Why Taylor can't be the QB longterm---perfect example today

[Thurman Kelly]

3 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

What a bunch of lies......  2 sacks, so didn't throw it away...... What wr injury? Inaccurate short passes......  

 

Another wow, just wow post.....

 

Didn't see these things?  Maybe you weren't looking for them.  Wait for the All 22's and watch the game again.  It will be an eye opener for you.

Edited November 27, 2017 by Thurman Kelly

[xxxxxxxx]

17 hours ago, matter2003 said:

 

Well, I offer plenty in other posts about "insights and analysis" guess you'll have to read those then... This is insightful because it encapsulates in a single play Taylor's main problem.

 

So let me understand this...your argument is that there is no study that shows putting the ball in a place where the receiver can run after he catches it rather than falls to the ground or has to stop himself routinely won't translate into more wins and losses? Of course it doesn't...it translates into yardage, first downs, better field position, extended drives, and time of possession...and THOSE translate into more wins.

In your initial post you said, in reference to Tyrod's problem with ball placement on completions, that details like this is what win and lose you games many times in the NFL. The problem is that your framing a matter of opinion as a fact, and the opinion is debatable and not shared by all.

Sam Bradford has great, if not wonderful ball placement, but all of his pretty throws haven't necessarily translated into more wins when compared to Tyrod. 

 

Tyrod has ball placement issues on short and intermediate throws, I've watched him just as much as you have, so I know this as well. The problem with your analysis  is that his deep ball is fairly accurate,  his placement issues rarely result in interceptions, and he often turns plays that would, in the case of a QB like Bradford with exceptional ball placement skills, result in a sack (and a potential injury). I am going to assume that you would rather have Bradford under center than Tyrod, and that's fine, your entitled to your opinion. But in my opinion your failing to recognize a lot of intangibles that Tyrod has which  have led to a lot of wins, and the amount of ways that one can win a football game,  so I don't think that your assessment is fair. 

Edited November 27, 2017 by MURPHD6

[Stank_Nasty]

3 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

What a bunch of lies......  2 sacks, so didn't throw it away...... What wr injury? Inaccurate short passes......  

 

Another wow, just wow post.....

lol. right? the sad thing is I don't even like going to bat for taylor becuz I've been ready to move on since early offseason. but some of these people are just awful....

 

i'm fairly certain the scramble he's speaking of happened on first down in the 2 minutue drill at the end of the half and it was a real nice 9 yd pickup to stop the clock..... this literally shows me some people have their minds made up even before the game starts. like..... who try and twists that play into anything but a positive?

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

59 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

The ball was at his stomach not the ground.  He didn't need to go to the ground to catch it.  Placement could have been better but it is what it is.  Look around the league and see that no QB throws 100% perfectly placed balls.  Some look perfectly placed because people don't analyze QBs to death like they do Tyrod.

 

I don't see the point of these threads.  Pretty much everyone has come to terms that Tyrod is not the long term answer.  It seems pretty obvious the new staff will be going after a QB in the next draft.  There is nothing left to prove about Tyrod.  He is what he is.  There may be a few fanatics that still believe.  There are also a few that act like he is worse than he really is.

So are you saying I was kind of right for the longest time?  

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

1 hour ago, Wayne Arnold said:

 

This isn't true at all. McDermott was even called racist by many in the media due to benching him. 

 

I couldn't believe how bad the media was towards McD, totally uncalled for. Taylor passes for 56 yards and any HC will be going over potential QB changes. 

 

I just wish McD would've started Peterman vs KC or Colts for his first start. I knew that Chargers D-Line was going to be a recipe for disaster with a rookie QB who is not afraid to sling it. Would've been much better for Peterman to start against KC. I don't even think it is possible to evaluate a QB who is getting 2 sec to pass the ball.

Edited November 27, 2017 by Call_Of_Ktulu

[Big Turk]

35 minutes ago, MURPHD6 said:

In your initial post you said, in reference to Tyrod's problem with ball placement on completions, that details like this is what win and lose you games many times in the NFL. The problem is that your framing a matter of opinion as a fact, and the opinion is debatable and not shared by all.

Sam Bradford has great, if not wonderful ball placement, but all of his pretty throws haven't necessarily translated into more wins when compared to Tyrod. 

 

Tyrod has ball placement issues on short and intermediate throws, I've watched him just as much as you have, so I know this as well. The problem with your analysis  is that his deep ball is fairly accurate,  his placement issues rarely result in interceptions, and he often turns plays that would, in the case of a QB like Bradford with exceptional ball placement skills, result in a sack (and a potential injury). I am going to assume that you would rather have Bradford under center than Tyrod, and that's fine, your entitled to your opinion. But in my opinion your failing to recognize a lot of intangibles that Tyrod has which  have led to a lot of wins, and the amount of ways that one can win a football game,  so I don't think that your assessment is fair. 

