dave mcbride

If they aren't panicking a little about the talent level on this defense, they're doing something wrong. Panic isn't always a bad response. The issue has to be addressed. As for "long term," this league is the not-for-long league. If they're 4-12 next season, I wouldn't bet a ton of money on them being back for season 3, and if they have a losing record in season 3, they will be gone as sure as the sun rises in the morning.

Actually, he was a 10 times better player in the late 1990s than he was in the mid-1980s. He genuinely blossomed and learned how to play in the CFL.

The simplest explanation is that the Bills will act like the Bills. Hence Occam's Razor. My assumption is that the Bills are the Bills and will act like the Bills typically act. Doesn't get any simpler than that. From the OED: "The principle that in explaining anything no more assumptions should be made than are necessary. Cf. law of parsimony n. at sense 3." You're missing my point. Taylor isn't even in this discussion. He's gone.

Irrespective of whether the qb switch is the right move or not, I'm gonna throw this idea out there: the switch is a function of panic about defense and in a sense a hail mary throw with regard to the future of the qb position. Here's my thinking: McDermott and Beane have decided that Taylor, who is probably more likely to lead them to 9-7 than Peterman, is not the answer and not the future qb of the Bills. They need to find out what Peterman is, but not just for the reason everyone thinks. I susepect they always anticipated packaging picks and moving up to get a qb, but times have changed. That is, they may well be having serious second thoughts about that strategy right now. Why? They are presiding over a defense that is functionally devoid of talent on the front seven -- and I mean almost *completely* devoid of talent. Jerry Hughes is the only mid-level starting caliber player in the entire group (don't kid yourself about Lawson or Lorax), and it basically requires a massive overhaul. They need to spend high draft picks to fix this huge problem (late round prayers won't cut it), and spending a couple of firsts and a second in order to move up for a qb (which is usually the best strategy given the centrality of the qb position) won't let them do that. McDermott is a defensive coach at the end of the day, and overseeing this pathetic crew--which can't sack anyone and (post-Dareus) can't stop the run--has to be galling. Starting Peterman, who actually looks like a pro-style qb in his limited garbage time efforts (last week and preseason), represents something of a hail mary on their part. They're likely hoping that over the next few games he can show that he's potentially another Tony Romo or Kirk Cousins -- a guy who can evolve into a franchise qb in a relatively short period of time. Both of those guys have put up numbers regardless of who they were throwing to. That frees them up to draft defense throughout on the first couple of days of the draft. Whether this happens or not, I don't know. However, if you apply Occam's Razor to the situation, it is the most Bills-y approach (ignoring qb early in the draft and praying for the best with marginal talent) -- and history tells us that it therefore has a decent likelihood of happening.

The bills would be crazy to not package picks and move up for a qb no matter what. Peterman is a limited player and is not the answer. Good teams know what it takes to win: get a stud qb. You can't expect to luck into one.

No, he sucked -- and he sucked the way he usually sucked: by functioning as a sack machine. 6 sacks and a safety taken.

My recollection of that "benching" of Kelly is that there were other non-football related factors behind it (and which also were affecting his performance). That was a big topic of discussion back in the day. Jimbo's personal history isn't a clean one, and he has freely admitted that.

It looks like he will. If they lose, the season is pretty much definitely over. The best they'll do is 8-8 because they're going to be blown out by KC and NE twice.

yup. Dreadful.

You're not really going to argue that Flutie didn't have a good game despite a couple of mistakes, right? Are you also going to argue that Johnson was good against TN?

I don't care what Dennison's pedigree is; he doesn't call a good game. I also suspect that he has more than little of Curtis Modkins (central/mountain zone edition) in him. Those weren't his offenses in Houston and Denver.

The thing is, in clear running situations he was in there (most plays are passing situations!). Teams adjust game plans accordingly when they know they have to face a guy like him who is extremely difficult to move even with two blockers on him. NO linemen were moving the Bills DTs with ease in one-on-one situations on clear running downs. The percentage of plays really isn't an indicator.

I suggest quitting while you're behind. Kirby ain't always right, but he is better informed about the game than just about anyone here.

The Jets defense was great in 2015 - a LOT better than it is now. 9th in points allowed, 4th in yards, and 5th overall in defensive DVOA. They are 19th in DVOA this season. The difference? The absence of Watkins/Hogan/Woods.

The team was terrible that night. Taylor's only really bad game was the NO game. He didn't perform very well against Cincy (although Cincy's very good front 7 had him under siege all game), but every mid-tier qb has off days, and that was a truly garden variety off-peak performance. I'm opposed to this move for a couple of reasons even though I know that Taylor will never be better than the 14th or so best qb in the league in any given season: I like the guy (he's a gamer and is no BS), the whole thing smacks of dishonesty / desperation, and I fear we're about to witness the 17th coming of Tom Savage/Brian Hoyer/etc. - pro-style qbs with modest athletic skills who can effectively run what the OC wants them to run. We shall see.

Um ... Taylor didn't play badly against the Jets.

The thing is, Taylor has done well against that same Jets defense in the past with a better receiving corps. He oversaw two nice victories in 2015 and had 30 passes for 297 (9.9 ypa) yards in a 37-31 loss in early 2016.

2015: RBs had 59 catches; WRs and TEs had 234 catches. 2016: RBs had 73 catches; WRs and TEs had 213 catches. 2016: RBs have 57 catches; WRs have 102 catches. The ratio gets worse every year. I somehow don't think that Taylor got worse in this regard either. The difference? We have a new coordinator, obviously, but the replacement of Watkins, Woods, and Hogan (a FAR better player than fans here gave him credit for) in 2015 with what we have now has been a huge factor. The receiver group got worse every year, whether through departure or injury.

100 is league average. Note the adjusted yards per attempt and the adjusted net yards per attempt numbers. They have gone down, and I suspect in direct relation to the presence of Sammy Watkins.

Actually, as I mention above, he HAS changed in recent weeks to being a more dump-off oriented passer. He wasn't in the past.

Taylor is not traditionally a dump-off passer; his ypa is actually pretty good and he has pushed the ball down the field in the past. The last two games have been different, but they don't represent the norm.

? - A low number of passing attempts is not a bad stat! Re the Titans, look at the whole picture instead of cherry picking -- i.e., the whole season. Anyway, the Bills offense was not great in 1999. No one is arguing that. It was *average* on the top line stats -- 16th in yards, 11th in points. It was 7th overall in offensive DVOA, however. Irrespective of Flutie's flaws, though, there is the much bigger issue of Rob Johnson: a physically talented but terrible QB his entire post-high school career.

Who is worshipping Flutie? He was a decent QB for the Bills who had major limitations in his game but also brought some real assets to the table. Johnson, on the other hand is the most sacked QB in league history and had well over twice the sack rate of Flutie while in Buffalo playing behind the same line. He stunk, as his subsequent career proved. There is a reason he was a fourth round pick despite being one of the most gifted throwers coming out of college in the mid-1990s: he lost three times each to ND and UCLA despite playing behind Tony Boselli and throwing to three WRs who have fringe-NFL hall of fame stats: Keyshawn Johnson, Johnny Morton, and Curtis Conway. All were first rounders and all had 500+ career receptions. Yet Johnson choked six times against what at the time were inferior opponents. I lived in LA at the time, and trust me, he choked.

Yeah, he looks pretty good to me. Time will tell.

"Scoreboard" is a weak way to argue. Look at the context and consider that football is a game with 22 moving parts on any play. Flutie did enough to win against a far superior opponent than the 1999 TN D; Johnson performed horribly against a middling defense.