This is why Tyrod was benched

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

54 minutes ago, moshermw said:

Agree in the most part, Hence, scapegoat.

 

Was not an aggressive inquiry, per se, but didn't answer the intended question. 

 

Nothing as drastic as a benching occurred at any D starter position - as far as I know.

 

This is insanity,

Benching? 

 

How about traded.   

[moshermw]

Just now, ShadyBillsFan said:

Benching? 

 

How about traded.   

Not sure if you are referring to Marcel Dareus "trade" ? or that you are probably correct that TT won;t be here next season.

 

The Bills got at least something for MD. And they traded him when the bills were 4-2. Cool. At least the Bills got something for him.

 

TT is benched at the moment, not - and can't be, traded. Because that pesky trade deadline has passed - and they will not get dvck for him - not even a 7th rounder - because they benched/didn't pick up his option now.

 

Agree or disagree with the change to Peterman,  timing is insanity.

 

 

 

 

[EasternOHBillsFan]

On 11/15/2017 at 3:44 PM, paulbills said:

I think this pretty much hits the nail on the head, probably plays in to why many think Dennison is sub-par as well. 

 

 

 

Many Bills fans typically go to the "blame OC X" when the QB plays like crap, and it is just an automatic default that we have to get out of. To be fair, we really haven't had much in the way of starting quarterbacks for ANY OC to really succeed to be sure. Eventually we have to hit on THE GUY at QB who will make it happen.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

23 minutes ago, moshermw said:

Not sure if you are referring to Marcel Dareus "trade" ? or that you are probably correct that TT won;t be here next season.

 

The Bills got at least something for MD. And they traded him when the bills were 4-2. Cool. At least the Bills got something for him.

 

TT is benched at the moment, not - and can't be, traded. Because that pesky trade deadline has passed - and they will not get dvck for him - not even a 7th rounder - because they benched/didn't pick up his option now.

 

Agree or disagree with the change to Peterman,  timing is insanity.

 

 

 

 

My point was they have  dumped players  on both sides of the line that they thought would not fit the system 

IMO 

TT was retained because the QB’s on the matket were no better and McD did not want to throw Nate into the fire.  

 

 

Edited November 18, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan

[moshermw]

4 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

My point was they have  dumped players  on both sides of the line that they thought would not fit the system 

IMO 

TT was retained because the QB’s on the matket were no better and McD did not want to throw Nate into the fire.  

 

 

Fair.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

8 minutes ago, moshermw said:

Fair.

I try to be.    

 

[SinatraSinger]

1 hour ago, moshermw said:

Not sure if you are referring to Marcel Dareus "trade" ? or that you are probably correct that TT won;t be here next season.

 

The Bills got at least something for MD. And they traded him when the bills were 4-2. Cool. At least the Bills got something for him.

 

TT is benched at the moment, not - and can't be, traded. Because that pesky trade deadline has passed - and they will not get dvck for him - not even a 7th rounder - because they benched/didn't pick up his option now.

 

Agree or disagree with the change to Peterman,  timing is insanity.

 

 

 

 

What makes you think that they weren't trying to trade him?  I personally think that this FO will trade anyone if the offer is worth it.  No one is off limits.  Heck I think Beane would trade McDermott and Pegula for a ham sandwich if he was really hungry.  

 

My quess is that they did try and trade him.  The team was 4-2 and looking good.  Tyrod's value wasn't going to be any higher so I believe they did try and shop him and no one offered the bills anything, at least not what the FO thought was worth it.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 11/15/2017 at 5:42 PM, Iraq Vet said:

This scream of ownership desperation... even though I was getting tired of TT.  It just does not feel like a coach decision.

 

Gawd, I do so hope you're wrong

On 11/16/2017 at 8:06 PM, GreggTX said:

The Bills have a huge decision to make soon regarding the most important position in sports. I think they're going to give Peterman a chance to open things up a bit and see if he can handle it. Also, the Bills don't neccesarily have to trade up into the top 3 to get a QB they like if Peterman plays well. If nothing else, this coming offseason looks to be very interesting.

 

The Bills had better go wherever on the draft board they must to get the QB they like.  If they don't, Here We Go Again.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 11/15/2017 at 6:39 PM, Alphadawg7 said:

THE REALITY is that Tyrod isnt as bad as his staunches naysers piss and moan about.  He is also not a guy who can carry a bad team, put the team on his shoulders kind of player.  What Tyrod is and will likely always be, is a guy a team CAN win with when the D is solid or better and the run game is a strength.  Why...because he protects the ball, he furthers elevates an already strong run game by making the D account for his own threat of running, and he can make plays if the receivers can get open.  

