thebandit27 Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 Taylor's amazing. 8-8 here we come. Why are people so convinced that there's 2 levels of QB: franchise and sucks? Tyrod is not a franchise QB. Tyrod does not suck. I believe that anyone that thinks either of those things is silly.
reddogblitz Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 People seem to forget we expected our defense to be lights out this year. Thanks to Rex Ryan its been anything but. I haven't forgotten. However, we don't have the D we were promised and won't for the foreseeable future it seems. IF Tyrod were playing a only a little better, we could still be winning. ie. not underthrowing 4 long passes vs Patsies**, not stopping throwing it to Sammy in 2nd half vs Cheaps, not throwing a pick on the first play vs Patsies** in the first game, not fumbling so much, etc. I believe that's where the heartburn is coming from. When you don't have a good D, your offense and QB must step up. In the game where out D crumbles, that's not happening. Sure, he was only going to be a game manager, but now we need more. Can he deliver? So far, mixed results. That said, ride him out the rest of the season and see what we got. If you keep dumping QBs after 10-20 games if they aren't Joe Montana, you'll likely never have a good QB. Overall I've been happy with a lot of his play.
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 Why are people so convinced that there's 2 levels of QB: franchise and sucks? Tyrod is not a franchise QB. Tyrod does not suck. I believe that anyone that thinks either of those things is silly. Because some think being a starter the following season = Franchise QB. Also - being critical does not mean he sucks. People get too carried away and make poor assumptions. --- Said assumptions keep me from quoting a certain poster upon threat of getting suspended (again) or worse.
Beerball Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 I believe that anyone that thinks either of those things is silly. The first 2 or the last 2? Hard for me to understand why people are so polarized on the topic. Taylor is the best QB on the roster. That doesn't make him a superstar, it makes him the best QB on the roster. The team will bring in 2 this off season, one a vet, the other a rookie. Next year we'll be having a similar discussion about whoever is the starter because this thing isn't going to come up roses any time soon. The best hope we have is that they snag someone with real promise in the draft because we know that good QBs don't hit the open market. People get too carried away and make poor assumptions. Yes, they do.
reddogblitz Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 But I think most former players, coaches, etc. would tell you that you're not really getting real experience- especially as a QB- until you're actually thrown to the fire. This is probably true to a degree. But doesn't seem to be the case with Aaron Rodgers and Brock Oswieler. College game, especially for a QB, is so different from college, a guy's gotta do a lot of book learning too in addition to learning by fire. Maybe it's better to not try to do both at once?
PromoTheRobot Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 Bills lose. Bills lose again. Yay for Tyrod ! Good stats and stuff.Congratulations. You've perfectly depicted the depth of analysis the Taylor detractors use.
34-78-83 Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 Here's another stat for you. Tyrod Taylor is ranked 7th in the league according to ESPN's Total QB rating. He is ahead of Aaron Rodgers, Russell Wilson, Drew Brees, Cam Newton, and a host of others. Anyone who believes that he is not a starting NFL caliber QB should look at the stats of the other QB's in the league before spouting off. Yesterday he threw 3 TD's with no picks and this nonsense goes on ad infinitum. I am seriously doubting some of my fellow Bills fans football IQ. as you should.
metzelaars_lives Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 (edited) Taylor's amazing. 8-8 here we come. Are you just trolling or are you so defeated that you can't respond to my post written directly to you? Once again, YOU are the one who continued to defend EJ Manuel after he sucked AND lost. But now a guy doesn't suck, is 5-4 through 9 games as a pro and all you can do is belittle him? This is probably true to a degree. But doesn't seem to be the case with Aaron Rodgers and Brock Oswieler. College game, especially for a QB, is so different from college, a guy's gotta do a lot of book learning too in addition to learning by fire. Maybe it's better to not try to do both at once? Aaron Rodgers was way better in his 4th season as a starter than he was in his 1st season. This is exactly my point. Thank you for bringing him up. Edited December 1, 2015 by metzelaars_lives
reddogblitz Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 The best hope we have is that they snag someone with real promise in the draft because we know that good QBs don't hit the open market. Yes, they do. Peyton Manning Drew Brees Kurt Warner Carson Palmer Jay Cutler Alex Smith Matt Hasselbeck (definitely franchise in mid 2000s) Randall Cunningham (took Vikings to NFC Championship late in career. Vikings lost due to missed FGs, several) Brett Favre (took Vikings to NFC Championship late in career.) Steve Young Brad Johnson Yeah we can draft and develop a QB (like that ever works). I'd prefer to see us use the Arizona Cardinals model. Find some QB who has had success and maybe seen as having lost it or whatever, and pounce (and win). Aaron Rodgers was way better in his 4th season as a starter than he was in his 1st season. This is exactly my point. Thank you for bringing him up. Yes he was. You do realize he, like Tyrod, didn't play for his first 3 or 4 years, right?
