Dumb Carucci column...assessing QB position

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

With respect to the highlighted segment that is one of the significant the weak points that can't be masked. You either have that vision and processing ability or you don't. TT is not a young qb. He has been in this league for at least a half a dozen years. If he hasn't learned to make reads in a timely manner at this stage of his career, he never will. I'm aware that he has only started for two years but he still has been in this league for at least a half dozen years. If his game is still so rudimentary at this point then there is little chance (my opinion) that he will ever master that crucial aspect of the qb position.

...cannot argue and didn't want to start yet another firestorm debate....bottom line is retraining gray matter and if it was a simple task, those that have failed because they could not adapt to the speed and complexity at the NFL level could have been "fixed"....

[3rdand12]

Yup. Hopefully, Peterman and Jones turn out to be good backup qbs at worst. But they are completely unknowns and Yates' best skill is knowing the playbook.

exactamundo

I wonder if Tyrod knows Vic Carucci's name

Vic has been at the pressers. so he likely does

[3rdand12]

Thanks. I will probably be labelled a "hater" or told I think Tyrod is "terrible" but I can only say it as I see it I don't think my post was unfair at all.

 

And like you, I'd love to be proved wrong. Tyrod is an easy guy to root for.

I find it easy to say, Tyrod has this season to pick up and execute The New Offense. Whether it be Dennison's or some hybrid tailored to to the players left to go win us some games. Part of his success will be to throw with anticipation finally. This supposed Dennison offense we will be seeing likes to widen the run game which means using similar tactics when optioning.

This might bode well for Tyrod.

 

Due to his height, i think a lateral- esque moving and fluid blocking Line could create some nice timing lanes.

I think he will be asked to throw with anticipation more than worrying about a pocket he never needed anyways.

He doesn't execute those throws? Coaches may begin to look elsewhere as Beane and Company likely already are .

 

Tyrod is going to give his best effort to date.

I truly hope he succeeds

Go Bills

 

Whenever someone starts going on about Taylor's "processing" speed (as if he's a defective cpu chip), I know it's time to pull out TT's statistics in the 15 games with a legitimate No 1&2 receiver, when both Watkins and Woods played : 63.6% comp. 8.25 YPA. 27 TD passes. 6 INTs.

 

His "processing" speed seem to work in those games, huh?

I think its his lack of decisive movement that has held him back. protect that ball !

He can process just fine

[stuvian]

this offseason is making us crazy

[transient]

this offseason is making us crazy

These pretzels are making me thirsty.

[Thurman#1]

You're right about pretty much all of this.

 

I was referring to time holding the ball. I don't think there are stats about time staying the pocket, and I don't think there are stats about leaving clean pockets too early. That's ALL conjecture. But the fact that he holds the ball longer than most QBs supports what I've always observed, which is that he's always looking downfield to throw. Carucci is suggesting that he gives up on pass plays too quickly, and that isn't true.

 

Yes it's possible that the new offense could cause problems. It's equally true that it could be better for Taylor, for a couple of reasons: the decision making is apparently easier. And since the offense runs the ball wide more often, the offense will tend to spread the defense more, which should help Taylor running.

 

As for his poor showing during the off-season, I'd really like to know where that is coming from. I've seen NO quotes or comments attributed to anyone who actually saw the off-season workouts saying anything at all like that. Plus, even if it's true, the fact that he didn't perform well in most of the off-season could be attributed to his learning the offense. That doesn't necessarily mean that he'll struggle in the regular season.

 

And, yes, it IS Vic's opinion. And others, like you and I, are free to express how we agree and disagree with that opinion. None of those opinions is worth anything, but none of us has seen the practices, has been in the meeting, has had frank conversations with Taylor or McDermott. Vic's bull **** smells just as bad as mine.

 

 

Carucci says he "remains too quick to run." Exactly. You say "Carucci is suggesting that he gives up on pass plays too quickly," and if he is indeed suggesting that, he's correct. He does give up on pass plays too early, that's what you do when you leave the pocket before you have to. That doesn't mean that he gives up on the idea of passing necessarily - I agree that he's generally looking to pass when he's scrambling, but yeah, once you leave the pocket and start sprinting, the play design is blown and it's pretty much back to sandlot ball. That's what Tyrod does too often, leaving clean pockets and reducing the play design to irrelevance. It's one of the four or five consistently mentioned problems that Tyrod has.

