The Tyrod Taylor Question

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

I like the fire, but it's gonna take more than a meaningless drive in TC to make me a believer.

 

 

obviously...

[Figster]

Queue the replies

 

Dennison's a hater

Dennison's got an agenda

 

wait that last one is right.

Dennison is spot on IMO.

 

Low YAC average is a glaring indication of Tyrod Taylors biggest problem and hopefully some of the off season work will help.

 

Throwing with anticipation takes knowing player tendency, takes practice.

 

Working harder then most to achieve his goals is what Taylor is all about in my humble opinion.

 

I'm a Billiever...

[transplantbillsfan]

But the CoT says he already does.

 

I'm so confused

"Can" as demonstrated by several examples doesn't mean anyone has said he shouldn't do it more.

Getting to the red zone I would say. We were 7th in red zone scoring last year.

http://stats.washingtonpost.com/fb/leaders.asp?range=NFL&rank=111&type=Passing&year=

Taylor had the sixth highest passer rating in the red zone in 2016.

LMAO

 

@MatthewFairburn

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tyrod Taylor just went 6-for-7 for 70 yards including a 20-yard TD to Charles Clay in a two-minute drill. Tyrod yelled "write about that!"

Kirk Cousins moment...?

 

Looks like he's got a little bit of a fire lit under him.

 

I saw either yesterday or the day before from Joe B that he thought Taylor had a good day or two and camp. But he tweeted it. He didn't write about it in his daily "seven observations". I can see Taylor getting frustrated reading only about the bad or unavoidably good rather than what's going pretty well for him and camp.

 

Either that, or maybe more likely, he knows that the team is working on certain things and at times that might make him not look as good because of the things they're working on it, yet that's all the media sees and reports on without having context.

 

Regardless, he seems angry!

Edited August 7, 2017 by transplantbillsfan

[YoloinOhio]

@mikerodak

With Anquan Boldin in the fold, Tyrod Taylor has a full deck at receiver and no excuses as Bills evaluate his future

http://www.espn.com/blog/buffalo-bills/post/_/id/28389/signing-anquan-boldin-gives-tyrod-taylor-full-deck-in-crucial-season

Edited August 7, 2017 by YoloinOhio

[Rocky Landing]

I know we love the fact that Tyrod doesn't throw many interceptions but I'd happily live with more picks if it meant he was being more aggressive moving the ball and throwing more TDs.

Be careful what you wish for...

[Bangarang]

Be careful what you wish for...

I wish for more TDs and production.

[Rocky Landing]

I wish for more TDs and production.

I wish for a 12" pianist.

[Thurman#1]

I like that you bring this point up. I actually feel like the timing West Coast offense will work really well for Taylor. I think when he has A well defined and quick timing route before the ball is even snapped, it will only A well defined and quick timing route before the ball is even snapped, it will help him rather than hurt him. help him rather than hurt him.

 

Somewhere in this thread, another poster posted a link to a WGR interview of Cian Fahey talking specifically about Taylor for about 14 minutes. One of his points about the whole YAC thing was that Taylor threw the ball down the field a lot more than the majority of NFL QBs (7th highest Average Depth of Throw) and that, in general, any NFL QB throwing deeper throws will be less likely to get YAC out of those throws. And he also points out that Taylor's accuracy percentage (% of "catchable balls" vs "uncatchable balls") was still the ninth highest in the NFL (76.02%). In his catalog, he actually breaks down the accuracy of each QB in specific ranges: behind the LOS, 1 to 5 yards, 6 to 10 yards, 11 to 15 yards, 16 to 20 yards, 21+ yards. Two out of Taylor's three most accurate ranges were the parts of the field that I think will be the focus in the West Coast offense. He was the ninth most accurate quarterback in the 6 to 10 range. He was the eighth most accurate quarterback in the 11 to 15 range. As you might guess, the other category he ranked highly in was the 21+ range, where he was ninth.

 

 

I've brought this up before, but I really think you saw this when Lynn took over last year. Lots of plays designed even over the middle in that 6 to 15 range. To me, that's the bread-and-butter of the West Coast offense.

