dave mcbride Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 With Lynch there I'm not sure TT would want to go there unless they throw a lot of money at him, which would mean not playing Lynch for a year or two, not to mention have to change their offense as the two are very different players. Elway isn't stupid about continuing to throw resources after sunk costs. He appears to be a guy who can cut bait quickly on QBs he doesn't think have it, unlike some GMs.
H2o Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 I think you are wrong. If you read national reports outside of Buffalo, this offense and TT are much more highly regarded outside of Buffalo. TT would get paid well bc all you need are 2 teams bidding. And there are more than 2 Teams that need a QB. Do these people actually watch the games like the rest of us do? No. They look at numbers in a box score and watch highlights on Sportscenter. We, most of us anyway, watch the actual game in it's entirety and see wtf is ACTUALLY going on out there. The WIDE OPEN receivers not seen while standing in a clean pocket. The inconsistent accuracy on passes between 5 and 20 yards. Not using the whole field even when given seams. Not throwing guys open, but waiting until they come open. Not comprehending what you are seeing on the other side of the field when standing at the LOS. I'll give you Denver because of the Kubiak connection and maybe San Fran, but that is all.
Doc Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 Still think it's a bad decision to walk away from Tyrod considering the options out there. You don't pay someone $16M/year just because there are supposedly no better options out there.
dave mcbride Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 This doesn't mean they are walking away. It simply doesn't force them into keeping Tyrod until they review everything. And I get your point but I hate the idea of keeping someone simply because you don't think there is an upgrade. You should keep TT if you think he is good enough to win. Again, we win between 6-8 games ever year no matter who the qb is. No way is this true. With a poor qb and this terrible defense, we're looking at 3-4 win team. The defense is awful.
Wagon Circler Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 God no. Kaaya is terrible. Only QB's I would take from this draft is Trubisky or Watson. Watson I wouldn't draft until the 3rd. I saw a mock draft that had three QB's going in the first five picks! The kid from Notre dame first. Would love to see Watson fall to us in the first. What don't you like about him? He appears to have that same poise in the pocket that Prescott has.
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 If he succeeded, the extension was cheap by today's standard woiuld have been a cheap deal for a good NFL starting QB. If he failed, then you cut him and no money lost. Except if he succeeded they'd still have a cap issue next year and if he didn't they still wouldn't have a QB. Of course, the most likely outcome was what has happened -- he's up and down, often produces pretty well but doesn't show that total command to make you think he's the long term answer. But now you're forced into anther awkward situation with the player and his contract, you have no other real options, and the team players (and fans) lose even more faith in the franchise watching this cluster!@#$ unfold. I can't see how that would work as teams would know the Bills likely need to make a decision by the end of the NFL season, else they could be on the hook for the contract, plus isn't part of it a bonus so as long as he's with the Bills on that first day, they'd be on the hook for the entire bonus paid.. It would leave both the Bills and other interested teams in a game of chicken, who blinks first. Likely outcome could be they may be able to get something for him, if another team would want him at that contract, but at much less than what the Eagles got for Bradford. Plus would be surprised based on what he's shown this year that another team would want to take on that contact. You hopefully only end up tied to them for 1 not 2 years would be my gut reactionIf promo is right though and teams are tripping over themselves to give tyrod 20m+ we could prob trade him for Bradford style compensation, right? End up with some vet schlub, 10m in cap and an extra 1 and 4 to try and go find the guy of the future if you are moving on.If he was successful than it'd be a great situation underpaying a franchise qb for several years.If he flopped you walk away.As is you give the new coach the right of first refusal on an ok qb that's paid on the low end of the starting spectrumIt's really not that bad of a situation as long as tyrod gets it I think it still may be they'd like to keep him, but sign him to a lower contract. Would he accept that, probably not likely without first tasting the FA market. Yup IMO if the Bills had any ideas of signing him to anything they let him play sunday. They're not therefor I don't think there is any interest at all of bringing him back no matter how cheap he might sign for. Answer this, if you're Tyrod, do you want to sign here with what has just gone down or are you going to see what else is out there?
Kelly the Dog Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 Elway isn't stupid about continuing to throw resources after sunk costs. He appears to be a guy who can cut bait quickly on QBs he doesn't think have it, unlike some GMs. I agree with that. I just don't think he thinks Lynch has had enough time. It's impossible to know without being at practices. But Lynch wasn't even supposed to play this year.
C.Biscuit97 Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 No way is this true. With a poor qb and this terrible defense, we're looking at 3-4 win team. The defense is awful. Without repeated 3 and outs, we might win games in Miami and Oakland. With a qb who was able to throw for more than 125 yards with every one healthy, we beat Baltimore. Taylor was terrible against the Steelers when we couldn't run the ball. Defense certainly had its flaws but the offense definitely had theirs as well. We beat 4 horrible teams (defenses) & a team with their 3rd string qb. Offense, defense, & STs all took terms in costing this team games.
PolishDave Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 I am betting EJ starts first half. Cardale starts second half.