 

Fair enough if you were talking about time he held the ball. He does indeed hold the ball a long time, but that does not tend to be because he's generally hanging in the pocket a long time.

 

Sure, it's possible that the new offense could be better for Tyrod. But that's not the way the odds would suggest as they put it to it's first tests under live conditions. First year offenses - and defenses - tend to have trouble while they get used to the new scheme, form new habit patterns and so on. If consistency weren't better, people wouldn't try for it and consistent teams wouldn't do better than teams that switch. And in fact, that's what happens. There are teams that break that pattern but in the first season and particularly early in the season having a new scheme is absolutely more likely to cause problems than improvement.

 

You haven't seen where this is coming from, that Tyrod had a bad series of workouts? Seriously? Jeez, Shaw, you must be one of the only ones. There was a ton of it, although they did mention that the last day at minicamp he looked better than he had the previous five workouts.

 

"Taylor, for that matter, also wasn’t that sharp – although his best practice by far was the final one Thursday."

 

http://buffalonews.com/2017/06/15/jay-skurskis-top-10-takeaways-bills-spring-practices/

 

"His issues with accuracy were absolutely a topic, both here and with other media members on the beat. Those who watched every practice would tell you the same. Here's the thing, though: The Bills don't have any other options. "

 

http://buffalonews.com/2017/06/17/jay-skurskis-bills-mailbag-tyrod-taylor-talk-stephen-hauschkas-job-jeopardy-much-faith-sean-mcdermott-brandon-beane-pairing/

 

"Through six workouts that the media has been able to view during the spring offseason sessions, the best day we’ve seen from starting quarterback Tyrod Taylor was saved for the last day of school ... This was a good sign for Taylor, especially considering that the other five workouts we’ve seen has featured him really playing at an average to below average level."

 

http://www.wkbw.com/sports/bills/joe-b-7-observations-from-buffalo-bills-minicamp-day-three-61517

 

"The Bills' first-team offense struggled in the red zone on Wednesday. Not only did Watkins fumble, but Taylor threw an interception to Jordan Poyer on an off-target throw to tight end Charles Clay. "

 

http://www.newyorkupstate.com/buffalo-bills/index.ssf/2017/06/buffalo_bills_minicamp_2017_tj_yates_bounces_back_and_10_observations_from_day_2.html

 

"Overall, here's how the numbers on the quarterbacks broke down on Wednesday:

"Tyrod Taylor: 12-for-19, INT, 4 sacks

TJ Yates: 16-for-21, 2 TDs, 2 sacks

Nathan Peterman: 9-for-12 (Excluding 2 spikes)

Cardale Jones: 1-for-3, INT

 

"You read that right. Yikes.

 

"The first-team offense failed to score with Taylor. The second team shined under a veteran pose from Yates."

 

http://www.thedailynewsonline.com/bdn02/video-story-uphill-battle-underway-for-bills-qb-cardale-jones-20170615

 

"There's no sugar-coating it. Tyrod Taylor looked terrible during the Buffalo Bills' penultimate spring practice on Wednesday at New Era Field.

 

"But two important qualifiers must be applied. First, it was just one practice. Second, at this time two years ago Taylor appeared just as ineffective and confounded while learning a new system, then Greg Roman’s. Taylor, of course, wound up beating out fellow veterans EJ Manuel and Matt Cassel to win the starting job by late August.

 

"But Taylor had a really bad day passing on Wednesday. Rick Dennison’s play-action-based system ought to suit Taylor, but the seventh-year NFL passer looked unsure too often and struggled mightily to hook up with receivers on Dennison’s requisite, favoured batch of simple, short, perimeter throws: Outs and comebacks.

"Far too many times, if Taylor wasn’t late to fire, he was inaccurate outside the numbers. Unsmooth, at best."

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/06/14/sammy-watkins-looking-mighty-fine-at-bills-camp

 

 

 

 

That's like five writers saying the same thing. You say you saw "NO quotes or comments attributed to anyone who actually saw the off-season workouts saying anything at all like that." You must not have been looking.

Edited June 28, 2017 by Thurman#1

[mannc]

You and many others continue to make the argument that he was an attractive qb option for a number of qb starved teams. The reality is that when he had the opportunity to pursue other options no team was interested in him at his former salary or even at a lower salary rate. The point is frequently made that he couldn't check out the market because he was contractually obligated to the Bills. That is a naive response because there was always a behind the curtain way through his agent to determine what other teams were interested in him and at what price range. No team showed an interest in him as a starter.

