transplantbillsfan Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 Passes and runs. (816+199=1015/29=35) It's pretty much the number of times per game that the Bills asked him to do something with the ball. I'm with you here, but the other side of the argument actually thinks rushes don't count or matter. But since we're on the subject... if that other side wants to discount how much the Bills actually relied upon him in the passing game by saying "runs don't count," then we would need to look at drop backs that aren't designed runs. Taylor scrambled 47 times last year, or 3.1 times a game. And he was sacked 42 times last year, or 2.8 times a game. That's 5.9 times the ball didn't leave his hand, but the Bills were entrusting him in the passing game. Some of those were positive plays like the scrambles (which he gained 371 yards on) while some were negative plays like the sacks (which he lost 196 yards on). (So he netted 175 yards on those 6 extra attempts per game. So he was gaining 12 extra yards per game on those 6 added drop backs) Although I suspect I'll be accused of "cooking stats," that's the reality of what Taylor was asked to do and actually accomplished on those plays the Bills asked him to pass but he didn't.
BringBackOrton Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 Passes and runs. (816+199=1015/29=35) It's pretty much the number of times per game that the Bills asked him to do something with the ball. Sacks/scrambles for negative yardage aren't included in that total.
transplantbillsfan Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 Dude Need Life What's wrong with you? Why do you resort to personal attacks? Sacks/scrambles for negative yardage aren't included in that total. Don't worry... I just included it for you... see above
BringBackOrton Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 What's wrong with you? Why do you resort to personal attacks? Don't worry... I just included it for you... see above Thank God for that 2 YPC which absolutely offsets the crushing, drive killing sacks.
Figster Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 Greg Roman and Lynn were the only reason TT had as much success as he did, IMO. I thought G Roman was used as a scapegoat and Lynn had Taylor going in the right direction toward seasons end.(IMO) The lack of sufficient reps hurt the passing game so I'm not blaming Roman or Lynn for something Rex Ryan brought G Roman in to accomplish. Rex/ D just didn't get the job done in my humble opinion.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 Sacks/scrambles for negative yardage aren't included in that total. all runs are included, sacks are not though. ...would be interesting to see out of the 9 losses, which games were "out of reach" and what his stats were in garbage time.....stats can be manipulative and misleading......NOT as a negative vote against TT, just curious as to how the picture differs....... Garbage time is pretty subjective, which makes that analysis difficult.
BringBackOrton Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 all runs are included, sacks are not though. Garbage time is pretty subjective, which makes that analysis difficult. Scrambles for negative yardage are sacks.
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 Thank God for that 2 YPC which absolutely offsets the crushing, drive killing sacks. Sacks are a bit of a function of the Greg Roman offense. Alex Smith was sacked 44 times in SF when they won 13 games. Combine Smiths and Kaepernick and you get 40. Kaepernick was sacked 39 and 52 times in his 2 full years under roman. Tyrod was sacked 36 and 42 times at a sack rate of 8.7/8.8%. Pretty much in line with what Smith and Kaep did in their years under Roman.
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 (edited) all runs are included, sacks are not though. Garbage time is pretty subjective, which makes that analysis difficult. ....agree....and with the two polarizing TT camps here, one from the Hatfields would make his case with subjective omission and one from the McCoys would make his case with over inclusion.....guess by thought was a dumb one....yet I will STILL maintain he has yet to demonstrate command of the entire field as in reads, progressions, etc......the speed and complexity differential is huge at the NFL according to Steve Young...said that's why "more fail than succeed"....4 year understudy and 2 year starter is a pretty decent test as to whether has "IT" or will get "IT".....and that is an observation... Edited May 18, 2017 by OldTimeAFLGuy
Eric Moulds on my A** Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 What's wrong with you? Why do you resort to personal attacks? Don't worry... I just included it for you... see above When a member needs/creates multiple accounts to avoid infractions hmmm... I don't know what else to say except that member could stand a break. Maybe participate in life. (It exists outside of this site) If that's an insult to you I'd suggest thicker skin.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 Scrambles for negative yardage are sacks. Factoring in sacks, his combined touches goes to 37.7 per game.
Figster Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 all runs are included, sacks are not though. Garbage time is pretty subjective, which makes that analysis difficult. All QB's have garbage time production in my humble opinion. Whats more garbage, having a huge lead and padding the stats or trying to come from behind?
BuffaloHokie13 Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 ....agree....and with the two polarizing TT camps here, one from the Hatfields would make his case with subjective omission and one from the McCoys would make his case with over inclusion.....guess by thought was a dumb one..... If someone wants to lay out a defined set of parameters for 'garbage time' and provide their input that's fine. All I wanted to do is lay out his officially recorded stats in a vacuum. What people think about them isn't up to me.
