Vic Carucci's Interesting Take On Why Tyrod Was Benched

[K-9]

5 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Well, you can if the offense is designed around that style of play and exploits it. Taylor definitely played well enough to get the team to the playoffs in 2015 and 2016.  The defense was a disaster, however. 

 

But that's not the sort of scheme the Bills run now, for better or worse. I hope and expect that they marshal their resources and draft a blue chip qb in 2018 who can operate well in this scheme. 

Again, we will have to agree to disagree on offensive design. The kind of "system" TT excels in doesn't exist in this league and it's not what he did in college, either. Sure, he will make a great athletic play to win a game and sure, you can install a certain number of moving pockets or rollouts in a game plan, but you cannot make that a basis for your offense and run them predominantly for reasons I've explained ad infinitum in the past around here. We've seen time and time again how he struggles vs. teams with good lane discipline that force him to stay in the pocket. I can certainly understand how that's frustrating for this coaching staff who require a different skill set that they aren't convinced TT can develop. 

[Gugny]

41 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

You guys are wilfully misreading my posts. I have no idea how Peterman will do. He may be great. But I want to get to the playoffs, and I think it's better to play the percentages. I realize you disagree. 

 

This team is a lot more than just a QB away from going to the playoffs. Don't let those 5 wins fool you.  A lot of things went the Bills' way on the way to those five wins.

 

Playing the percentages would mean, to me, that this team would end up right around - but not above - .500, even if they kept Tyrod in.  Because that's what they've done since he became the starter.

 

This simply isn't a playoff team and Tyrod Taylor simply isn't a legitimate starting QB in the NFL.

[John from Riverside]

I think that it is something as simple as Peterman actually fits the qb traits that they need to run Dennison's 3 step and fire offense

[dave mcbride]

9 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

This team is a lot more than just a QB away from going to the playoffs. Don't let those 5 wins fool you.  A lot of things went the Bills' way on the way to those five wins.

 

Playing the percentages would mean, to me, that this team would end up right around - but not above - .500, even if they kept Tyrod in.  Because that's what they've done since he became the starter.

 

This simply isn't a playoff team and Tyrod Taylor simply isn't a legitimate starting QB in the NFL.

9-7 isn't usually playoff worthy. It probably will be this year, however, and it's even possible that an 8-8 team gets in if the Bills tank and the Ravens lose to either Detroit or GB. If a team is in the playoffs, they're a playoff team.

Edited November 17, 2017 by dave mcbride

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

50 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

The thing is, it didn't kill Taylor. He plays like that all the time and is extremely durable. The only time he got injured was on a dirty play in TN, and he finished the game.

Didn’t he get a concussion in preseason?   Yes he did

 

I also recall at least 2 or 3 games this season where TT got up very slow. 

This past Sunday was one of them. 

 

Hes not Superman.  Maybe his stubbornness to stay in the game hurt the team.  Just saying 

28 minutes ago, John from Hemet said:

I think that it is something as simple as Peterman actually fits the qb traits that they need to run Dennison's 3 step and fire offense

Run Dennison’s offense 

 

intriguing

 

[HappyDays]

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

I personally think that Taylor gives them a better chance to get to 9-7 and a playoff entry (which, to repeat, I regard as essentially a SB victory at this point).

 

Well I have to say I’m really glad we have a coach that doesn’t feel this way. We all want the drought to end but it’s pretty meaningless if it doesn’t lead to a championship contending team.

[familykwi]

There is more than one factor in the Tyrod benching, and if this has not crossed the minds of M&M, it has crossed mine.  I think the purge of Watkins and Darby at the beginning of the season is a result of them observing Tyrod and not liking what they saw. 

 

Because they had Shady and others who still want to win, they claimed they are not mailing it in, and our defense supported that point of view.  Unfortunately, Dennison has exposed himself as a system coordinator, not a teacher of offense, so he and Tyrod do not fit together.  Tyrod's benching makes it clear they will not depart from Dennison and they believe in his system.

 

I'm sure M & M believe Peterman will better fit Dennison's offense, so I think watching Peterman will be fascinating.  It may blow up, it may work OK.  IF they stuck with Tyrod and this team found a way to make the playoffs, they may still have brought in another QB, but they would have been criticized then instead of now.  M & M has decided to rip the bandaid off now and get ready to fix the problem now instead of later.  Doing so now leads to questions regarding M & M knowing what they are doing, so they betting start showing improvement next year and be in the playoffs no later than two years from now.

