Things Taylor did on the field in 2016 that kept him around

[3rdand12]

Thanks OP Transplant ! Good stuff,

[K-9]

 

It's very difficult to argue this.

And I say that with a great appreciation for the difference between being a quarterback and being a passer.

[John from Riverside]

Not only did the defense suck but the offense sucked because it was trying to help the defense stop sucking!? What in the world is going on

because the offense DIDNT suck....it was 6th in the NFL in points

 

one thing they did try to not do was make the big mistake at critical times.

 

but.....playmaker's make plays for their qbs....i saw dropped balls at critical times, penalties that brought back big plays, penalties that kept opponet offensive drives going.

 

Tyrod very seldom made the big mistake.....you can obviously argue that he didnt take enough chances witht he ball

[fridge]

Its a fair complaint

 

I do wonder how much of the non risk taking was due to being conservative BECAUSE of our defensive problems......if you start throwing picks with last years D your gonna get blown out

 

We'll certainly find out a year from now.

 

There was a plan last year to stick to the run, regardless of how the defense played, no one disagrees with that. The problem I have is that for the most part the ultra-conservative play calling was thrown out the window when we were down and we still struggled to move the chains. It scares me that when teams knew we were going to pass he was helpless mostly at the end of games.

[Patrick Duffy]

The Bills were not going to pick up the option and started exploring options such as Glennon and Siemian. The Bills were prepared to move on from Tyrod and would have done so if Tyrod had not taken a massive paycut. Now you are claiming we cannot know if someone offered a 2nd round pick or 2 seconds for our bridge QB.

 

Guess what. Everyone but you knows that no NFL team offered a 2nd for Tyrod because that would be ludicrous.

 

If someone offered a 2nd the Bills would have been glad to take the pick and sign a Foles or Hoyer. We know because no NFL team risks losing a QB they truly want.

 

 

They were leaving "no stone unturned" man. I must have missed when they were looking at Glennon, but I remember seeing a thread of some sort that Siemian was to be interviewed or talked to, something along those lines. But some of your post do come off as fact when they are obviously your opinion, which you are entitled to.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Patrick_Duffy

[Bangarang]

At this point, nobody is going to change their minds on Tyrod until games are actually played. This bickering is approaching BBMB territory.

[K-9]

This team has NO chance unless the defense improves

That's true.

 

But when it comes to strictly evaluating the execution of his position as the QB, we need to leave the defense out of it. It's simply not relative to how he executed his responsibilities at the position from play to play. The same can be said when breaking down a player at any other position, too.

[fridge]

And I say that with a great appreciation for the difference between being a quarterback and being a passer.

 

I have a "mild appreciation" for that. I think being a QB, to the level that Tyrod has played, can keep you in most games. I think being a great passer wins you a handful of the close ones.

[K-9]

At this point, nobody is going to change their minds on Tyrod until games are actually played. This bickering is approaching BBMB territory.

That's why it's such a waste of time discussing it.

 

He's our starter, lets embrace that, see what Dennison can do to improve his game, and hope for the best. We'll know soon enough.

 

I can be skeptical without dismissing EVERYTHING else he brings to the position. There's things to like about TT, after all.

[HappyDays]

No, I'm against people using statistics they don't understand and assuming when they say things like 'Oh, but he had a good DVOA!' they understand that the 'contextual details' are often irrelevant or plain wrong in assessing whether or not a play or player or unit did something 'good' or 'bad'. If you need to refer to DVOA or QBR without being able to tell beforehand whether or not a guy's any good, he's not.

 

Bottom line, if all you've got is an obscure 19th ranking to bolster your argument, good luck. And please continue with how total yards isn't relative to an evaluation of Taylor but offensive points scored somehow is.

Thanks, but I understand DVOA very well. Of course it's not perfect, of course there will be individual instances where the statistical result doesn't match the practical result. Over the course of the season it ends up proving to be very accurate, that's all I'll say on that.

 

Total yards does not correlate strongly with reaching the playoffs, points scored does. Bad analogy. I also didn't bring up points scored in any case, nor was I trying to argue anything other than I think Tyrod would be a better choice than Wentz in 2017.

[K-9]

 

I have a "mild appreciation" for that. I think being a QB, to the level that Tyrod has played, can keep you in most games. I think being a great passer wins you a handful of the close ones.

You'll get no argument from me on that score. My only point is that being a quarterback is about so much more than passing the ball. And if you don't possess those traits as well, it doesn't matter how golden your arm is.