 

The stark reality is he took a salary cut with a shorter term because he had no other offers. If you believe that there is still potential for him, even with his glaring limitations, then so be it. What I am saying in a declarative manner is that when he had an opportunity to avail himself to the market there were no takers. What does that tell you?

 

The issue for me isn't whether TT can be a starter for the Bills because he is currently the designated starter. The issue for me is whether as a starter he is good enough. I am comfortable in saying no.

John, you are just making stuff up. You are stating things as cold, hard facts that you cannot possibly know to be true.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

These pretzels are making me thirsty.

Edited June 28, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan

[JohnC]

John, you are just making stuff up. You are stating things as cold, hard facts that you cannot possibly know to be true.

What am I making up? If Taylor would not of taken a pay cut with a lesser term he wouldn't even be on the Bills' roster. That's a fact. TT had the ability to decline the lower contract offering and go to another team. There were no other teams interested in him as a starter. If there were then state them.

 

At best TT is a bridge qb for us. He taking a diminished contract illustrates that point. If the organization under the new regime was unwilling to invest in him under his original contract what does that tell you? If Whaley would have been retained TT would have been unceremoniously dispatched.

 

TT has been in the league for at least a half dozen years. He is what he is. Those hoping for him to be something more than what he has already demonstrated are being wishful. TT does serve a useful purpose. But it is not as our long term franchise qb.

[BuffaloHokie13]

What am I making up? If Taylor would not of taken a pay cut with a lesser term he wouldn't even be on the Bills' roster. That's a fact. TT had the ability to decline the lower contract offering and go to another team. There were no other teams interested in him as a starter. If there were then state them.

 

At best TT is a bridge qb for us. He taking a diminished contract illustrates that point. If the organization under the new regime was unwilling to invest in him under his original contract what does that tell you? If Whaley would have been retained TT would have been unceremoniously dispatched.

 

TT has been in the league for at least a half dozen years. He is what he is. Those hoping for him to be something more than what he has already demonstrated are being wishful. TT does serve a useful purpose. But it is not as our long term franchise qb.

This is false. I'm not going to go further than that because I prefer to keep private conversations private.

[26CornerBlitz]

What am I making up? If Taylor would not of taken a pay cut with a lesser term he wouldn't even be on the Bills' roster. That's a fact. TT had the ability to decline the lower contract offering and go to another team. There were no other teams interested in him as a starter. If there were then state them.

 

At best TT is a bridge qb for us. He taking a diminished contract illustrates that point. If the organization under the new regime was unwilling to invest in him under his original contract what does that tell you? If Whaley would have been retained TT would have been unceremoniously dispatched.

 

TT has been in the league for at least a half dozen years. He is what he is. Those hoping for him to be something more than what he has already demonstrated are being wishful. TT does serve a useful purpose. But it is not as our long term franchise qb.

 

Noooo! Not you!

[JM2009]

What am I making up? If Taylor would not of taken a pay cut with a lesser term he wouldn't even be on the Bills' roster. That's a fact. TT had the ability to decline the lower contract offering and go to another team. There were no other teams interested in him as a starter. If there were then state them.

 

At best TT is a bridge qb for us. He taking a diminished contract illustrates that point. If the organization under the new regime was unwilling to invest in him under his original contract what does that tell you? If Whaley would have been retained TT would have been unceremoniously dispatched.

 

TT has been in the league for at least a half dozen years. He is what he is. Those hoping for him to be something more than what he has already demonstrated are being wishful. TT does serve a useful purpose. But it is not as our long term franchise qb.

See folks, this type of posting is not genuine posting. TT has been a starter for two years in the NFL. he sat on the bench the rest. "If Whaley"-the guy who pushed EJ and said EJ had the it factor- he disliked TT which is a good thing for TT because Whaley is a terrible evaluator of QBs. Sounds like this poster wants Whaley back just so TT isn't on the roster.

What am I making up? If Taylor would not of taken a pay cut with a lesser term he wouldn't even be on the Bills' roster. That's a fact. TT had the ability to decline the lower contract offering and go to another team. There were no other teams interested in him as a starter. If there were then state them.

 

At best TT is a bridge qb for us. He taking a diminished contract illustrates that point. If the organization under the new regime was unwilling to invest in him under his original contract what does that tell you? If Whaley would have been retained TT would have been unceremoniously dispatched.