 

The general criticism that Taylor was the reason that the Bills were so poor in YAC because he doesn't put the ball in places where WRs can gain any extra yardage is questionable, at best.

 

A few months ago when this issue came up, I started with the plan to do the whole season, but after doing the first 3 games and realizing time was an issue (wish I had more of it), I decided to jump to what I thought was his worst 4 game stretch. What I did was just rewatch the completions for ball placement to see how many of his completions were poorly placed and left yardage on the field. This is more about ball placement than accuracy, something Fahey said he's not looking at as he's just looking for "catchable balls"... and yes, I think the 2 should be examined separately because accuracy would include all those incompletions. But there seems to be this general belief by some that Taylor's WRs were somehow always bailing him out and that Taylor is responsible for leaving yards on the field.

 

Well, in those 7 games (BALT, NYJ, ARI, CIN, JAX, OAK, PITT), Taylor completed 111 passes.

 

By my own eyes (feel free to doubt them and try this yourself ), only 7 of those passes were so poorly placed that they left potential yardage on the field.

 

1- A high pass to Clay on 3rd down in the Ravens game

2- A 3rd down pass to Woods in the Ravens game

3- A 2nd down pass to Goodwin in the Cardinals game

4- A 1st down pass that was low to a wide open Woods on the sideline in the Cardinals game

5- A 3rd down and 1 to Harvin in the Bengals game that was a little behind him... he was gonna get clobbered, anyway.

6- A 1st down pass to Clay that was a little behind him in the middle and really didn't have much chance for YAC... in fact, the chance for that YAC may have been to the middle, where the ball was thrown.

7- A 3rd down pass to Goodwin around the sideline that was a 1st down conversion, anyway

 

 

 

As you always do, you left out the game time on each play, meaning you say people can do their own checks, but in fact it's almost impossible to do so because we can't even find the plays you're referring to without extensive research. You say we can check your work, but then go out of your way to prevent people from actually doing so.

 

More, you knew this, because I called you on this last time you posted the same nonsense.

 

The thing that makes research like this useful is that it's repeatable. Yours is not, because we can't know which plays you're talking about. Until you put stuff like "3rd quarter 3:02" next to each play, it's virtually uncheckable. Why would you do this? Most likely because another person checking who's not nestled quite as far into Tyrod's jock as you are would come to different conclusions.

 

But folks, don't expect him to supply those game times. He didn't the last time I pointed out these exact same things. He doesn't particularly want his research to be repeatable, because then people could point out plays he missed.

Edited August 8, 2017 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

 

What?

 

The criteria I gave Thurm that he told me at least 50 guys met consisted of 3 things:

 

1) Rode the bench all or the vast majority of entire rookie contract (4 years)

2) Given the opportunity to compete for a starting QB job, he won the starting job

3) Played up to the end of year 6 at "starting QB level," meaning somewhere in the middle or better of the 32 starters

 

My reasoning for #1 specifically is because of the arbitrary criteria set forth about how "if a QB hasn't proven to be a franchise QB by his 7th year, he's not one." Well, if you're on the bench for all but 35 pass attempts of your first 4 years, that gives you 2 years to prove your a franchise QB, which just isn't something that always happens for QBs in their first 2 years. You'd love it if they played lights out or absolutely horribly so that you know, but that leaves out that very large number of NFL QBs who are learning the game and showing both flashes and struggles in their first 2 years.

 

 

What I think Thurm did was what a lot of folks here do, like what Crusher has been doing a number of times in this thread, he latched onto one thing without considering the rest.

 

Thurm's right, lots and lots of QBs meet #1. That much is obvious.

 

I'm still waiting for QBs who meet #2 or #3. If #2 and #3 don't exist, then Taylor's situation is incredibly unique.

 

 

If those are the criteria you wanted filled, then they are your own criteria. Go ahead and make your own list up.

 

The criteria I set up and said I could find 50 guys or more (and then I proved it would be easy by find in 14 guys who fulfilled them in less than ten minutes of searching) are these:

 

1) They sat the bench for a long time at the beginning of their careers, three or four or five years, that kind of long period.