 

Good luck fellas.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

17 hours ago, BuffaloRush said:

http://buffalonews.com/section/sports/bills/podcast/

 

I'd encourage everyone to listen to the Bills Blitz podcast.  Even though I don't like the BN Sports business model, the coverage is top notch as is this podcast from Vic Carucci and Jay Skurski.  I have always respected Vic and he's an extremely reliable source.  Keep in mind he brought up rumblings about Rex and Whaley getting fired nearly a year in advance.

 

Vic's take on Tyrod getting benched for Peterman is that it was more of a big picture move.  Not necessarily a few years down the road, but next year in particular.  His take is the Bills realized that 8-9 wins will get them in the playoffs and there was a very good chance that they get there with Tyrod as QB.  If they get to the playoffs with Tyrod that makes it harder for them to move on from the QB who led them to the first playoff appearance in 17 years.  So at point in the year the team realized they didn't want to be stuck with Tyrod for the 2017-2018 season.  Considering the fact of how poorly Tyrod has played in losses and the fact that they don't want him next year, they made the move to start Peterman.

 

It's an interesting thought.  Skurski argues that the coaching believes Peterman will run the offense better than Tyrod.  It's an interesting listen for sure.

 

So what are your thoughts on this?   Does Vic' idea seem plausible?  

 

...so now the Bills FEAR making the playoffs (same FEAR for the last 17??) and FEAR having to make a TT decision in 2018?.......and the 2018 FEAR is from fans and/or media backlash?.....sounds like "The Inmates Are Running The Asylum II".....let Vic know medical marijuana can help thoughts like this...Jesus, I've heard it all.....FEAR of the playoffs.....

Edited November 17, 2017 by OldTimeAFLGuy

[eball]

3 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

I disagree, largely because I personally think that Taylor is going to be a better player than Peterman will be for the remainder of this season. Call me crazy, but I am not sold on a marginal pick who has not played a meaningful NFL down in his life coming into the the final part of a season to save the day. I know Peterman has his fans, and that's fine. But I'm trying to be reasonably objective here, and it is the case that Taylor has led the team to wins more often than losses despite mostly bad defenses throughout his career here. He is not great, but he is certainly more qualified at this point. 

 

Btw, this whole "teams have figured him out in the last few games" is a joke. Post-bye, in the three games prior to the Saints game, he played OBJECTIVELY well. Here are the numbers:

 

69 completions in 100 attempts (69 percent) for 718 yards (7.18 ypa); 4 TDs/0 INTs; 2 rushing TDs, and one total turnover (fumble v. the Jets).  His rating in those three games?  102.9.  Are the numbers everything? No, but they're more indicative than a lot what of the commentators on the board think they mean.

 

This narrative of teams figuring him out has to stop. Yes, he had a horrible game against NO. But you know what? Every qb in the league not named Brees, Rodgers, or Brady does. Did anyone watch Dak Prescott on Sunday? Mariota last night? Roethlisberger when he threw five picks vs. Jax?  I honestly think that some on this board don't watch other teams with any regularity.

 

Dave, I'm going by what has been pretty widespread analysis that Tyrod's stats don't really tell the story.  He's not taking any chances in the passing game, so when the running game isn't working the offense is stagnant.  You can't measure "attempts not taken" unless you break down every play on the All-22 tape and I don't have time to do that.  What is patently obvious, however, is that the Bills' WRs have been criminally underutilized by Tyrod.

 

It has got to be incredibly frustrating for the coaches and players to look at the tape and see opportunities that weren't taken.  I think McD/Dennison reached the breaking point after reviewing Sunday's tape and decided Peterman will at least give them a chance to put an NFL-caliber passing game on the field.

[TigerJ]

At Buffalo Rumblings, one writer (can't recall which one) thinks that the impetus for a change came from Rick Dennison, who felt that Tyrod's limitations made it to difficult for him to game plan the way he wanted.

[BobChalmers]

15 hours ago, Ol Dirty B said:

 

And this is based off? Him playing 2s and 3s? They could be better but saying it as though it's a certainty is teetering on stupidity.

 

It certainly can be debated at this point. No one has seen the guy play a meaningful snap. 

 

FALSE. He was playing against the same guys as TT against the Ravens and again Sunday and in both cases outperformed him.

