John from Riverside Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 Not sure what you're talking about with regards to the offense. The offense is and was absolutely built to score lots of points, sans QB. Two top 10 OL rounded out with serviceable starters, a top 3 RB, the best backup RB in the NFL, top 5-10 talent at WR with a solid number #2 and #3. What part of that offense isn't supposed to score? We're talking about TT's level of play in the offense. The offense got better because McCoy played better. Not because TT played worse. so you are not willing to recognize that this was a run the ball dominant team? Im not going to fight with you on this....im past doing that on this board. If you are not willing to recognize that the bills were a run dominant team and that in essense run dominant teams are not biult to win shootouts.....and the fact that the top 5 talent WR you speak of was out for most of the year then played at far less then 100 percent the remainder of it due to a jones fracture. If you are not willing to recognize those things then let me know so i can save the bandwith sir
Crusher Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 What are my true colors? Insults and belittling of those who don't agree with you're high praise of Taylor. You can never keep it to strictly discussion...there's always a little dig thrown into it...as if any other opinion on Taylor isn't worth acknowledgement. It's fine with me as I can take it and don't mind giving it back, but it still speaks to what type of poster you have become...at least when Tyrod is the subject of the discussion.
transplantbillsfan Posted June 4, 2017 Author Posted June 4, 2017 This perfect system you are speaking of would have to hide Taylor's major flaws as a passer...we already did that by protecting him with a dominant ground game mixed in with simple plays and easy, low risk throws. The QB's that have the perfect system in place have the freedom to read the defense and operate in real time while the play is developing...before the snap as well. Dennison may help him a bit more by rolling out of the pocket and such, but I don't view that as sustainable, and I can envision Taylor taking more of a beating that way, too. I think we've given Tyrod about as much help as he can expect, and he's been given a system that helps him maximize his abilities already. Bottom line is I just don't see alot more that can be done to get him playing at a higher level. ]And Taylor had a chance to put it away, but didn't. I'm sorry but this is super lame. It really is. You need to consider circumstances and context in a game that has so many other things influencing it than just the QB. Taylor passed what should have been the go ahead TD to Clay with less than 90 seconds in the game, then the return team allowed a 39 yard return, the defense promptly allows Matt Moore to get 25 more yards, then our dumbass HC can't call a TO to potentially ice the kicker. Then on the first OT drive Taylor helps the Bills get into the Red Zone with a chance to put the game away and you get -2 yards from McCoy on 1st down and one of the worst play calls ever by running a gimmick play to a guy who hardly saw the field all year because he's at the end of his career and he gets-8 yards. Oh yeah, and then our kicker missed a pretty easy FG by NFL standards giving the opposition good field position. Loss.
BringBackOrton Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 (edited) so you are not willing to recognize that this was a run the ball dominant team? Im not going to fight with you on this....im past doing that on this board. If you are not willing to recognize that the bills were a run dominant team and that in essense run dominant teams are not biult to win shootouts.....and the fact that the top 5 talent WR you speak of was out for most of the year then played at far less then 100 percent the remainder of it due to a jones fracture. If you are not willing to recognize those things then let me know so i can save the bandwith sir But here we are talking about a "run dominant team" that "scored lots of points." Teams that score lots of points are the teams that win shootouts. I'm a little confused about your expectations. After the 2015 campaign, in which the Bills were 12th in points scored and we retained every single starter on that offense, you didn't expect to score a similar amount of points? You thought the 2016 offense was gonna drop to 20th or so in points, because it "wasn't built to score lots of points" Doesn't that by virtue of having an offense score top 12 in points two years in a row make that expectation inherently wrong? Clearly we should expect an offense that scores lots of points because that's what they do and have done. Is your expectation of the 2017 Bills offense to score around 10th or so in points or 20th? Why? Edited June 4, 2017 by jmc12290
Crusher Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 so you are not willing to recognize that this was a run the ball dominant team? Im not going to fight with you on this....im past doing that on this board. If you are not willing to recognize that the bills were a run dominant team and that in essense run dominant teams are not biult to win shootouts.....and the fact that the top 5 talent WR you speak of was out for most of the year then played at far less then 100 percent the remainder of it due to a jones fracture. If you are not willing to recognize those things then let me know so i can save the bandwith sir If Taylor was good and could have carried more of a load in the passing game, I'm sure they would've given him more responsibility in that regard. All the info actually shows the opposite...that he needed things simplified in order to better run the offense. I could of maybe bought that this was a run oriented offense that didn't ask Taylor to make plays in year one, but surely they would have recognized Taylor's ability to handle more and would have put more on his plate last season so we could win if we do end up in a shootout (which is inevitable in today's NFL). Again...they actually ended up simplifying the plays and his reads after struggles last season, so I think the offense has been constructed to protect a flawed QB and utilize our strength which has been the run game. Any other conclusion seems to be a stretch IMO