 

2) They then got a chance to start for a significant period of time.

 

That's the group Tyrod is in. Sure, you can squeeze the margins of that group and make it look smaller by setting up extra criteria. It'd be beside the point, though. The point is that plenty of guys sat for a long time like Tyrod did and then had a chance to prove themselves over a significant period of time starting. And out of that large group of guys, well over 50, how many didn't prove within their first six years that they were a franchise QB and then did become a franchise QB later?

 

One. Rich Gannon.

 

Generally speaking anyone who hasn't proved himself a franchise QB in his first six years in the league is wildly unlikely to do so. And for those who try to say that it's not fair to throw Tyrod in because he sat for a long time, again, it's a large group that sat for a long time and then had a long time to start and try to be a franchise guy. And out of the few that ever - Danny White, Aaron Rodgers, Jake Delhomme, for a few - did become a franchise guy they all did so before their sixth year ended.

 

Except, again, Gannon.

 

Tyrod's very unlikely to do so. It's not impossible, though. Just unlikely.

Edited August 8, 2017 by Thurman#1

[transplantbillsfan]

 

 

 

As you always do, you left out the game time on each play, meaning you say people can do their own checks, but in fact it's almost impossible to do so because we can't even find the plays you're referring to without extensive research. You say we can check your work, but then go out of your way to prevent people from actually doing so.

 

More, you knew this, because I called you on this last time you posted the same nonsense.

 

The thing that makes research like this useful is that it's repeatable. Yours is not, because we can't know which plays you're talking about. Until you put stuff like "3rd quarter 3:02" next to each play, it's virtually uncheckable. Why would you do this? Most likely because another person checking who's not nestled quite as far into Tyrod's jock as you are would come to different conclusions.

 

But folks, don't expect him to supply those game times. He didn't the last time I pointed out these exact same things. He doesn't particularly want his research to be repeatable, because then people could point out plays he missed.

Wow... all that time writing this post up and you could have easily discovered at least half of the plays based on game, down & distance, and targeted WR by looking at the play by plays in the time you wrote it...

 

And you write enough long winded posts that go nowhere, so clearly you'd have the time to do the other half.

 

 

You're a smart guy, Thurm... have at it!

Edited August 8, 2017 by transplantbillsfan

[Thurman#1]

9 of those 16 guys (including Gannon) played in the Pro Bowl. So you went back to Danny White to find a total of 16 guys and 9 had some degree of success. Of that list though Romo, Rodgers, White, Schaub, Beurlein, and Gannon were franchise QBs. Taylor has a chance to be. Fiedler, Garrard and Cassel had moments of solid play.

 

Maybe it's semantics. There aren't a lot of guys that have developed into great QBs later in their careers. There aren't a lot of guys that haven't gotten the opportunity until late in their careers. The guys that became starters later on have largely been successful (at least to some degree).

 

 

I didn't go back to Danny White. Which you should know if you had ... y'know ... read my post. As I said, I found this group by looking at lists of QBs from 2003 and 2009.

 

A guy earlier on in the thread brought up Danny White as if he were an example that disproved my thesis. When he's actually just the opposite, a perfect example of someone who proves my point, sitting for a long time and then when he had his shot proving himself a franchise QB within his first six years. Yeah, after the guy came up with Danny White, I threw him in, but I didn't go back anywhere near Danny White when looking for that list of guys.

 

I found those guys by looking - and again I said this in the last post - at lists of QBs in two years, if I remember correctly it was 2009 and 2003, picking out the names I thought had sat for a while and then played, and checking their career stats to see if I was right.

 

And you're right that some of those guys had moments of solid play. I agree, and that's part of the point. Tyrod has had his moments too. You don't get to start for a couple of years without looking like maybe you could become a franchise QB. That's exactly the point. Those guys were a group of young QBs who sat for a long time at the beginning of their careers, and then started. Had their moments. And after sitting for three or four or five years had their chances to start. Like Tyrod.

 

And after they started, there were two groups. Three, really.