 

TT has been in the league for at least a half dozen years. He is what he is. Those hoping for him to be something more than what he has already demonstrated are being wishful. TT does serve a useful purpose. But it is not as our long term franchise qb.

The fact that you would agree with Whaley about QB talent is very telling.

What am I making up? If Taylor would not of taken a pay cut with a lesser term he wouldn't even be on the Bills' roster. That's a fact. TT had the ability to decline the lower contract offering and go to another team. There were no other teams interested in him as a starter. If there were then state them.

 

At best TT is a bridge qb for us. He taking a diminished contract illustrates that point. If the organization under the new regime was unwilling to invest in him under his original contract what does that tell you? If Whaley would have been retained TT would have been unceremoniously dispatched.

 

TT has been in the league for at least a half dozen years. He is what he is. Those hoping for him to be something more than what he has already demonstrated are being wishful. TT does serve a useful purpose. But it is not as our long term franchise qb.

And who said he was? he is the best QB the Bills have had this century and could get the team to the playoffs if he has the talent around him-including a defense that can stop the better teams in the league. You don't like that-then get the Bills a HOF, elite type QB, you think it is so easy. You work with the best option you have.

[Chandler#81]

..

 

TT has been in the league for at least a half dozen years. He is what he is. Those hoping for him to be something more than what he has already demonstrated are being wishful. TT does serve a useful purpose. But it is not as our long term franchise qb.

 

with TWO years playing in only Roman's offense, it's more than reasonable he could be 'something more' in an offense better suited to his strengths. Of course, I don't know this for sure. We're ALL on Tyrod's new, short leash contract. Deliver in Dennison's offense, and we have the answer. If not, move on.

[JohnC]

This is false. I'm not going to go further than that because I prefer to keep private conversations private.

You don't have to divulge private conversations. I can respect your sense of confidentiality. No one's asking for sources. However, if there were teams interested in TT as a starter then name them. A team can have an interest in a player but if there are no serious overtures then the interest is tepid.

 

TT and his agents are not stupid. If he could have gone to another team and started under his original contract he would have done so. He didn't! Let's remember that TT was not being warmly embraced by the Bills. The departed GM wanted to release him and the new regime was only willing to keep him on with a lesser contract. That's the reality of the situation.

 

Noooo! Not you!

Can I have a do over? Would not have-----. I appreciate the correction. You are not scolding. This is what you call a teachable moment.

 

The fact that you would agree with Whaley about QB talent is very telling.

 

On this issue I unequivocally agree with Whaley and Jeffismagic. Speaking of Jeff he needs to be freed from his unjust imprisonment!

[mannc]

What am I making up? If Taylor would not of taken a pay cut with a lesser term he wouldn't even be on the Bills' roster. That's a fact. TT had the ability to decline the lower contract offering and go to another team. There were no other teams interested in him as a starter. If there were then state them.

 

At best TT is a bridge qb for us. He taking a diminished contract illustrates that point. If the organization under the new regime was unwilling to invest in him under his original contract what does that tell you? If Whaley would have been retained TT would have been unceremoniously dispatched.

 

TT has been in the league for at least a half dozen years. He is what he is. Those hoping for him to be something more than what he has already demonstrated are being wishful. TT does serve a useful purpose. But it is not as our long term franchise qb.

John, your entire first paragraph, as well as the part about Whaley, is nothing but speculation, yet you state it as an established fact. Other statements you make (bridge QB, he is what he is) are obviously just your opinion of the player, which is fine. But you should not present rumor and unsupported speculation as fact. You also did it in the Ryan Brothers bar fight thread, when early on you stated unequivocally that they did not instigate anything. That speculation, presented as fact, also turned out to be wrong.

[section122]

 

Truth of the matter is I don't care where TT is ranked as a qb. He can be ranked between 15 to 20 and still not be good enough to lead this team to anywhere meaningful. You point out that mediocre qbs like Hoyer and McCown have been starters. My response is so what! TT is clearly better than those qbs. But what does that get you? It gets you nowhere. That's my central point.

 

Don't let perfection be the enemy of very good.

 

Not every team gets to have a top 10 QB that can strap a team on its back and there isn't even 10 guys in the league that can do that. The rest of the teams need to make due and you make due with the best options available. If he is the 15th - 20th best QB in the league that would make him a valuable commodity both to the team and in the league.

