John from Riverside Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 This is the first I've ever heard someone make the case for TT being anything other than "slight." TT is not "slight" he is short
FireChan Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) Wonder when the last time a ProBowl QB was labeled not good enough that was also essentially a rookie, played hurt most that season, lost all his offensive weapons (every single one and many of their backups) for periods of the season, didn't get first team reps on the offseason like an anointed starter would, first year in a new system, first year the whole team was in a new system, lots of OL injuries, and when he did have his weapons, they were often playing hurt and at less than full speed? Seriously, anyone questioning Taylors potential right now should probably not be allowed to evaluate QBs anymore. And sorry "Dude", but your statistical analysis is a complete joke. We were the top rushing team in the league, we had a young QB, we lost our best receiving weapons frequently, and everyone was learning a new offense...you KNOW this...yet you choose to use Yardage TOTALS to discredit the kid when that has nothing to do with his skill and potential given the offense that was ran and was the offense chosen MONTHS before Tyrod was ever close to being the starter. Not to mention, you carefully ignore his plays with his legs as a QB. This is just like all the foolish garbage BS people were trying to say about Russell not being Elite...because of his yardage totals in a run heavy offense despite the fact his passing efficiency was outstanding. Im not saying TT is on Russels level yet, but what I am saying is that its absolutely stupid to point to passing yard totals as a barometer on a QBs ability when the QB in question is also a dual threat and not count his rushing yards and also not take into effect the run first offense of a top rushing team in the NFL. Didn't you used to say this same song and dance about "knowing nothing about player evaluation," a few years ago about a certain RB? One would think humility would be learned. Edited January 28, 2016 by FireChan
The Big Cat Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 Didn't you used to say this same song and dance about "knowing nothing about player evaluation," a few years ago about a certain RB? One would think humility would be learned. What's your excuse? Also, this stalker routine gets old. I've never seen someone hound so many strangers on the internet over protracted periods of time, pestering them incessantly over things that were said YEARS in the past.
Malazan Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 When why does the Pro Bowl exist? No one seems to know.
John from Riverside Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) No one seems to know. Actually I think YOU just dont seem to know It is a all star game in which the super bowl teams do not participate. Edited January 28, 2016 by John from Hemet
fridge Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 IMO, this is misrepresenting the discussion. First off, top 1/3 of the league in what? Not yards. Not TDs. Not comp. % So basically we're talking YPA and passer rating...and that's fine, but let's be specific about what qualifies as top 1/3. And the discussion that many people, including myself, are trying to have is not whether or not he's better than what we've had the last 15 years (he is), but rather whether or not he's good enough to win here long-term. One season of 14 starts in which he finished 8-6 isn't enough, despite the fact that he showed some encouraging signs. He also showed some deficiencies (field vision, release quickness, pocket presence), and didn't exactly avail himself in the clutch (failed to cross midfield on 5 potential game-winning/tying drives). We need to stop conflating the QB discussion with the defense discussion; the defense doesn't determine whether or not the QB is the long-term solution. This perfectly states my frsutration with this discussion, and why it's kind of sad how defensive and polarizing the topic gets everyone. It is not Pro-Tayler vs Hate-Taylor. I believe that it is more Realists/Skeptics vs Belivers/Apologists. If I'm not at all moved by Tyrod's reserve pro bowl spot, it doesn't mean that I hate the guy. Then how come Hoyer lost to Tyrod? hmmmm....??? So by this logic you would rather have EJ Manuel than Cam Newton?