 

1) Guys who in that situation DID become franchise QBs in their first six years when given a chance. Aaron Rodgers. Danny White, Jake Delhomme, and we could probably find some others.

 

2) Guys who in that situation DID NOT become franchise QBs in their first six years. So far Tyrod fits this category. And then DIDN'T ever become a franchise guy. This is by far the biggest group of guys. Cassel, Schaub, Shaun Hill, Seneca Wallace, Huard, Grossman, Garrard, Fiedler, Holcomb, Jim Miller, Beuerlein. Not a single guy there you'd want as your starter.

 

3) Rich Gannon, the only guy in NFL history who hadn't proved himself a franchise QB by the end of his sixth year and then went on and did so later.

Edited August 8, 2017 by Thurman#1

[transplantbillsfan]

 

 

If those are the criteria you wanted filled, then they are your own criteria. Go ahead and make your own list up.

 

The criteria I set up and said I could find 50 guys or more (and then I proved it would be easy by find in 14 guys who fulfilled them in less than ten minutes of searching) are these:

 

1) They sat the bench for a long time at the beginning of their careers, three or four or five years, that kind of long period.

 

2) They then got a chance to start for a significant period of time.

 

That's the group Tyrod is in. Sure, you can squeeze the margins of that group and make it look smaller by setting up extra criteria. It'd be beside the point, though. The point is that plenty of guys sat for a long time like Tyrod did and then had a chance to prove themselves over a significant period of time starting. And out of that large group of guys, well over 50, how many didn't prove within their first six years that they were a franchise QB and then did become a franchise QB later?

 

One. Rich Gannon.

 

Generally speaking anyone who hasn't proved himself a franchise QB in his first six years in the league is wildly unlikely to do so. And for those who try to say that it's not fair to throw Tyrod in because he sat for a long time, again, it's a large group that sat for a long time and then had a long time to start and try to be a franchise guy. And out of the few that ever - Danny White, Aaron Rodgers, Jake Delhomme, for a few - did become a franchise guy they all did so before their sixth year ended.

 

Except, again, Gannon.

 

Tyrod's very unlikely to do so. It's not impossible, though. Just unlikely.

To the bold...

 

Total

 

Bull

 

$H!+

 

 

You told me 50 after I presented the criteria and responded directly to that criteria. I told you give me 10. Maybe you just selectively read the way so many here seem to do and merely saw my first set of criteria and ran with it, but I'm glad you're admitting 10 don't exist, further cementing the uniqueness of Taylor's situation

Edited August 8, 2017 by transplantbillsfan

[transplantbillsfan]

Thurm, again, you say sixth year like it's a magical number. The problem is that absolutely none of the QBs you listed had his few regular season wraps as Taylor did. Why does that matter? Seems pretty obvious, but apparently you're too smart to get out of your own way sometimes so I'll explain briefly at least. QBs need some game time reps in order to learn the game at full speed. ask any QB or listen to any interview of any QB pastor present and they say resoundingly that it's the on field experience that really matters.

 

passing attempts and first four years:

 

Tyrod Taylor: 35

 

Matt Schaub: 450

 

Shaun Hill: 0

 

Seneco Wallace: 166

 

David Garrard: 298

 

Damon Huard: 288

 

Rex Grossman: 675

 

Matt Cassell: 555

 

Jay Fiedler: 101

 

Kelly Holcomb: 73

 

Tony Romo: 220

 

Aaron Rodgers: 595

 

Steve Beuerline: 610

 

Danny White: 103

 

Shaun Hill, Tyrod Taylor, Seneca Wallace, Jay Fiedler, and Kelly Holcomb are the QBs who started less than a season's worth of games before the end of year 4.

 

Danny White is a completely different era and I don't know enough about him to discuss him.

 

It was obvious by their 7th years that Fiedler, Hill, Wallace and Holcomb were all backups, whether after moving from team to team and starting some random games but never winning a starting job outright or just not being good, at all.

 

That is something far from obvious for Taylor.

 

The Taylor situation is incredibly unique. He might not be a franchise QB down the road, but your prized "6th year" criteria really doesn't matter much here.

