. High pointing is irrelevant. And it has nothing to do with how Taylor should throw the ball on this kind of play. 4. You say the point of having big targets is so they can out-jump defenders. That's true. But that doesn't mean that all throws to the end zone are supposed to be thrown high. The ball has to be thrown where the probabilities are best. See above. 5. You say throwing high to receivers in the end zone is a common practice. That's also true. But that is true when the receivers are deep in the end zone and the defenders are in front of the receiver. It is not true when the receiver is in the front of the end zone and the defenders are behind him. See above. Rephrasing an old proverb, Abraham Lincoln once said "better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt." Thanks. I agree with this. Tackles don't pile up stats, and they can have very good games without ever being visible to most of us unsophisticated viewers of the game. It takes some real discipline to see what the DTs are doing while watching the games. Kyle's play was easy because the stunt put him outside the DE and then running free in the backfield. The Jets had so little success running the ball, Hughes, Dareus, Kyle and Shaq had to have played well. They either were making tackles or making it possible for linebackers and DBs to make tackles.

I'm with you. TT already is committed to Clay in that still. But QCity is correct about ball placement. That ball has to be thrown low so that only Clay can get it. It is NOT supposed to be thrown high, for the exact reason that played out here. Throw it high and you've turned it into a jump ball. And the notion that it was at eye level is ridiculous. Clay jumped and reached over his head to make a play on the ball. It simply was one of Taylor's poorer throws of the day. Could Clay have caught it? Sure. But that doesn't mean it was a good throw. There's also the question of whether Taylor read this play as quickly as he needed to. The still makes it look like he did, but it isn't easy to tell. I'd love to know what the coaches said to Taylor after watching the film.

I think it IS an arrow up moment for the Bills precisely for the reasons you give - good coaching and team discipline. Not saying this is a playoff team, but if the team is organized and disciplined, you can add talent and get better. Last season I had the feeling that Rex wasn't going to win regardless of the talent the Bills might get. So I'm definitely feeling good. This Sunday will tell a lot. I actually care less about winning than I do about the Bills being competitive. Can this team, with last season's talent and this season's coaching, compete with a team with some big offensive threats and a good defense? If the Bills can compete, we've got something to get excited about. If the Bills can win, well, then it's a whole new ballgame. I think you're right. Problem was that Clay wasn't the first option. Maybe Taylor came to him late, maybe he was too slow recognizing what was happening and he should have seen Clay earlier. No way for us to know.

I think you're right. But that's one thing that isn't Taylor's fault. Clay definitely could have caught it, but the throw wasn't where it was supposed to be.

Problem is, Rivera knows McD's defense inside and out, and he has Cam Newton to take advantage of Bills weaknesses. i don't think there's an advantage.

So Ralph broke down and brought Saban back, who actually gave the ball to Simpson and as a consequence looked like a genius!

Statistically, yes, it was a typical Tyrod day. We've seen a dozen of those games - low 200 yards, decent percentage, a couple of touchdowns, runs well, low INTs. But I thought he LOOKED better. I think we saw a lot of the things that people have been saying he needed to do. He stayed in the pocket and generally didn't begin scrambling until it was time to go. He got rid of the ball quickly on many throws. He was accurate on his short throws. He threw over the middle. And I'll say it again - I don't think Tyrod all of a sudden became a better QB. I think he's playing in a system that asks him to do those things and that creates open receivers to throw to. Most of the throws he had to make were easy, because his options were clear. He's a good athlete and he works hard off the field to master his position. He's taking advantage of what the coaches are giving him. I too don't understand it. The Bills went through about 15 years with quarterbacks who simply weren't good enough. Guys with 80, 82 passer ratings, which means they simply weren't making enough plays. They finally get a guy who DOES make enough plays to win, not a Favre or Manning or Rodgers, but a guy who puts up solid performances most weeks, and some people talk about him like he's a bag of pistachio shells.

I wrote nicely complimentary things about Tyrod's game. He had a good game. However, every play is open for review, and Tyrod missed that throw. Yes Clay could have caught it and should have caught it and gets paid to catch it, but that doesn't change the fact that the ball was not thrown where it was supposed to be thrown. I wasn't commenting on Clay, I was commenting on Taylor. Taylor had a good a game. His passer rating was 92, which is a solid performance. If he'd thrown the ball where it should have been, or if Clay had caught it where it was thrown, his passer rating would have been 123. If that pass had been completed the game would have been much different. The play is worth talking about.