 

He will get a chance to compete and probably start again somewhere in this league.  He is going to have to work for it, especially with his last start being that utterly miserable game at home against the Saints that quite frankly was probably the worst of his career.

 

Well put.  Add in, he works much better from the shotgun than under center, and he needs quality receivers with whom he is really comfortable - he can make some good throws, but he won't throw into coverage unless he has high confidence in his receivers.   I agree, he's an adequate QB, he's not a guy who can carry a team.

What still boggles my mind is the "racism" thing.   Bills are 30th in the league for passing.  30th for 1st downs by passing.   No, he is not comparable to Kirk Cousins who is like 10th in the league, nor even "wears out suitcases" Josh McCown.   

 

Now last year, the Bills managed to be 30th in the league for passing and still run an effective offense.  But they aren't running one now at 30th, so there are 29 reasons why Dennison wants to try a change, and racism isn't one.

 

All that said, if Dennison was dead-set on running this timing O and scrapping last year's effective run game, it is a puzzle why they kept Tyrod.

 

 

[Buffalo Barbarian]

On 11/15/2017 at 6:47 PM, Wayne Arnold said:

B-b-but the deranged social justice warrior from Ireland said that Taylor is great and it's the coaches' fault that Taylor won't throw to receivers!

 

Can never have enough Socialist Justice Warriors, lol.

 

Hey now you can change your member title.

On 11/15/2017 at 6:48 PM, unclepete said:

Good info. I’m still against the benching. We could have traded him at the deadline or next year. We could have gave him a year but let him walk. This just reeks of a front office that drafted a guy and want to play him. I don’t want another staff loyal to a guy and refusing to make a change. If we don’t draft a QB next year it’ll be because of a commitment to Peterman. And if Peterman struggles the coaching staff will lose the team. Maybe Tyrod was missing open guys. But gambling a competitive season on a rookie is unforgivable if he fails. 

 

Tyrod is an average to above average QB. He’s David Garrard. He’s a reflection of how good the team is. In a weak AFC we can make the playoffs with him. Now I’m not sure. 

 

The front office that drafted him was canned after the draft. This is McDermott's decision , period.

[Big Gun]

On 11/15/2017 at 7:39 PM, Alphadawg7 said:

 

 

 

THE REALITY is that Tyrod isnt as bad as his staunches naysers piss and moan about.  He is also not a guy who can carry a bad team, put the team on his shoulders kind of player.  What Tyrod is and will likely always be, is a guy a team CAN win with when the D is solid or better and the run game is a strength.  Why...because he protects the ball, he furthers elevates an already strong run game by making the D account for his own threat of running, and he can make plays if the receivers can get open.  

 

 

The real reality is, if the last 2 games are any indication of how teams will defense Tyrod going forward, then he won't ever win another game in the NFL. He won't be a game manager, he won't win with a good defense or run game. He won't win anything. He's done in the league if the last 2 games are any indication, not even backup worthy, too easy to defense.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

On 11/16/2017 at 4:35 PM, DerekJ said:

Agreed.

 

.....Bills were also somewhat pioneers early on with black QB's James Harris and Marlin "The Magician" Briscoe..................

[Saxum]

On 11/15/2017 at 6:36 PM, essential said:

Today, most of the national media seemed to think the benching was a mistake, again citing all the stats that many don’t feel tell the full picture.  Rodak seemed to get it, but he, like us, watch all the games, and the national media doesn’t. 

 

LOL Rodakent, the ESPN troll and Pats* fan, watches game?  

There have been hundreds of things he posted which shows he doesn't.

[Stank_Nasty]

After reading through a bit of this thread and the board in general I honestly feel like certain posters were hating our 5-2 start and the generally solid play during the first 7 games...... which is extremely pathetic and sad. 

 

Almost undertones of being happy about the recentt implosion of the TEAM just becut it got Taylor benched 

Edited November 18, 2017 by Stank_Nasty

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

Pretty well summed up and what we all know. We can get by and manage when Taylor is still making enough plays to win games like in the Denver game. But when he is missing reads and not making plays like in the last two games the team has no chance. And over the last season and a half he has had too many games like the last two.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

25 minutes ago, Stank_Nasty said:

After reading through a bit of this thread and the board in general I honestly feel like certain posters were hating our 5-2 start and the generally solid play during the first 7 games...... which is extremely pathetic and sad. 