[Thurman#1]

To the bold...

 

Total

 

Bull

 

$H!+

 

 

You told me 50 after I presented the criteria and responded directly to that criteria. I told you give me 10. Maybe you just selectively read the way so many here seem to do and merely saw my first set of criteria and ran with it, but I'm glad you're admitting 10 don't exist, further cementing the uniqueness of Taylor's situation

 

 

Again, I've never given a crap about your criteria. Nor will I. It's your consistent weak little ploy to say you're re-phrasing what I said and then adding in your own extra criteria and then challenging me to back up words that aren't mine, they're yours. Looks to me like this is yet another example of this flaccid tactic.

 

On the other hand, I suppose it's possible - likely even - that you posted something that I didn't read. I don't read most of your stuff anymore, so it's quite possible. But if I "responded directly to your criteria," took them seriously and answered ...?

 

 

... then fine, show me the posts where this happened.

 

You may even get an apology out of me if I didn't read your post carefully enough before I replied.

Edited August 8, 2017 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

Wow... all that time writing this post up and you could have easily discovered at least half of the plays based on game, down & distance, and targeted WR by looking at the play by plays in the time you wrote it...

 

And you write enough long winded posts that go nowhere, so clearly you'd have the time to do the other half.

 

 

You're a smart guy, Thurm... have at it!

 

 

 

 

I am a smart guy, Trannie. That's why I know when someone's hiding something.

 

See, folks? Told you he wouldn't give those times (Post 1150, above). He doesn't want any of this repeated. Pretty obvious why, too. He says, "By my own eyes (feel free to doubt them and try this yourself ), only 7 of those [111] passes were so poorly placed that they left potential yardage on the field."

 

But he isn't anywhere near confident of those numbers. So if you actually do want to check it yourself as he suggests, he is going to be as obstructive as possible and not tell you what plays he's talking about.

Edited August 8, 2017 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

Thurm, again, you say sixth year like it's a magical number.

 

That's the point, it pretty much is a magic number. In all of NFL history, there's been exactly one guy - one - who wasn't a franchise QB by his sixth year and then went on to become one later.

 

Rich Gannon.

 

Other than that, history shows that if you're going to become one, you will manage it by your sixth year. And yeah, that includes guys who didn't start for a lot of their early careers. The ones who would succeed did it by their sixth year.

 

It kinda is magic.

 

 

The Taylor situation is incredibly unique. He might not be a franchise QB down the road, but your prized "6th year" criteria really doesn't matter much here.

 

 

The thing that is unique about Tyrod is basically how obsessed with him you are.

 

Other than that, he's an example of a common group, guys who didn't play much early then started a couple of years and weren't good enough to show themselves as franchise guys before their sixth year.

 

I mean, sure, everybody's unique if you dig enough. He's the only guy who didn't start in his first four years and then was traded and then won the starting job in a Northeastern industrial city and threw 865 passes in four years at Virginia Tech and has the letter "Y" in both his first and last name. Yup, he's totally unique and all you have to do is go to ridiculous lengths to show it. Draw enough distinctions and everybody's in a group of one.

 

Beside the point, though. The point is nobody's ever become a franchise QB after failing to do so for his first six years in the league. Excepting Rich Gannon.

[GunnerBill]

Tyrod isn't going to become a franchise Quarterback so this 6th year vs 7th year vs 4th year whatever it might be is irrelevant. That does not mean I think he is terrible or that he can't take the Bills to the playoffs or anything like that.

 

This transplant vs thurman thing is the problem with the debate it has to be absolutes. You either have to believe he can become a franchise Quarterback or you have to hate him. Nothing has changed since the start of this thread. Neither of these absolutes is true. Almost everyone here is somewhere in the middle on him.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Have we reached the end of the internet yet?

[HappyDays]

Have we reached the end of the internet yet?

[YoloinOhio]

NFL.com: Bills' Tyrod Taylor has his 'You like that?' moment

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000826993/article/bills-tyrod-taylor-has-his-you-like-that-moment