Jump to content

Giving Tyrod a new contract was such an awful decision


Yeezus

Recommended Posts

Look where it has us now. Bills are in such a difficult place. If only Whaley just held out this year and waited until it was over to decide on giving him a contract. How come a QB like Kirk cousins doesn't get signed but we go ahead and sign Tyrod after 1 season of average QB play??

 

If we didn't give him that contract we could have easily given him a small contract and signed a FA QB like Romo or drafted our guy this year to compete with Tyrod next year

 

After all those awful QB decisions the past 16 years the bills front office still hasn't learned

 

From the guy that said this:

 

 

The bills defense is solely responsible for 4 of our 5 losses but I'm the troll

 

Wake up and stop eating up everything Rex is saying

 

His defense is awful

This board is just a bunch of racist posters who can stand that our QB is black and want him gone and wanna keep Rex

 

What a joke

 

 

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/189903-why-are-players-still-confused-on-defense/?do=findComment&comment=4122658

Edited by thebandit27
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Tyrod has beaten 1 winning team in his carrer (Texans in 2015, which barely counts, not including the Patriots this year) and you think we are going to beat not 1 but 2 winning teams in the next 4 games.

 

hahahaahhahahaahaha

I don't think he will, the odds say we lose Sunday, but we will be favored to win the last 3 games.

 

I've said it all before, Pittsburgh is the game where you benchmark Tyrod. A home game in late season with a playoffs on the line environment. If Tyrod plays well win or lose that will be important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tyrod has beaten 1 winning team in his carrer (Texans in 2015, which barely counts, not including the Patriots this year) and you think we are going to beat not 1 but 2 winning teams in the next 4 games.

 

hahahaahhahahaahaha

 

So the 10-2 Patriots don't count this season, nor the 10-6 Jets they beat twice in 2015. Do you count much? Might want to pull out those fingers and re-check your math.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So the 10-2 Patriots don't count this season, nor the 10-6 Jets they beat twice in 2015. Do you count much? Might want to pull out those fingers and re-check your math.

How often is a QB going to throw 3 straight INTs with the playoffs on the line?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Optics The QB that JUST SHREDDED US MAKES 1.4M this year.

 

That contract did NOT need to be done.

Major, I'm demoting you to 2nd Lieutenant for whiffing on this.

 

The reason they gave him a new contract was because they feared TT would have such a hell of a second year that they would have to pay him a king's ransom for a long term deal. But because of lessons learned with Fitz and others, they hedged their bet by giving themselves an easy out in case he didn't have a great second year. Because the second scenario has come to pass, all they need do is release him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a bad feeling the Bills are going to give Tyrod the contract and "commit"... which essentially means they will again ignore the position for too long, Tyrod will eventually get hurt or flame out and more time wasted. In 2 or 3 years, we will get the equivalent of walking into a season with EJ, Thad Lewis, and Tuel looking at extending the "streak" to 19, 20 or 21 seasons.

Edited by May Day 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point?

 

Is there a league rule that says Taylor needed a Raise? Nope. Optics. Bills once again the "Good Guy" Front Office.

 

Think NE gives that contract in the Summer? To Taylor because he deserved a raise? Or do they make him play at 3.5M

 

My point being it's incomparable in the NFL to compare a rookie contract to a non-rookie contract, so it's silly to bring it up.

 

What you're doing here is making a strawman argument that the Bills gave Tyrod a new contract because they are nice guys.

 

What we can do, though, is look at Tyrod in the situation we're in, not the one we'd like him to be in. Here's where we were last year:

 

Tyrod Taylor 2015:

 

One year left on his deal before UFA (2016):

 

63.7% Passing

20 TD, 6 INT

7.10 ANY/A

5.5 Y/A Rushing

4 Rushing TDs

#8 DVOA

#7 QB rating

#14 QBR

 

Tyrod had a fantastic season. There was one year left on the deal. The Bills had two options:

 

1.) Go into the season where the player, who was fantastic, has 100% of the leverage if he plays well again. He'll be a free agent, we'll either have to franchise him or sign him to a mega deal.

 

2.) Re-sign him to a contract now, reducing the overall cost of the contract significantly if he plays well for another season.

 

The smart thing to do here is EXACTLY what the Bills did; protect against the future if he plays well, and protect against the future if he plays poorly, by having an out-clause in case it didn't work out. What you're giving up is a pay raise for this year. This is how negotiations work.

Look where it has us now. Bills are in such a difficult place. If only Whaley just held out this year and waited until it was over to decide on giving him a contract. How come a QB like Kirk cousins doesn't get signed but we go ahead and sign Tyrod after 1 season of average QB play??

 

If we didn't give him that contract we could have easily given him a small contract and signed a FA QB like Romo or drafted our guy this year to compete with Tyrod next year

 

After all those awful QB decisions the past 16 years the bills front office still hasn't learned

 

His $$$ amount is not big if we pick up the option. If we pick up his option, AND we add in the cost of a 1st round QB salary, we'll STILL only be at about the #16 QB in the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst I would be mad with the Bills if they took up the option I agreed with and still agree with the deal they gave him.