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 so you are not willing to recognize that this was a run the ball dominant team? Im not going to fight with you on this....im past doing that on this board. If you are not willing to recognize that the bills were a run dominant team and that in essense run dominant teams are not biult to win shootouts.....and the fact that the top 5 talent WR you speak of was out for most of the year then played at far less then 100 percent the remainder of it due to a jones fracture. If you are not willing to recognize those things then let me know so i can save the bandwith sir ....indisputable John.....hell, Wrecks broadcast it to the world in a woefully asinine proclamation......more appropriately, they were a "run or done" team because the passing game (lack thereof) scared no one...it was a paper tiger afterthought if TT's wheels couldn't bail out the offense......even if Bflo had a 100% healthy receiving corp (what team EVER does from start to finish?), I'm not convinced as TT STILL stumbles with processing the entire field as well as reads/progressions < 5 seconds, he'd find them anyway.....plenty of instances in 2016 where guys were open and were invisible or ulled up short knowing they'd never see the ball.....it is up to Dennison to fix this as priority #1 in 2017....without a dependable and viable passing game threat component, this club goes no where....TT's wheels need to be a SELECTIVELY viable alternative versus dire necessity....
John from Riverside Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 But here we are talking about a "run dominant team" that "scored lots of points." Teams that score lots of points are the teams that win shootouts. I'm a little confused about your expectations. After the 2015 campaign, in which the Bills were 12th in points scored and we retained every single starter on that offense, you didn't expect to score a similar amount of points? You thought the 2016 offense was gonna drop to 20th or so in points, because it "wasn't built to score lots of points" Doesn't that by virtue of having an offense score top 12 in points two years in a row make that expectation inherently wrong? Clearly we should expect an offense that scores lots of points because that's what they do and have done. Is your expectation of the 2017 Bills offense to score around 10th or so in points or 20th? Why? As of right now I dont have expectations....I have hopes. Its a new offense. If Taylor was good and could have carried more of a load in the passing game, I'm sure they would've given him more responsibility in that regard. All the info actually shows the opposite...that he needed things simplified in order to better run the offense. I could of maybe bought that this was a run oriented offense that didn't ask Taylor to make plays in year one, but surely they would have recognized Taylor's ability to handle more and would have put more on his plate last season so we could win if we do end up in a shootout (which is inevitable in today's NFL). Again...they actually ended up simplifying the plays and his reads after struggles last season, so I think the offense has been constructed to protect a flawed QB and utilize our strength which has been the run game. Any other conclusion seems to be a stretch IMO Why would we not create a offense around what we do well just to prove a point in the passing game? ....indisputable John.....hell, Wrecks broadcast it to the world in a woefully asinine proclamation......more appropriately, they were a "run or done" team because the passing game (lack thereof) scared no one...it was a paper tiger afterthought if TT's wheels couldn't bail out the offense......even if Bflo had a 100% healthy receiving corp (what team EVER does from start to finish?), I'm not convinced as TT STILL stumbles with processing the entire field as well as reads/progressions < 5 seconds, he'd find them anyway.....plenty of instances in 2016 where guys were open and were invisible or ulled up short knowing they'd never see the ball.....it is up to Dennison to fix this as priority #1 in 2017....without a dependable and viable passing game threat component, this club goes no where....TT's wheels need to be a SELECTIVELY viable alternative versus dire necessity.... Now I agree with this.....TT needs to show this year that the scramble for 1st down comes as a last resort.....not the 2nd if the 1st read is not open
transplantbillsfan Posted June 4, 2017 Author Posted June 4, 2017 Insults and belittling of those who don't agree with you're high praise of Taylor. You can never keep it to strictly discussion...there's always a little dig thrown into it...as if any other opinion on Taylor isn't worth acknowledgement. It's fine with me as I can take it and don't mind giving it back, but it still speaks to what type of poster you have become...at least when Tyrod is the subject of the discussion. All this time and I figured you would've finally been able to describe me, instead you describe yourself... A note: the word "delusional" on an internet discussion board is about as big an insult there is that's still generally acceptable in that you won't get an infraction for it. When you enter conversations calling people that immediately, you're picking a fight. That's you. I'm just the guy you picked a fight with who's not simply going to turn the other cheek. Maybe I should, but I'm human.