 

Almost undertones of being happy about the recentt implosion of the TEAM just becut it got Taylor benched 

We’re not hating 5-2.  I was starting  to believe in TT.  

We are “hating” that it took 2 ugly games and 10 points in meaningful game time for them to make the switch.  

 

Some are hating that a certain poster kept saying Tyrod is the starter over and over thinking he was rubbing it in people’s faces then he refused to admit he was backing the wrong horse. 

 

You want undertones?  Read what some of the TT faithful post.  

They post

 I am rooting for Nate but what if he really sucks

commentary.  

Edited November 18, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan

[Stank_Nasty]

26 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

We’re not hating 5-2.  I was starting  to believe in TT.  

We are “hating” that it took 2 ugly games and 10 points in meaningful game time for them to make the switch.  

 

Some are hating that a certain poster kept saying Tyrod is the starter over and over thinking he was rubbing it in people’s faces then he refused to admit he was backing the wrong horse. 

 

You want undertones?  Read what some of the TT faithful post.  

They post

 I am rooting for Nate but what if he really sucks

commentary.  

again. i'm fully convinced after reading over the last week that there were people literally squirming during tyrod and the teams solid start that's sad to me.... say what you want about the last 2 games but the guy played solid ball the first 7 games. you're ticked it took 2 bad games? so you are saying  you wanted him benched after a 5-2 start and generally good set of games to start his season? i also find that extremely alarming.

 

ftr. i'm not a tyrod "lover" or a member of the COT.... whatever that even stands for. i actually wanted a qb early in 18 regardless of if taylor played solid ball or not.

 

but the people basking in this benching are freaking pathetic and sad. all for the sake of being proven right..... and honestly. i still wouldn't even say they are right. taylor has had a ton more average/good games than he has had bad ones. and he wins more than he loses.

 

 

Edited November 18, 2017 by Stank_Nasty

[Scott7975]

5 minutes ago, Stank_Nasty said:

again. i'm fully convinced after reading over the last week that there were people unhappy with tyrods solid start.... say what you want about the last 2 games but the guy played solid ball the first 7 games. you're ticked it took 2 bad games? you wanted him benched after a 5-2 start and generally good set of games to start his season? i also find that extremely alarming.

I feel like the benching came at the right time.  I was a big TT supporter, but he was just outright bad last week.  This offense just doesn't suit him and for better or worse the coaches were unwilling to change that.  Peterman seems to fit this offense a lot better due to his quick decision/gunslinging nature.  He still may not help us win football games because the team has many more problems, but he still looks to be the better QB for this offense in limited action anyhow.

 

What you are saying above, I don't doubt.  There are at least a few posters that would disappear all week long on wins and then flood the forums in a loss.

Edited November 18, 2017 by Scott7975

[Stank_Nasty]

1 minute ago, Scott7975 said:

I feel like the benching came at the right time.  I was a big TT supporter, but he was just outright bad last week.  This offense just doesn't suit him and for better or worse the coaches were unwilling to change that.  Peterman seems to fit this offense a lot better due to his quick decision/gunslinging nature.  He still may not help us win football games because they team has many more problems, but he still looks to be the better QB for this offense in limited action anyhow.

 

What you are saying above, I don't doubt.  There are at least a few posters that would disappear all week long on wins and then flood the forums in a loss.

if there was a time for the benching it would be now. i agree..... but people talking about how they knew this all along and they are upset it took 2 bad games to get it done just look idiotic.... so when should he have gotten benched? maybe after he brought them from behind against the bucs? or maybe the blowout win against the raiders? i laugh when they say they are mad it took so long.

[Big Gun]

13 minutes ago, Stank_Nasty said:

again. i'm fully convinced after reading over the last week that there were people literally squirming during tyrod and the teams solid start that's sad to me.... say what you want about the last 2 games but the guy played solid ball the first 7 games. you're ticked it took 2 bad games? so you are saying  you wanted him benched after a 5-2 start and generally good set of games to start his season? i also find that extremely alarming.

 

 

 

Look, if Tyrod was a good QB and just had a couple of bad games I don't necessarily think McD benches him. The fact of the matter is Tyrod never was good, they won inspite of him never because of him. Now throw in a couple bad games from an already bad QB along with comments from other teams on how to stop him and here we are, a bad QB playing bad got benched. Good QBs don't get benched, is what it is and Tyrods days are done, IMO.