 

It was a low risk potential high reward. If he took the step this year the Bills by paying him proper caretaker money in 2016 had him locked up at cheap franchise QB pay for the peak of his career. If he didn't they could get out at the end of this year basically for nothing.

 

He obviously hasn't taken the step and they now need not to take up the option to keep him at low franchise QB money because he is just a caretaker.

 

But I don't have any issue with what the Bills did it was essentially like him playing on a half price version of the franchise tag this year.

Edited by GunnerBill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Major, I'm demoting you to 2nd Lieutenant for whiffing on this.

 

The reason they gave him a new contract was because they feared TT would have such a hell of a second year that they would have to pay him a king's ransom for a long term deal. But because of lessons learned with Fitz and others, they hedged their bet by giving themselves an easy out in case he didn't have a great second year. Because the second scenario has come to pass, all they need do is release him.

I don't get how people struggle with this so much. It was a smart business decision at the time, and still is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Major, I'm demoting you to 2nd Lieutenant for whiffing on this.

 

The reason they gave him a new contract was because they feared TT would have such a hell of a second year that they would have to pay him a king's ransom for a long term deal. But because of lessons learned with Fitz and others, they hedged their bet by giving themselves an easy out in case he didn't have a great second year. Because the second scenario has come to pass, all they need do is release him.

There was protection against what you stated it was called the Franchise Tag. Now they are going to compound the issue and pick up the option watch

 

My point being it's incomparable in the NFL to compare a rookie contract to a non-rookie contract, so it's silly to bring it up.

 

What you're doing here is making a strawman argument that the Bills gave Tyrod a new contract because they are nice guys.

 

What we can do, though, is look at Tyrod in the situation we're in, not the one we'd like him to be in. Here's where we were last year:

 

Tyrod Taylor 2015:

 

One year left on his deal before UFA (2016):

 

63.7% Passing

20 TD, 6 INT

7.10 ANY/A

5.5 Y/A Rushing

4 Rushing TDs

#8 DVOA

#7 QB rating

#14 QBR

 

Tyrod had a fantastic season. There was one year left on the deal. The Bills had two options:

 

1.) Go into the season where the player, who was fantastic, has 100% of the leverage if he plays well again. He'll be a free agent, we'll either have to franchise him or sign him to a mega deal.

 

2.) Re-sign him to a contract now, reducing the overall cost of the contract significantly if he plays well for another season.

 

The smart thing to do here is EXACTLY what the Bills did; protect against the future if he plays well, and protect against the future if he plays poorly, by having an out-clause in case it didn't work out. What you're giving up is a pay raise for this year. This is how negotiations work.

 

 

His $$$ amount is not big if we pick up the option. If we pick up his option, AND we add in the cost of a 1st round QB salary, we'll STILL only be at about the #16 QB in the NFL.

Forgot option 3 that majority of teams use on a one year performer. Play the 3.5M deal and if performs again re-sign or Tag.

 

Now the stupid option is a Two year deal with huge dead money on the backend if he doesn't perform. Yet again

I don't get how people struggle with this so much. It was a smart business decision at the time, and still is.

Only smart if they use their Bail clause. If they don't they just compounded the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was protection against what you stated it was called the Franchise Tag. Now they are going to compound the issue and pick up the option watch

 

Forgot option 3 that majority of teams use on a one year performer. Play the 3.5M deal and if performs again re-sign or Tag.

 

Now the stupid option is a Two year deal with huge dead money on the backend if he doesn't perform. Yet again

 

Only smart if they use their Bail clause. If they don't they just compounded the issue.

The lock in with the loophole in an of itself was smart. What they should have done was to pro-rate the extension value based on production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was protection against what you stated it was called the Franchise Tag. Now they are going to compound the issue and pick up the option watch

 

 

 

They basically brought the franchise tag forward a year and halved its cost by giving him the deal they did with the bonus that if he balled out he was tied up for his best year.

 

If they take up the option now THAT is the mistake. The contract itself was a sensible move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look where it has us now. Bills are in such a difficult place. If only Whaley just held out this year and waited until it was over to decide on giving him a contract. How come a QB like Kirk cousins doesn't get signed but we go ahead and sign Tyrod after 1 season of average QB play??

 

If we didn't give him that contract we could have easily given him a small contract and signed a FA QB like Romo or drafted our guy this year to compete with Tyrod next year

 

After all those awful QB decisions the past 16 years the bills front office still hasn't learned

How are they in a difficult place? They hold the cards. You don't understand contract structures in the NFL apparently because it's pretty easy to get out from underneath this.

 

And you are acting like they paid him some exorbitant rate...he would be the 20th or lower paid QB in the NFL once that contract kicks in...you just have no concept of what QBs actually make to compare it to...even terrible ones make a lot. Osweiler is making $18 million a year...Tyrod is DEFINITELY better than him no matter how hard you try to find reasons he isn't...

 

QBs get paid, get over it and find another bone to pick cause it just makes you look clueless by choosing this as the issue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...