Edited November 17, 2017 by BobChalmers

[Foreigner]

Just think McD is trying to get the heat off of him. Has any Bills D given up 500 in two games on the ground?

Everyone is talking Peterman this week, literally burying the talk of the horrible D play by our D guru.

[Ol Dirty B]

18 hours ago, cd1 said:

 

OMG - REALLY?

 

Now I am going to lose sleep while feeling bad for the poor man.

 

I guess we could look at Tyrods benching as a GOOD thing for Tyrod. NOW he can go find a team that will appreciate him by paying him 

 

Leave it to a Bills fan to get jealous over a guy making good money, but still being paid under market value. It's a fact I'm not going to hold against him.

 

I'm starting to become convinced those campers and trailers in the camper lot are actually Bills fans full time residences.

8 hours ago, BobChalmers said:

 

FALSE. He was playing against the same guys as TT against the Ravens and again Sunday and in both cases outperformed him.

 

No actually it's simply not false. Thanks for the obnoxious all caps though. Everyone loves that guy. If you really want to make judgments off of preseason games (which I'm not even sure you are correct on that but don't care) and a game they were down by 30 (again, not sure the Saints had the same personnel in, I'd venture you could be wrong on that to), I don't really care what you think. Those are two awful instances to make any judgments. I'll wait until Sunday like a rational person would.

[THEHARDTRUTH]

16 hours ago, TigerJ said:

At Buffalo Rumblings, one writer (can't recall which one) thinks that the impetus for a change came from Rick Dennison, who felt that Tyrod's limitations made it to difficult for him to game plan the way he wanted.

Which another poster astutely pointed out was recognized by Todd Mcshay and two other guys whose names escape me. Im paraphrasing but they basically said nothing pisses off a coordinator more than drawing up a play, watching it work exactly the way you drew it up, and seeing your qb fail to pull the trigger and miss the opportunity.

5 hours ago, Ol Dirty B said:

 

Leave it to a Bills fan to get jealous over a guy making good money, but still being paid under market value. It's a fact I'm not going to hold against him.

 

I'm starting to become convinced those campers and trailers in the camper lot are actually Bills fans full time residences.

 

No actually it's simply not false. Thanks for the obnoxious all caps though. Everyone loves that guy. If you really want to make judgments off of preseason games (which I'm not even sure you are correct on that but don't care) and a game they were down by 30 (again, not sure the Saints had the same personnel in, I'd venture you could be wrong on that to), I don't really care what you think. Those are two awful instances to make any judgments. I'll wait until Sunday like a rational person would.

As intrigued as I am by the switch and hopeful that the coaching staff knows something the rest of the planet hasnt discovered yet this is exactly right. The Saints looked about as disintested when Peterman came in as a sleeping does when you roll a tennis ball by his nose for the hundredth time trying to get him to wake up and fetch. It will take a season or more before anyone is sure about Peterman. Preseason games and games where you come in down four tds or more arent an accurate barometer. I stuck with Tyrod till it finally sunk in ten minutes into the Saints game we are mostly screwed if we fall behind by two tds at any point in the game if hes the qb. Rooting hard for Nate. Pray to god hes the chosen one. But even a stellar performance Sunday wont be a predictor that hes gonna be the starter two years down the road.

Edited November 18, 2017 by THEHARDTRUTH

[SoTier]

On 11/16/2017 at 9:23 PM, ShadyBillsFan said:

 the NFL is a business 

 

That's right, and the Bills' business model is to keep actual current payroll as low as possible while keeping ticket/merchandise sales as high as possible to maximize profits.   Winning is totally irrelevant as they've demonstrated this season.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

8 hours ago, Ol Dirty B said:

Leave it to a Bills fan to get jealous over a guy making good money, but still being paid under market value. It's a fact I'm not going to hold against him.

 

I'm starting to become convinced those campers and trailers in the camper lot are actually Bills fans full time residences.

Can I ask..... Did they steal you living space?

2 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

That's right, and the Bills' business model is to keep actual current payroll as low as possible while keeping ticket/merchandise sales as high as possible to maximize profits.   Winning is totally irrelevant as they've demonstrated this season.

Close but I believe you are off base.  

 

All teams attempt to dump high salaried players not living up to their potential.  

The Ralph is Cheap era ended.  