 

You have been ruined by Brady. What he and the Pats* are doing is amazing but he has a fantastic team around him, probably the best coach of all time, and is in the conversation for best QB of all time if he hasn't already achieved that status. TT has had subpar talent around him, Rex Ryan, and was a first time starter. Look at recent SB QBs and you will see what I mean. Ryan and Brady are both top 5-10 QBs which was the anomaly, Cam and P Manning when they met? Cam had a great year but his career puts him somewhere around 10-15th best in the league and Manning was terrible, Seahawks both year were led by their defense as RW might be top 10 now but wasn't when they went to the SB, before that the super bowl matchup was Colin Kaepernick and Joe Flacco both who imo are worse than TT, Eli Manning won the SB before that and has been maybe around top 10 his career with some absolutely dreadful seasons mixed in. QBs absolutley help and make a huge impact on the game but ultimately the talent around them drives their success. Look no further than Brees and Rivers for proof of that.

 

John, you are just making stuff up. You are stating things as cold, hard facts that you cannot possibly know to be true.

 

This was my issue with your post. A lot of conjecture passed off as fact.

 

What am I making up? If Taylor would not of taken a pay cut with a lesser term he wouldn't even be on the Bills' roster. That's a fact. TT had the ability to decline the lower contract offering and go to another team. There were no other teams interested in him as a starter. If there were then state them.

 

At best TT is a bridge qb for us. He taking a diminished contract illustrates that point. If the organization under the new regime was unwilling to invest in him under his original contract what does that tell you? If Whaley would have been retained TT would have been unceremoniously dispatched.

 

TT has been in the league for at least a half dozen years. He is what he is. Those hoping for him to be something more than what he has already demonstrated are being wishful. TT does serve a useful purpose. But it is not as our long term franchise qb.

For starters you made up the bolded. You took a lot of your ideas on the situation and presented them as fact. That doesn't make them a fact.

 

You also don't know for sure that he would have been cut without renegotiating although that is a pretty safe bet.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

in reference to Dennis Green

 

He is who we thought he is.

 

Fun to watch, good ant times, he's just not that guy

What am I making up? If Taylor would not of taken a pay cut with a lesser term he wouldn't even be on the Bills' roster. That's a fact. TT had the ability to decline the lower contract offering and go to another team. There were no other teams interested in him as a starter. If there were then state them.

 

At best TT is a bridge qb for us. He taking a diminished contract illustrates that point. If the organization under the new regime was unwilling to invest in him under his original contract what does that tell you? If Whaley would have been retained TT would have been unceremoniously dispatched.

 

TT has been in the league for at least a half dozen years. He is what he is. Those hoping for him to be something more than what he has already demonstrated are being wishful. TT does serve a useful purpose. But it is not as our long term franchise qb.

what he said (bolded)

 

There were no other teams interested in him as a starter.

I too would love see it in type

If there were then state them

 

And not some tabloid or talking head. Something from a teams Front Office or coaching staff.

Edited June 28, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan

[mannc]

 

There were no other teams interested in him as a starter.

I too would love see it in type

If there were then state them

 

And not some tabloid or talking head. Something from a teams Front Office or coaching staff.

That's entirely disingenuous. Since Tyrod was at all times still under contract with the Bills, it would have been illegal tampering for anyone associated with another team to make any such statement, and you know it. Which is why John's original statement (presented as cold, hard fact) is nothing more than uninformed speculation. Edited June 28, 2017 by mannc

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

That's entirely disingenuous. Since Tyrod was at all times still under contract with the Bills, it would have been illegal tampering for anyone associated with another team to make any such statement, and you know it. Which is why John's original statement (presented as cold, hard fact) is nothing more than uninformed speculation.

Is it now?

Teams have never ever tried to work out deals with players under contract before?

 

Explain to me how a team goes about negotiating a trade? meaning the player has to be under contract or there is no need for a trade.

 

What we could call being disingenuous is not providing the link asked for.

[mannc]

Is it now?

Teams have never ever tried to work out deals with players under contract before?

 

Explain to me how a team goes about negotiating a trade? meaning the player has to be under contract or there is no need for a trade.

 

What we could call being disingenuous is not providing the link asked for.

I never made any proclamation one way or another regarding whether Tyrod would have been given the chance to start elsewhere. I don't know for sure because he never hit the market and no GM or coach was foolish enough to risk losing a high draft pick by speaking publicly about their team's interest in a player under contract with another team. The burden to produce evidence falls on those, like JohnC, who state categorically that no other team had any interest in TT as a starter.