Interesting story about State Farm. Personally, I've been with AMICA forever, and they're great too. I'd never buy insurance from an amphibian. Not that I'm biased; some of my best friends are amphibians.

Days - Watch the replay on NFL.com. http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017091000/2017/REG1/Jets@Bills?icampaign=scoreStrip-globalNav-2017091000#menu=gameinfo%7CcontentId%3A0ap3000000842391&tab=recap Clay clearly goes airborne. Watch the replay on ESPN - commentator says Taylor overthrew Clay. http://www.espn.com/nfl/video?gameId=400951567 That ball is supposed to be at Clay's waist, not over his head.

Watch the video. Clay JUMPED for the ball, hands over his head and it went off his fingers. Ask Taylor where that ball is supposed to be and he will say at or below the waist. Especially on 3rd down in the red zone. Up is the only place it can be intercepted. Taylor missed by 5 feet. It cost the.Bills 3 points. not a bad decision but a bad throw.

Read again what I've said about Taylor. I'm not discrediting him for anything. I'll take that game all day. I didn't say Clay missed because he got hit. I said Taylor hung him out to dry - throwing that pass assured that Clay would get hit by two defenders. If Clay cracked a couple of ribs on that play, you'd agree the throw was a problem. The ball looked like it surprised Clay. Should it have? No. The play didn't happen so fast that he should have been surprised. But the ball WAS high, and that's not the place for that throw to be. Ask Taylor and he'll say it's on him. Ask Clay and he'll say it's on him. Buddo - I agree about the defensive line and the possibility for progress. They aren't done building this defense. Also right about blown assignments - very few, and occasional soft coverage - clearly intentional.

I thought it was really weird. And you're right about not many Jets fans being there. Usually there are plenty, but the Jets fans are so bummed right about now, it's understandable. I really would like to see the Bills beat Carolina, because that will bring the crowd back to life for game three. That's a tall order.

Well, maybe it's all on Clay and I didn't see it clearly. I thought the ball took Clay by surprise (which may be on him, too), and it wasn't an easy catch - too high. That throw is supposed to be in his belly. Of course, the receiver has to help out his QB. Plus when Clay caught the TD later, he clapped his hand on the ball as if to say that he was still upset about not getting the first one. On the other hand, Clay was absolutely drilled on the one he missed. Taylor set him up for that. End of the day, however, it has to be on Taylor. He threw a ball that wasn't right where it was supposed to be, and his receiver couldn't handle it. Back of the end zone, high. Front of the end zone, low.

Right you are. He isn't quite up to the level of the others I named, but close, and he deserves to be there as much for his inspirational value. What's interesting is that Jackson is without question not in the top 5 Bills running backs of all time, and he'd be in the top 5 for sure, on probably 20 teams in the league., including probably three in the Bills' division. I looked at the replay - looks like the throw was above his head. He was coming back for the ball and probably wouldn't have scored if he caught it. And there were two defenders on him. If Taylor's going to throw to Clay on that play, it had better be low. Taylor paid the price.

Hard to know what Williams would be doing. But that isn't the point. The point is that fans thought Tolbert was an old Booby Dixon, but he isn't. He's a real running back who happens to be big. If McCoy were to get hurt, Williams might have been a better guy to be a full-time player, might not, but as a guy to spell Shady on 15 plays a game, Tolbert will do fine. Fans also have forgotten that Tolbert joined the Bills immediately after McDermott signed on, and the reason it happened is because McDermott believes Tolbert is a special guy to have in the locker room and Tolbert believes McD is a special coach to play for. That relationship is important to the team. No doubt the Jets had something to do with it. Had it been the Pats or the Packers or the Seahawks or the Cowboys or the Raiders or a few others, the place would have been rocking, and fans wouldn't have left early. They would have stayed for the celebration. But five years ago, the fans would have been celebrating even a win over a crap team. No more. The fans are saying they aren't buying until they've seen something more than new slogan.