metzelaars_lives Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 Yes, they do. Peyton Manning Drew Brees Kurt Warner Carson Palmer Jay Cutler Alex Smith Matt Hasselbeck (definitely franchise in mid 2000s) Randall Cunningham (took Vikings to NFC Championship late in career. Vikings lost due to missed FGs, several) Brett Favre (took Vikings to NFC Championship late in career.) Steve Young Brad Johnson Yeah we can draft and develop a QB (like that ever works). I'd prefer to see us use the Arizona Cardinals model. Find some QB who has had success and maybe seen as having lost it or whatever, and pounce (and win). Yes he was. You do realize he, like Tyrod, didn't play for his first 3 or 4 years, right? Yes, we are in agreement. The Taylor detractors are insisting that what you see is what you get already. I am saying that even guys who sit for a few years still have room to grow. Rodgers is a good example.
DC Tom Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 And why is that? It is based on statistics and a scientific formula. What is your opinion based on? Show me some comparative analysis that proves your point. Because it overweights situational considerations and underweights overall performance; because it's completely opaque; because it confuses points of team performance with points of individual performance (e.g., if a back blows a blitz pickup, the QB gets a lower rating for getting sacked); because it results in incredibly stupid measures like claiming that Tim Tebow's 4-10, 79 yard, 1 TD game is a better QB performance than Aaron Rogers' 26-39, 396 yard, 2 TD game because Tebow played a quarter of a comeback and rushed for 40 yards (point of note: what are their QBRs this year?); because in as much as it does correlate with wins, it only does so because win/lose are part of the equation (i.e. it's not a correlation); because despite using win/lose as an ex post facto justification of the QBR, it still somehow only correlates weakly to wins (which is damn near miraculous.) You need more?
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 Why are people so convinced that there's 2 levels of QB: franchise and sucks? Tyrod is not a franchise QB. Tyrod does not suck. I believe that anyone that thinks either of those things is silly. He's good enough to be a place holder until we find our guy, as he's probably inside the top 20-25 in the league. At a minimum, I have no doubt that he's one of the best 32 quarterbacks in the NFL. What he is not good enough for, however, is to hang the hopes on the franchise upon.
FireChan Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 He's good enough to be a place holder until we find our guy, as he's probably inside the top 20-25 in the league. At a minimum, I have no doubt that he's one of the best 32 quarterbacks in the NFL. What he is not good enough for, however, is to hang the hopes on the franchise upon. Positivity alert!
thebandit27 Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 Yes, they do. Peyton Manning Neck injury that could've been career-ending Drew Brees Shoulder injury that could've been career-ending, plus holding back top-5 pick Kurt Warner Carson Palmer Never hit the open market, was traded from Cinci to Oakland, and then from Oakland to Arizona Jay Cutler Never hit the open market, was traded from Denver to Chicago Alex Smith Never hit the open market, was traded from SF to KC Matt Hasselbeck (definitely franchise in mid 2000s) Never hit the open market until he'd lost his starting job in Seattle Randall Cunningham (took Vikings to NFC Championship late in career. Vikings lost due to missed FGs, several) Brett Favre (took Vikings to NFC Championship late in career.) Steve Young Never hit the open market, was traded from TB to SF Brad Johnson Yeah we can draft and develop a QB (like that ever works). I'd prefer to see us use the Arizona Cardinals model. Find some QB who has had success and maybe seen as having lost it or whatever, and pounce (and win). Not exactly (see above) Because it overweights situational considerations and underweights overall performance; because it's completely opaque; because it confuses points of team performance with points of individual performance (e.g., if a back blows a blitz pickup, the QB gets a lower rating for getting sacked); because it results in incredibly stupid measures like claiming that Tim Tebow's 4-10, 79 yard, 1 TD game is a better QB performance than Aaron Rogers' 26-39, 396 yard, 2 TD game because Tebow played a quarter of a comeback and rushed for 40 yards (point of note: what are their QBRs this year?); because in as much as it does correlate with wins, it only does so because win/lose are part of the equation (i.e. it's not a correlation); because despite using win/lose as an ex post facto justification of the QBR, it still somehow only correlates weakly to wins (which is damn near miraculous.) You need more? If so, here's the case-in-point: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/11/19/charlie-batchs-186-yard-two-pick-game-has-espns-best-qbr-ever/ He's good enough to be a place holder until we find our guy, as he's probably inside the top 20-25 in the league. At a minimum, I have no doubt that he's one of the best 32 quarterbacks in the NFL. What he is not good enough for, however, is to hang the hopes on the franchise upon. I'd agree with all of that.