[HappyDays]

 

If someone HONESTLY thinks that you could nurse 5.5+ ypc out of any stable of backs on that volume of carries with a better "passing QB" they simply don't understand how hard that is to accomplish.

 

It is very common for teams with outstanding passers to have mediocre running games.........the pass game does not necessarily facilitate the run......the defensive approach to both in the NFL now is the same......stop the run on the way to the QB.

 

That's where Tyrod throws a wrench in the works.......teams are much less aggressive wrt wrecklessly shooting gaps and a spy typically plays off the ball.

 

As for whether the Bills should have had more success throwing the ball..........if they had better options in the passing game Taylor would have had more success.

 

Tyrod is a cautious passer..........add in the fact that there was a PALPABLY LOW margin for error on this team and what you got was a QB that was ULTRA cautious.....and sure as hell not throwing 50/50 balls to Walter Powell or Brandon Tate.

 

So in lieu of the kind of performances we saw late in the season versus Miami........we got a QB that was about to lead an offense to an NFL record for fewest turnovers in a season.

Another great post, thank you.

 

I'm already liking this forum better than BBMB. At least there seems to be more good posters to outweigh the trolls from what I can tell.

[BADOLBILZ]

It's not about nursing a fat rushing average, we already do that. It's about nursing a better passing game which should be better served by such a strong running game.

 

I'm not going down the rabbit hole everyone else wants to go down in this thread.

 

TT leaves a lot to be desired as a passer. Period.

 

Lets hope Dennison can raise him to another level. In the meantime, based simply on what I've observed over two seasons, I am skeptical.

 

 

I don't know if I've met anyone who is sold on Tyrod as a passer........certainly NOT me.

 

But when you subtract Tyrod you don't get to keep that dynamic running game........you START OVER.

 

And then you are back to a pretty pedestrian OL........a VERY poor/shallow/suspect WR corps.....and a couple good RB's who previous history suggests can get you 4.3-4.4 ypc pretty consistently, which isn't very good unless you are pounding that defense and softening them up for the pass.

 

Very underrated downside of having a rare "scatback" as your lead is that the rest of the league is using the run game to wear down the small defenders that have made the scatbacks of yesterday obsolete.

 

THAT personnel only looks like a top scoring offense if the QB guiding it is a top 5 type QB.

 

Keep lookin' for a franchise QB but it's ok to appreciate the ability to score on offense in the meantime.

[John from Riverside]

 

 

I don't know if I've met anyone who is sold on Tyrod as a passer........certainly NOT me.

 

But when you subtract Tyrod you don't get to keep that dynamic running game........you START OVER.

 

And then you are back to a pretty pedestrian OL........a VERY poor/shallow/suspect WR corps.....and a couple good RB's who previous history suggests can get you 4.3-4.4 ypc pretty consistently, which isn't very good unless you are pounding that defense and softening them up for the pass.

 

Very underrated downside of having a rare "scatback" as your lead is that the rest of the league is using the run game to wear down the small defenders that have made the scatbacks of yesterday obsolete.

 

THAT personnel only looks like a top scoring offense if the QB guiding it is a top 5 type QB.

 

Keep lookin' for a franchise QB but it's ok to appreciate the ability to score on offense in the meantime.

this

[HappyDays]

I don't dispute the argument that we might be able to make the playoffs with Taylor. But in my mind that's the absolute height of our aspirations with him.

 

This argument stemmend from a poster who said the only reason to take Wentz over Taylor was their respective ages, which I completely disagree with. Wentz is the kind of prospect you build a franchise around, and Taylor simply isn't.

EJ Manuel is the "kind of prospect" you build a franchise around. No one thought Russell Wilson was. This is exactly the kind of "keep doing the same thing" attitude that plagues so many GMs today IMO. There is no correct way to win the Super Bowl. Having an elite QB is the fastest way there to be fair, but not the only way.

 

So I couldn't care less that Wentz "looks" like a franchise QB or has some nebulous set of traits that other franchise QBs have. I care how he produces on the field and last year, after defenses had tape on him, he performed worse than Tyrod did. That's just a fact no matter what statistical analysis you use, he was not as good at playing QB as Tyrod was. And there is no guarantee he ever develops. Some like EJ only get worse. Why would I trade a QB that I KNOW can reach the playoffs with better defense, for a QB that potentially will play like EJ? The Eagles defense with Tyrod is probably a playoff spot.

[K-9]

 

 

I don't know if I've met anyone who is sold on Tyrod as a passer........certainly NOT me.

 

But when you subtract Tyrod you don't get to keep that dynamic running game........you START OVER.