GunnerBill Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 (edited) How are they risking losing him? Taylor is our's for the next 4 years if he's playing to the level where the Bills want to franchise him. This is the best contract the Bills could ask for. Shaw thinks this contract is a win for Taylor based on what his agent friend said. And while I respect his opinion and credibility and do think Taylor is "betting on himself" to a certain degree, I think Taylor wanted to stay with the Bills more than some folks are willing to accept (because pro athletes go where the most money is!) and he showed his hand the moment he opened himself to restructuring on clean out day. It's the whole art of the deal thing... once he showed any level of willingness, of course McDermott is going to try to get him to take less money if he can free up money at other positions of need. It's not like he's built a significant relationship with Taylor that can't be repaired. Sorry, but that's just what I think happened. And it's reasonable even if you disagree. Your opinion is reasonable, too, even though I disagree. What's irritating is when posters say that an opinion is unarguable when, in fact, it's merely speculation. 3 years. Not 4. His new contract is 2 years he is franchise eligible in 2019. As for it being speculation to disagree. Find me one more example in the last 20 years of the NFL where a team has reduced the cash number of a guy they are treating as a Franchise QB by $10m. Not where they lowered an annual cap hit but where they lowered the cash a guy would receive. I can't think of a single one. Maybe you believe the Bills have set a new trend of successfully lowballing their QB of the future? Personally I find that interpretation incredible. The truth is they see him as the best option now and long term as a bridge. Edited May 18, 2017 by GunnerBill
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 (edited) Roman offense facts - Top 12 in points scored 5/6 years. 8th or better in giveaways in 5/6 years. Top 8 in rushing yards 5/6 years. Bottom 5 passing yards 5/6 years. Teams usually near the bottom of the league in sacks. 3 playoff teams in 4 years with SF. Almost won a superbowl, and almost got to a 2nd. What is the main takeaway? The niners defense was awesome, and top 5 in yards all 4 years under harbaugh. Ours was bottom half in yards, and worse at getting takeaways and short fields. And one of the worst rush defenses in football. Edited May 18, 2017 by dneveu
transplantbillsfan Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 Thank God for that 2 YPC which absolutely offsets the crushing, drive killing sacks. You act like it means nothing, but QBs like Matthew Stafford and Jameis Winston don't gain those extra 2 yards... they lose yards. I haven't even looked at their own designed runs vs. sacks vs. kneeldowns (which you'd have to do), but Winston netted -71 yards and Stafford netted -9 yards after considering their runs and their sacks, while Taylor netted +175 yards. You act like Taylor's the only one who has "crushing, drive killing sacks" in the NFL when in actuality it happens a lot to a lot of QBs.
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 All QB's have garbage time production in my humble opinion. Whats more garbage, having a huge lead and padding the stats or trying to come from behind? ...it's not "humble"....it's highly accurate bud.....I wasn't interested in stats during garbage time to make a critical point about the kid..only an azz would hope he fails to live his lifelong dream as an NFL QB......was trying to get a handle on his decision making prowess when the game is in reach or on the line...many times stats have talked about a QB's 4th quarter comebacks.....is he capable or does he have plenty more to do?.....
transplantbillsfan Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 3 years. Not 4. His new contract is 2 years he is franchise eligible in 2019. As for it being speculation to disagree. Find me one more example in the last 20 years of the NFL where a team has reduced the cash number of a guy they are treating as a Franchise QB by $10m. Not where they lowered an annual cap hit but where they lowered the cash a guy would receive. I can't think of a single one. Maybe you believe the Bills have set a new trend of successfully lowballing their QB of the future? Personally I find that interpretation incredible. The truth is they see him as the best option now and long term as a bridge. 4 years. This year. Next year. Franchise tag twice like the 'Skins just did with Cousins. 4.
HappyDays Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 Sacks are a bit of a function of the Greg Roman offense. Alex Smith was sacked 44 times in SF when they won 13 games. Combine Smiths and Kaepernick and you get 40. Kaepernick was sacked 39 and 52 times in his 2 full years under roman. Tyrod was sacked 36 and 42 times at a sack rate of 8.7/8.8%. Pretty much in line with what Smith and Kaep did in their years under Roman. Roman's pass play calling was horrible. The receivers' routes took too long to develop. It's no coincidence that the pass game improved after he left, with the best two games of Tyrod's career coming weeks after Lynn took over.
GunnerBill Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 Indeed dneveu. And you will never find a post from me dissing Greg Roman as play designer. I personally believe him to be the best run game coordinator in the NFL. His passing game was a little basic but he had the most varied, most developed run game in the league. He needed to be a better play caller on gameday at times, but he could design an offense. No question about that.
Recommended Posts