FireChan Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) What's your excuse? Also, this stalker routine gets old. I've never seen someone hound so many strangers on the internet over protracted periods of time, pestering them incessantly over things that were said YEARS in the past. I don't hound or pester anyone. Unless hounding and pestering them means that when they get on their soap box, and indirectly calls anyone who disagrees with them an idiot, and say they know nothing, and calls their "opinion BS garbage," I point out a little detail. I suppose it could. It's really easy. If you want to post like a know-it-all, try to be close to that mark. And even if you aren't, at least try not writing posts full of vitriol. As far as the stalking, if you write 50k words at me, I'm bound to remember a few of them. Then I again, I take opposing opinions seriously, rather than using them as a platform to call everyone morons. I mean, if you seriously never remember another person's opinion and only your own, did you even really have a conversation, or did you just proselytize? Edited January 28, 2016 by FireChan
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 yes, completely serious. and on the flip side, i've heard many people go out of their way to say that wilson's "size" is very deceiving, that he's built like a fire hydrant.Nobody wants the Bills QB to be a physical stud more than fans like me! Oh. lordy, the last time I commented on a thread like this I got accused of "turning the thread to gay porn". I guess I'm a low slearner. Russ Wilson Combine 2012 https://youtu.be/_pUzJKpSIBc Tyrod Taylor Combine 2011 https://youtu.be/6HpTjEJvWL0 Wilson has been doing the "curls for the girls" and building up his guns a bit longer than Taylor I'd say. That's some serious armament there. I'd also say that yes, Wilson's natural body type is a bit thicker, especially through the hips. Taylor is built more like a triangle. That said, they're obviously both gym rats, with the possible edge to Taylor, who has clearly built himself up quite a bit since his combine days. Thing is I'm not entirely sure a "thicker" body type really provides that much more protection against hits. Anyone can get hurt if they land the wrong way while getting hit. Easley. Bradford. I think the key thing is Wilson can slide like an eel. Taylor best learn. I think Tyrod's natural body type is more slender, yes. Both Wilson and Taylor are obvious gym rats. Wilson was a gym rat in college, if you look at his pro
Marty McFly Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 (edited) Oh. lordy, the last time I commented on a thread like this I got accused of "turning the thread to gay porn". I guess I'm a low slearner. Russ Wilson Combine 2012 https://youtu.be/_pUzJKpSIBc Tyrod Taylor Combine 2011 https://youtu.be/6HpTjEJvWL0 Wilson has been doing the "curls for the girls" and building up his guns a bit longer than Taylor I'd say. That's some serious armament there. I'd also say that yes, Wilson's natural body type is a bit thicker, especially through the hips. Taylor is built more like a triangle. That said, they're obviously both gym rats, with the possible edge to Taylor, who has clearly built himself up quite a bit since his combine days. Thing is I'm not entirely sure a "thicker" body type really provides that much more protection against hits. Anyone can get hurt if they land the wrong way while getting hit. Easley. Bradford. I think the key thing is Wilson can slide like an eel. Taylor best learn. I think Tyrod's natural body type is more slender, yes. Both Wilson and Taylor are obvious gym rats. Wilson was a gym rat in college, if you look at his pro If he slides more instead of trying to gut it out he will play more games and Manuel will play less. Thats a Win in my book. IDK why threads like this get so hostile? !@#$ arent we all rooting for the same team? damn......anyways besides his short comings on the field I really liked how Manuel showed character on that one play in the last game he was brought in to draw a penalty. Cant teach class and Manuel has it. Wish he cuda played better but I hope he gets a chance somewhere else. This is Tyord territory now, if he progresses, trusts the line to step up in the pocket to use the middle of the field more, then we have a QB. Then everyone on here can B word about something else we dont have thats keeping us out of the playoffs.... I agree with fridge. Alphadawg gave us a laundry list of excuses. Hotrod don't need excuses. He played well. I suspect he will do even better next year (with no excuses needed). Agreed, next years his break out as long as we keep our left side of the line together and hopefully upgrade RT. Lost to the Giants because we couldn't stop the run!? They averaged 3.28 ypc. Relative to this conversation, we dropped the Giants game because of the offense. Period. It's not even an argument. We had 14 possessions in that game: Result (plays) Punt (3) Punt (3) FG (5) Int (1) Punt (3) Punt (3) Punt (6) Punt (3) Punt (3) Missed FG (13) Turnover on Downs (7) TD (3) Fumble (3) Turnover on Downs (14) Now, you can argue that TT wasn't to blame for all of that. I mean you can argue it. It's a stretch to say he's absolved of that abysmal performance. But to say they lost to NYG because they couldn't stop the run is categorically cuckoo. The fact that game was even remotely winnable is a testament to, not a critique of the defense. The Def missed tackles and the Offense had some stupid penalties that took some big plays off the board including TDs.....or was that the NE game? or both? cant remember but Tyrod was most def not the sole reason we lost that Giants game. Could he have played better? Yes. Could he have played worse? See the london game lol....now look at the Giants defense and the jets defense...then look at those same stats you posted for the wk 17 game and look how much our offense including Tyrod has progressed since week 4 to week 17. I know ur point is the Def wasnt to blame for that game but here is the silver lining in this years vomit. Edited January 29, 2016 by Marty McFly
The Big Cat Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 If he slides more instead of trying to gut it out he will play more games and Manuel will play less. Thats a Win in my book. IDK why threads like this get so hostile? !@#$ arent we all rooting for the same team? damn......anyways besides his short comings on the field I really liked how Manuel showed character on that one play in the last game he was brought in to draw a penalty. Cant teach class and Manuel has it. Wish he cuda played better but I hope he gets a chance somewhere else. This is Tyord territory now, if he progresses, trusts the line to step up in the pocket to use the middle of the field more, then we have a QB. Then everyone on here can B word about something else we dont have thats keeping us out of the playoffs.... Agreed, next years his break out as long as we keep our left side of the line together and hopefully upgrade RT. The Def missed tackles and the Offense had some stupid penalties that took some big plays off the board including TDs.....or was that the NE game? or both? cant remember but Tyrod was most def not the sole reason we lost that Giants game. Could he have played better? Yes. Could he have played worse? See the london game lol....now look at the Giants defense and the jets defense...then look at those same stats you posted for the wk 17 game and look how much our offense including Tyrod has progressed since week 4 to week 17. I know ur point is the Def wasnt to blame for that game but here is the silver lining in this years vomit. The point was that the loss fell squarely on the offense. Failing to get a first down on 7 of your first 10 drives (which took them throug the third quarter) is a pretty clear illustration for how bad they were. Nobody is saying it's all TT's fault, but that kinda of abysmal offensive performance falls disproportionately at your QBs feet. This trend would continue the following week in Tennessee, then again at home against Cincy and then it completely hit the fan in London. That was a bad bad bad three game stretch for the offense. Through all the insufferable belly aching about the defense, this FACT gets largely glossed over.