 

And then you are back to a pretty pedestrian OL........a VERY poor/shallow/suspect WR corps.....and a couple good RB's who previous history suggests can get you 4.3-4.4 ypc pretty consistently, which isn't very good unless you are pounding that defense and softening them up for the pass.

 

Very underrated downside of having a rare "scatback" as your lead is that the rest of the league is using the run game to wear down the small defenders that have made the scatbacks of yesterday obsolete.

 

THAT personnel only looks like a top scoring offense if the QB guiding it is a top 5 type QB.

 

Keep lookin' for a franchise QB but it's ok to appreciate the ability to score on offense in the meantime.

Can't argue with anything here.

 

Subtracting TT hurts our offense and his detractors need to understand that. If they can acknowledge that while also admitting they accept that our W-L record would be worse in the short term while another QB is groomed, I'd have more respect for some of their extreme positions.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

 

 

I don't know if I've met anyone who is sold on Tyrod as a passer........certainly NOT me.

 

But when you subtract Tyrod you don't get to keep that dynamic running game........you START OVER.

 

And then you are back to a pretty pedestrian OL........a VERY poor/shallow/suspect WR corps.....and a couple good RB's who previous history suggests can get you 4.3-4.4 ypc pretty consistently, which isn't very good unless you are pounding that defense and softening them up for the pass.

 

Very underrated downside of having a rare "scatback" as your lead is that the rest of the league is using the run game to wear down the small defenders that have made the scatbacks of yesterday obsolete.

 

THAT personnel only looks like a top scoring offense if the QB guiding it is a top 5 type QB.

 

Keep lookin' for a franchise QB but it's ok to appreciate the ability to score on offense in the meantime.

Not buying that Roman and Kromer would not have had a strong running game with that personnel. Maybe you could make the case that without Tyrod it drops to say 5th. But its not going to go from best in the league to bad because Tyrod is gone, give me a break. And yes, a more efficient passer will mitigate some of that and help the run game too.

 

You go from best running game ever to 5th in the league and from worst passing game to mediocre, its a better offense in both raw production AND situational scoring that's needed to win close games, something we failed miserably at consistently over 2 seasons.

[jeffismagic]

Ok, so we have heard over and over how TT is responsible for our great running game. Bandit tried to quantify that by using 2015 games where EJ started. He shows that games where TT started the running game was better by .5 yard. Now that is a sample size of 2, very small. I didn't want to use the 2016 finale as that game the team had quit.

 

So I found a perfect opportunity to test the Elite QB runner helps other running backs theory.

 

The 2012 San Francisco 49ers. Greg Roman as offensive coordinator. Colin Kaepernick as a more dangerous runner than TT. Alex Smith as the other QB who was mobile but not a scary running threat. As it happens, we have a decent sample size for each as Alex started the year and Kap finished it off.

 

I decided to use Frank Gore the feature back's numbers under each to keep random noise lower.

 

First 8 games where Alex Smith started: Frank Gore 199 carries, 656 yards. 5.51 yards per carry

 

The next game Alex and Colin shared a lot of snaps, so I discounted it.

 

Final 7 game where Kaepernick started: Frank Gore 118 carries, 461 yards. 3.91 yards per carry

 

So here is a Greg Roman offense, similar to the Bills, where we have a large sample size of half a season for effects of running threat for QB. Yet the running QB had much worse yards per carry for Frank Gore!

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sfo/2012.htm

[GoBills808]

That's true.

 

But when it comes to strictly evaluating the execution of his position as the QB, we need to leave the defense out of it. It's simply not relative to how he executed his responsibilities at the position from play to play. The same can be said when breaking down a player at any other position, too.

This is the larger issue for me. Most fans demand excellence from every other position and look for replacements when expectations aren't met. We're even amenable to letting a guy like Gilmore walk when we know it's going to be a lesser relent replacing him.

 

But upgrade the QB spot? 'Nobody better available!' 'Can't risk losing an average guy!' 'We can win with him, things just have to fall right!' It's so weird how the most important position is allowed such leeway in terms of performance.

 

If the odds (these are made up numbers, but you get the idea) are even that the chances of improving, staying the same, or going backwards with a new QB are all equal...66.67% of the time you're either improving or maintaining by replacing a marginal QB. Why people don't hold the QB to the same standard as other positions I have no idea.

[Big Gun]

 

 

 

 

But when you subtract Tyrod you don't get to keep that dynamic running game........you START OVER.

 

 

Shady McCoy did pretty damn good without Tyrod Taylor as his QB.

 

You make it sound like the only reason McCoy is a good RB is because of Taylor. Disagree 100%