Wagon Circler Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 (edited) Do these people actually watch the games like the rest of us do? No. They look at numbers in a box score and watch highlights on Sportscenter. We, most of us anyway, watch the actual game in it's entirety and see wtf is ACTUALLY going on out there. The WIDE OPEN receivers not seen while standing in a clean pocket. The inconsistent accuracy on passes between 5 and 20 yards. Not using the whole field even when given seams. Not throwing guys open, but waiting until they come open. Not comprehending what you are seeing on the other side of the field when standing at the LOS. I'll give you Denver because of the Kubiak connection and maybe San Fran, but that is all. A cogent analysis of Tyrod. Good job! Edited December 28, 2016 by Wagon Circler
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 If Denver wants a better QB option than the currently have I think they'd take a shot on Romo way before TT as with TT he may be a small upgrade, or maybe a downgrade over Lynch and Trevor. With Lynch there I'm not sure TT would want to go there unless they throw a lot of money at him, which would mean not playing Lynch for a year or two, not to mention have to change their offense as the two are very different players.
dave mcbride Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 Without repeated 3 and outs, we might win games in Miami and Oakland. With a qb who was able to throw for more than 125 yards with every one healthy, we beat Baltimore. Taylor was terrible against the Steelers when we couldn't run the ball. Defense certainly had its flaws but the offense definitely had theirs as well. We beat 4 horrible teams (defenses) & a team with their 3rd string qb. Offense, defense, & STs all took terms in costing this team games. This team scores. It scores a lot. And the QB never turns the ball over. Put a normal sh**ty qb out there - you know, the ones that were actually available - and you're looking at a bottom of the barrel record. Taylor is decent.
bobobonators Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 Do these people actually watch the games like the rest of us do? No. They look at numbers in a box score and watch highlights on Sportscenter. We, most of us anyway, watch the actual game in it's entirety and see wtf is ACTUALLY going on out there. The WIDE OPEN receivers not seen while standing in a clean pocket. The inconsistent accuracy on passes between 5 and 20 yards. Not using the whole field even when given seams. Not throwing guys open, but waiting until they come open. Not comprehending what you are seeing on the other side of the field when standing at the LOS. I'll give you Denver because of the Kubiak connection and maybe San Fran, but that is all. The day of people outside of buffalo not watching bills games are over. This isn't 1985. Its called the Sunday Ticket. I watch Jags games. I watch Texans games. Heck, I've watched 2-3 Browns games this season. I watch all games. I love football. If you're a reporter or an analyst, you're watching games.
Mark80 Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 I hope he gets in there for a series or two. Sign Bradford, draft the Miami U QB in round two. Then if Bradford is hurt or stinks you have two young guns and you hope one will work out. Anyone who wants to draft Kaaya has either never seen him play a game or has no idea how to evaluate a college QB. His is not good at all and certainly not worth close to a 2nd round pick. And I say this as a Canes fan.
dave mcbride Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 I was totally on board with giving Tyrod some good 'folding money' for this season, but whoever is responsible for the outrageous contract that he signed, should be fired. The Bill's are painted into a corner with that contract, - a not too dissimilar scenario that we have with Captain Fatso, and his no strings $60M. How do you figure? It's not a big contract, and on the low to mid-range end for starting NFL qbs. It also gave the team a huge out.
bobobonators Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 (edited) How do you figure? It's not a big contract, and on the low to mid-range end for starting NFL qbs. It also gave the team a huge out. I swear people hear 1 report that's false, and they continue to believe it. No wonder "fake news" is such a big thing. Just put some BS story out there, and enough people will believe it, even if it's incorrect. They won't care. Dumbing down of America. Edited December 28, 2016 by bobobonators
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 They are highly regarded by people in the media who really don't know, let's see if actual NFL teams agree.. But you're right all you need is two teams and every year there's a number of teams that way over pay for someone. I think you are wrong. If you read national reports outside of Buffalo, this offense and TT are much more highly regarded outside of Buffalo. TT would get paid well bc all you need are 2 teams bidding. And there are more than 2 Teams that need a QB.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 This team scores. It scores a lot. And the QB never turns the ball over. Put a normal sh**ty qb out there - you know, the ones that were actually available - and you're looking at a bottom of the barrel record. Taylor is decent. Yep. Another thing overlooked is the lack of turnovers. It's impossible to gauge, but I would imagine that Taylor would have 50 yards more a game passing if he was willing to take the chances a lot of if not most other quarterbacks take. Ones better and ones worse. And he would have a lot more INTs and a lot more TDs and a lot more yards and would be worse.
dave mcbride Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 Yep. Another thing overlooked is the lack of turnovers. It's impossible to gauge, but I would imagine that Taylor would have 50 yards more a game passing if he was willing to take the chances a lot of if not most other quarterbacks take. Ones better and ones worse. And he would have a lot more INTs and a lot more TDs and a lot more yards and would be worse. 47 total TDs and 13 total turnovers in basically two full seasons. Compare that with the Brock Osweilers and Case Keenums of the world. Because that's who the alternatives are.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 28, 2016 Posted December 28, 2016 47 total TDs and 13 total turnovers in basically two full seasons. Compare that with the Brock Osweilers and Case Keenums of the world. Because that's who the alternatives are. I know. How do people not see that? Or the difference that Watkins makes.
Recommended Posts