Billsfansince90 Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 (edited) I'd like you to be aware of two quarterbacks who both sat out before their first season and compare the numbers. Quarterback A: 14 gp 242 com 63.7 Cp% 27.1 att/g 3,035 yds 8.0 avg 216.8 yd/gm 20 TD 5.3 TD% 6 INT 1.6 INT% 63 Lng 45 20+ 11 40+ 36 sck 212 sck yds 99.4 rate Quarterback B: 15 gp 413 att 264 com 63.9 Cp% 27.5 att/g 2843 yds 6.9 avg 189.5 yd/gm 18 TD 4.4 TD% 12 INT 2.9 INT% 91T Lng 32 20+ 6 40+ 41 sck 216 sck yds 86.5 rate Now you can probably guess who quarterback A is. Can any of you guess B though? Both were in their first seasons as full-time starters. Study those numbers and then reread the comments on this thread. I'll wait. Sorry, I tried to do it horizontally and it automatically did it vertically. I hope that's not annoying to read. Copy and paste onto word for easy comparison. Edited January 29, 2016 by Billsfansince90
Gugny Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 Actually I think YOU just dont seem to know It is a all star game in which the super bowl teams do not participate. It's a money grab that mostly marginal NFL fans watch. It's not an "all star" game, because most of the big names don't even show up or play. it's a gimmick to get more money out of fools.
ALF Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 It's a nice incentive, vacation reward for players who did well .
Malazan Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 (edited) Actually I think YOU just dont seem to know It is a all star game in which the super bowl teams do not participate. Every year, every major and pretty much any active news site, blog, organization that covers the NFL has an article about the uselessness of the pro bowl. http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-the-nfl-eliminate-the-pro-bowl http://www.silverandblackpride.com/2016/1/27/10842662/rival-report-1-27-most-pro-bowl-invitation-declines-in-history-of-nfl http://www.si.com/nfl/video/2016/01/27/nfl-pro-bowl-lacking-star-talent-replacement-bowl http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/26/is-the-pro-bowl-in-danger-of-going-away/ http://www.1500espn.com/news/2016/01/zulgad-bridgewaters-addition-to-pro-bowl-should-be-final-straw-for-this-game/ http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/24/pro-bowl-needs-to-replace-14-guys-at-least/ http://thewalkoffsportsblog.com/2016/01/28/lets-get-rid-of-the-pro-bowl/ https://bakerstake.wordpress.com/2016/01/27/is-it-time-to-ditch-the-nfl-pro-bowl-game/ http://scstudentmedia.com/2016/01/28/pointless-pro-bowl/ http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2611570-the-scammiest-pro-bowl-in-scammy-pro-bowl-history http://www.cbssports.com/video/player/nfl/609482819625/0/its-easier-to-tell-whos-not-in-the-pro-bowl http://hunterlove.sportsblog.com/posts/11402700/most-inventations-declined-in-pro-bowl-history.html http://www.ibtimes.com/should-nfl-finally-get-rid-pro-bowl-1794114 http://www.footballnation.com/content/nfl-should-get-rid-pro-bowl/14887/ Edited January 29, 2016 by jeremy2020
Marty McFly Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 The point was that the loss fell squarely on the offense. Failing to get a first down on 7 of your first 10 drives (which took them throug the third quarter) is a pretty clear illustration for how bad they were. Nobody is saying it's all TT's fault, but that kinda of abysmal offensive performance falls disproportionately at your QBs feet. This trend would continue the following week in Tennessee, then again at home against Cincy and then it completely hit the fan in London. That was a bad bad bad three game stretch for the offense. Through all the insufferable belly aching about the defense, this FACT gets largely glossed over. got you. now heres the upside to that......take all ur 3d down stats on the Giants game vs a meh defense in week 4 and compare the same stat category against the week 17 game vs a much better defense playing for a guaranteed playoff spot coming off a big win vs the pats* with the offense missing shady mcCoy, woods, and hogan playing with broken hand creelies. thats a good amount of progression from Tyrod and the Offense after a full season of playing together for the 1st time and gaining a consistency to gel.