Wayne Cubed Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 This is probably true to a degree. But doesn't seem to be the case with Aaron Rodgers and Brock Oswieler. College game, especially for a QB, is so different from college, a guy's gotta do a lot of book learning too in addition to learning by fire. Maybe it's better to not try to do both at once? I wouldn't exactly be using Brock Oswieler and Aaron Rodgers in the same sentence. Osweiler has proved nothing yet. He certainly hasn't proved, through 2 games, that sitting for 4 seasons has helped him all that much. Unless you think his very, very average showing against the Patriots** is proof of that.
Maury Ballstein Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 Are you just trolling or are you so defeated that you can't respond to my post written directly to you? Once again, YOU are the one who continued to defend EJ Manuel after he sucked AND lost. But now a guy doesn't suck, is 5-4 through 9 games as a pro and all you can do is belittle him? Aaron Rodgers was way better in his 4th season as a starter than he was in his 1st season. This is exactly my point. Thank you for bringing him up. Gonna have to eat more fish. That memory doesn't work so well. My names not bf4e. I did enjoy laughing at the overly emotional anti ej crowd fwiw. You guys can go all fanboy on Tyrod, me I'll just be missing the playoffs again. There's always next year. I'm sure Tyrod will do better or he will choke at the hands of Belichek some more.
reddogblitz Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 Not exactly (see above) My point was just that there is an alternative to drafting, which you said was the only way. Sure, some of them were acquired in trades, but none of them were drafted by the team they played the best for. We should be on the look out and try to trade for someone who has had success at the NFL level and now seems to have issues like a neck problem or a shoulder injury or on the outs with his team for some reason. In the off season we'll see what happens. And draft somebody. Leave no stone unturned is my point.
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 (edited) Yes, we are in agreement. The Taylor detractors are insisting that what you see is what you get already. I am saying that even guys who sit for a few years still have room to grow. Rodgers is a good example. Rodgers has a very different skill set than Taylor, and had very different weaknesses. For example, Rodgers never had any problems reading the whole field, he just didn't trust his reads as much as he does now. Many of Taylors weaknesses I don't think can be improved upon, or at least not improved upon enough, which is why I think he's likely to be close to his ceiling. Edited December 1, 2015 by TakeYouToTasker
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 (edited) EJ is the BACKUP QB period. TT is the starter. Can we please discuss the starter and his playing and not trash the people not on the field?? I for one would love to see more complete games. I was pumped in the first half then slowly started to get dejected as the game went on. Edited December 1, 2015 by BillsFan-4-Ever
metzelaars_lives Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 Rodgers has a very different skill set than Taylor, and had very different weaknesses. For example, Rodgers never had any problems reading the whole field, he just didn't trust his reads as much as he does now. Many of Taylors weaknesses I don't think can be improved upon, or at least not improved upon enough, which is why I think he's likely to be close to his ceiling. So after all the arguing and bickering we're pretty close. The only difference is I think you're slighting him by saying 20-25th best QB in the league, I think we both know he's more in the 15-20 range. Either way, as I was trying to tell you, we were never that far off. I was never worshipping at EJ's alter and as evidenced by this thread, no one is. But I think barring a complete implosion, he's done enough to warrant being the starter (or at least have the inside track to be being the starter) again next season- without a new contract. BFFE, No one is trashing EJ. What myself and a few other people have pointed out is that there is a glaring hypocrisy amongst those who defended EJ when he had played poorly and are now overly critical of Taylor who has played, at the very least, pretty good. So for me at least, this isn't about EJ necessarily but rather those who defended him.
Recommended Posts