BringBackOrton Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 (edited) As of right now I dont have expectations....I have hopes. Its a new offense. Why would we not create a offense around what we do well just to prove a point in the passing game? Now I agree with this.....TT needs to show this year that the scramble for 1st down comes as a last resort.....not the 2nd if the 1st read is not open WTF? Meanwhile, you had expectations that the 2015 and 2016 defenses would perform like the 2014 defense even though it was a new defense? Are you intentionally contradicting yourself? Edited June 4, 2017 by jmc12290
John from Riverside Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 WTF? Meanwhile, you had expectations that the 2015 and 2016 defenses would perform like the 2014 defense even though it was a new defense? Are you intentionally contradicting yourself? Did I say that I expected it? I think I have stated what it would take to field a competitive team?
BringBackOrton Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 (edited) Did I say that I expected it? I think I have stated what it would take to field a competitive team? Yes. Which games are we talking about here? Please dont pick games where we are actually scoring points and the defense is letting them score right back during the game? This was supposed to be a DEFENSIVE DOMINANT team.......they did not live up to their identity? It wasnt biult to score score a ton (even though it did) You're on record 10000 times telling us how the offense EXCEEDED expectations and the defense didn't live up to them in the TT era. But now, the story has changed. Edited June 4, 2017 by jmc12290
John from Riverside Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 Yes. You're on record 10000 times telling us how the offense EXCEEDED expectations and the defense didn't live up to them in the TT era. But now, the story has changed. I really dont think i did that but if I did that was not my intention......they are gonna have to prove it. I might have HOPED that a return to a defense they excelled out would create improvement. And the offense did exceed expectations....and that story has not changed one bit
BringBackOrton Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 I really dont think i did that but if I did that was not my intention......they are gonna have to prove it. I might have HOPED that a return to a defense they excelled out would create improvement. And the offense did exceed expectations....and that story has not changed one bit It was a new offense, I thought you didn't have expectations?
John from Riverside Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 It was a new offense, I thought you didn't have expectations? The offense that was our last 2 years is a new offense? Not sure what your trying to twist here.
BringBackOrton Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 The offense that was our last 2 years is a new offense? Not sure what your trying to twist here. The 2015 offense wasn't the same as the 2014. Did the 2015 offense exceed expectations?
John from Riverside Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 The 2015 offense wasn't the same as the 2014. Did the 2015 offense exceed expectations? The 2015 offense WAS the 2014 offense....and the interim HC said as much in interview.......the terminology changed the offense was the same.
Foxx Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 The 2015 offense WAS the 2014 offense....and the interim HC said as much in interview.......the terminology changed the offense was the same. Romans offense was Hacketts offense?
BringBackOrton Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 The 2015 offense WAS the 2014 offense....and the interim HC said as much in interview.......the terminology changed the offense was the same. Romans offense was Hacketts offense? Interim HC Perry Fewell said as much in interview.
John from Riverside Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 Romans offense was Hacketts offense? Excuse me I thought we were talking about the 2015 and 2016 offenses The 2014 offense was not good.....it was a attempt to run and was a low yard per carry "cloud of dust" offense. Enter 2015.....enter Roman and his very good run based schemes....now we are run dominant but actually having a high yard per carry average.....ALL WE WERE LOOKING FOR that first year was a QB that could "game manage" the offense.......but TT came in and in my opinion provided much more then that......the problem is we moved away from Schwartz and his top 5 D at the same time as the offensive improvement Now enter 2016....the offensive scheme was no different (and was said as much by the coaching staff) the terminology changed....the way the playcalling was done changed....the fullback became a bigger part of the offense.......and once again the offense was effective. I meant 2015 and 2016....sorry for the confusion
Bangarang Posted June 5, 2017 Posted June 5, 2017 Excuse me I thought we were talking about the 2015 and 2016 offenses The 2014 offense was not good.....it was a attempt to run and was a low yard per carry "cloud of dust" offense. Enter 2015.....enter Roman and his very good run based schemes....now we are run dominant but actually having a high yard per carry average.....ALL WE WERE LOOKING FOR that first year was a QB that could "game manage" the offense.......but TT came in and in my opinion provided much more then that......the problem is we moved away from Schwartz and his top 5 D at the same time as the offensive improvement Now enter 2016....the offensive scheme was no different (and was said as much by the coaching staff) the terminology changed....the way the playcalling was done changed....the fullback became a bigger part of the offense.......and once again the offense was effective. I meant 2015 and 2016....sorry for the confusion I'm quite certain that the terminology did not change and Lynn himself said that it wouldn't have been something that could have been done given how sudden his promotion to OC was.
Recommended Posts