Marty McFly Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 (edited) I'd like you to be aware of two quarterbacks who both sat out before their first season and compare the numbers. Quarterback A: 14 gp 242 com 63.7 Cp% 27.1 att/g 3,035 yds 8.0 avg 216.8 yd/gm 20 TD 5.3 TD% 6 INT 1.6 INT% 63 Lng 45 20+ 11 40+ 36 sck 212 sck yds 99.4 rate Quarterback B: 15 gp 413 att 264 com 63.9 Cp% 27.5 att/g 2843 yds 6.9 avg 189.5 yd/gm 18 TD 4.4 TD% 12 INT 2.9 INT% 91T Lng 32 20+ 6 40+ 41 sck 216 sck yds 86.5 rate Now you can probably guess who quarterback A is. Can any of you guess B though? Both were in their first seasons as full-time starters. Study those numbers and then reread the comments on this thread. I'll wait. Sorry, I tried to do it horizontally and it automatically did it vertically. I hope that's not annoying to read. Copy and paste onto word for easy comparison. QB A is Tyrod Taylor QB B is......Tom Brady? EDIT: wow it is Tom Brady.....thats good company to be in for 1st year starters who both sat and learned before starting...some might say Tyrod had a better 1st starting season with a much lesser team too...you know a team that didnt even make the playoffs compared to a Super Bowl winning team*...spygate and all... Edited January 29, 2016 by Marty McFly
PromoTheRobot Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 Every year, every major and pretty much any active news site, blog, organization that covers the NFL has an article about the uselessness of the pro bowl. http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-the-nfl-eliminate-the-pro-bowl http://www.silverandblackpride.com/2016/1/27/10842662/rival-report-1-27-most-pro-bowl-invitation-declines-in-history-of-nfl http://www.si.com/nfl/video/2016/01/27/nfl-pro-bowl-lacking-star-talent-replacement-bowl http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/26/is-the-pro-bowl-in-danger-of-going-away/ http://www.1500espn.com/news/2016/01/zulgad-bridgewaters-addition-to-pro-bowl-should-be-final-straw-for-this-game/ http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/24/pro-bowl-needs-to-replace-14-guys-at-least/ http://thewalkoffsportsblog.com/2016/01/28/lets-get-rid-of-the-pro-bowl/ https://bakerstake.wordpress.com/2016/01/27/is-it-time-to-ditch-the-nfl-pro-bowl-game/ http://scstudentmedia.com/2016/01/28/pointless-pro-bowl/ http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2611570-the-scammiest-pro-bowl-in-scammy-pro-bowl-history http://www.cbssports.com/video/player/nfl/609482819625/0/its-easier-to-tell-whos-not-in-the-pro-bowl http://hunterlove.sportsblog.com/posts/11402700/most-inventations-declined-in-pro-bowl-history.html http://www.ibtimes.com/should-nfl-finally-get-rid-pro-bowl-1794114 http://www.footballnation.com/content/nfl-should-get-rid-pro-bowl/14887/ So 133 invitations had to go out to fill the Pro Bowl roster? That's still the top 7.8% of all active roster players. Even with 5 QBs who turned down the game, the 6 QBs on the roster still represent the top 1/3 of starting QBs.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 30, 2016 Posted January 30, 2016 Now you can probably guess who quarterback A is. Can any of you guess B though? Both were in their first seasons as full-time starters. Study those numbers and then reread the comments on this thread. I'll wait.Sorry, I tried to do it horizontally and it automatically did it vertically. I hope that's not annoying to read. Copy and paste onto word for easy comparison. I don't have to guess, I know who B is. I really hate these comparison posts though. The thing is, when you don't have much data to go on, a QB can look like a lot of other QB first years. And some go on and improve and become great, and some don't. And yeah, it's really annoying to read, but I know from experience it's hard to get data into these posts from other apps.
The Big Cat Posted January 30, 2016 Posted January 30, 2016 got you. now heres the upside to that......take all ur 3d down stats on the Giants game vs a meh defense in week 4 and compare the same stat category against the week 17 game vs a much better defense playing for a guaranteed playoff spot coming off a big win vs the pats* with the offense missing shady mcCoy, woods, and hogan playing with broken hand creelies. thats a good amount of progression from Tyrod and the Offense after a full season of playing together for the 1st time and gaining a consistency to gel. Won't challenge that. I liked where the offense was heading. That said, in the final two weeks they were strong. That Dallas game was kept way closer than it had to be thanks to TWO redzone turnovers. Obviously the offense showed its potential to turn the corner in the Jets game too, but in the two games prior (Philly and WAS), meh, not so much. I love how the offense is trending, but especially when you consider the massive FA holes they presently have at the OLine, my mode remains in "wait and see."
Recommended Posts