[Fan in San Diego]

My take on the Tyrod benching is this. It is a good time to pull him and start Peterman after two bad starts but for this reason.

A running QB style won't win the Superbowl. Look at CK, Vick,  Cam Newton, that Washington QB that could run but got hurt, etc. you have to have a QB that is effective passing from the pocket. Pure and simple.

 

 

 

[stuvian]

If TT got us to the playoffs his market value would go to a 3rd or 2nd round pick versus nothing by starting The Urban Sombrero. Vic's logic is counter intuitive. A playoff appearance would be great box office and elevate TTs market value immensely even if we didn't want him long term.

[Ol Dirty B]

7 hours ago, stuvian said:

If TT got us to the playoffs his market value would go to a 3rd or 2nd round pick versus nothing by starting The Urban Sombrero. Vic's logic is counter intuitive. A playoff appearance would be great box office and elevate TTs market value immensely even if we didn't want him long term.

I agree with this but I think the league and everyone knows the Bills have not been that committed to Taylor. Factor in that they haven't been afraid to make controversial moves with the Watkins and Dareus trade leaving the benching completely out of it.

 

It's such a conservative league, I think the league would just wait until the Bills have to make a decision on the 3rd league day of the year on whether to pick up the option. The contract status, lack of organizational commitment before the benching really kill any potential trade value for Tyrod imo. If it was the NBA or NHL I'd completely agree with your view.

17 hours ago, Fan in San Diego said:

My take on the Tyrod benching is this. It is a good time to pull him and start Peterman after two bad starts but for this reason.

A running QB style won't win the Superbowl. Look at CK, Vick,  Cam Newton, that Washington QB that could run but got hurt, etc. you have to have a QB that is effective passing from the pocket. Pure and simple.

 

 

 

 

Cam Newton made it to the Superbowl and lost to a team that a lot of people thought Carolina was better than.

 

Cam Newton didn't win a Superbowl, but he was certainly capable that year.

 

Colin Kaepernick lost at the very end and just didn't finish that year. Do I think he could do it now or has been the same since? Absolutely not, but the defense essentially retired after that year. Harbaugh got ran off and they just finally hired a legit coach. Colin Kaepernick did not prevent that team from winning the superbowl regardless of what you think of him off the field. He destroyed Green Bay in Green Bay vs Aaron Rodgers with his style and they had no answer and he didnt get hurt.

 

I also noticed you conveniently left Russel Wilson out too.

 

These guys were all better than Tyrod at their peak so it's moot. But the general point you are trying to make I think is just wrong. And the OC agrees with you, so that's why we are at benching Tyrod and playing a 1980s style offense.

 

It's also funny how we say hey so and so never won a Superbowl. So him and his style can't do it. There has been less then 50 super bowl winning QBs. You pointed out guys that are a coin flip away essentially from being Superbowl winning QBs and said that style cant work. It doesn't count, but heads or tails for a SB, I'll take.

 

We never go hey Jake Plummer, Gus Ferrotte, Marc Bulger, Tim Couch, Ryan Leaf, and really Drew Bledsoe counts... Those guys couldn't win a Superbowl, that style of play never works.

Edited November 19, 2017 by Ol Dirty B

[Ol Dirty B]

21 hours ago, THEHARDTRUTH said:

Which another poster astutely pointed out was recognized by Todd Mcshay and two other guys whose names escape me. Im paraphrasing but they basically said nothing pisses off a coordinator more than drawing up a play, watching it work exactly the way you drew it up, and seeing your qb fail to pull the trigger and miss the opportunity.

As intrigued as I am by the switch and hopeful that the coaching staff knows something the rest of the planet hasnt discovered yet this is exactly right. The Saints looked about as disintested when Peterman came in as a sleeping does when you roll a tennis ball by his nose for the hundredth time trying to get him to wake up and fetch. It will take a season or more before anyone is sure about Peterman. Preseason games and games where you come in down four tds or more arent an accurate barometer. I stuck with Tyrod till it finally sunk in ten minutes into the Saints game we are mostly screwed if we fall behind by two tds at any point in the game if hes the qb. Rooting hard for Nate. Pray to god hes the chosen one. But even a stellar performance Sunday wont be a predictor that hes gonna be the starter two years down the road.

 

I'm against the switch but I agree, I get it. Anytime we go down by 4 I think game over and people look at me like I'm crazy, but facts are facts and his record is what it is. It has been earned.