 

I'm not a fan of Bradford either...he checks the ball down far too often. Ball placement isn't going to help on 3rd and 10 when you throw a 3 yard pass very often.  Bradford is also injured every other play it seems like. No thanks. I'd take Case Keenum in a heartbeat tho.

 

Yeah, he has great deep throw potential.  Then we go and trade his only real deep threat.  Deonte Thompson SHOULD be a deep threat as he is faster than Watkins in straight line speed but he almost never has any separation on deep throws which is baffling, even against middling CB's. 

 

Tyrod will get us to 9, maybe 10 wins with enough pieces around him and a first round playoff exit.  If the goal is to simply make the playoffs than we should keep him and build around him.  That isn't and shouldn't be the goal.  Keeping him would just hamstring our ability to be better than that and actually compete longterm for championships.

Edited November 27, 2017 by matter2003

[Bills757]

3 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

 

I'm not a fan of Bradford either...he checks the ball down far too often. Ball placement isn't going to help on 3rd and 10 when you throw a 3 yard pass very often.  Bradford is also injured every other play it seems like. No thanks.

 

Yeah, he has great deep throw potential.  Then we go and trade his only real deep threat.  Deonte Thompson SHOULD be a deep threat as he is faster than Watkins in straight line speed but he almost never has any separation on deep throws which is baffling, even against middling CB's. 

 

Tyrod will get us to 9, maybe 10 wins with enough pieces around him and a first round playoff exit.  If the goal is to simply make the playoffs than we should keep him and build around him.  That isn't and shouldn't be the goal.  Keeping him would just hamstring our ability to be better than that and actually compete longterm for championships.

Take a look at Dak Prescott. Elliot’s not playing and all of a sudden he’s a mere mortal. They’re Oline is still the same Oline and he has a pretty good receivers. Up to the Cowboys recent struggles, i bet a ton of posters on this board would’ve given their left arm for a guy like Prescott. This week he was something like 20-29 for 170+ and two picks.  If a QB doesn’t have a solid supporting cast, it can change the whole dynamic. 

 

The Bills can get rid of Taylor but they still have to have the receivers and an Oline. They don’t magically improve with a change at QB. 

[BringBackOrton]

2 minutes ago, Bills757 said:

Take a look at Dak Prescott. Elliot’s not playing and all of a sudden he’s a mere mortal. They’re Oline is still the same Oline and he has a pretty good receivers. Up to the Cowboys recent struggles, i bet a ton of posters on this board would’ve given their left arm for a guy like Prescott. This week he was something like 20-29 for 170+ and two picks.  If a QB doesn’t have a solid supporting cast, it can change the whole dynamic. 

 

The Bills can get rid of Taylor but they still have to have the receivers and an Oline. They don’t magically improve with a change at QB. 

Actually, all teams do.  That's the whole point.

[Billsfan1972]

33 minutes ago, Call_Of_Ktulu said:

 

I couldn't believe how bad the media was towards McD, totally uncalled for. Taylor passes for 56 yards and any HC will be going over potential QB changes. 

 

I just wish McD would've started Peterman vs KC or Colts for his first start. I knew that Chargers D-Line was going to be a recipe for disaster with a rookie QB who is not afraid to sling it. Would've been much better for Peterman to start against KC. I don't even think it is possible to evaluate a QB who is getting 2 sec to pass the ball.

Stop it please, just stop it........

 

Another Petermaniac.......  Pathetic.

[ctk232]

20 hours ago, matter2003 said:

Look...we won and that is great...but we made it way harder than it needed to be.  

 

Taylor had a chance to pretty much bury the Chiefs on a simple play and he didn't take it.  O'Leary wide open in the middle of the field with literally nobody within 20 yards of him...not exaggerating. Taylor has an absolutely clean pocket, nobody near him, nobody in his face...all Taylor has to do is make an easy throw, give O'Leary the chance to run after the catch and instead he throws the ball at his feet where he has to dive and make a catch, nullifying his ability to gain more yards.  Instead of a first down + inside the 20, we have a 3rd and 2 at the 42 oe 43 yard line...3rd down and we lose yards, then punt. 

 

So instead of running a bunch of more time off the clock, kicking an easy FG or even possibly getting a TD, to go up 2 scores we punt it back to them up 6.  

 

I know I know...you are like "Whats the big deal? Taylor completed the pass, set up a short 3rd down and we won!"  Yes, we did, but there are times every game when you have the chance to put a team away and Taylor consistently doesn't take advantage of it.  Yes, other QB's put the ball there at times, but not on that route and not with nobody in their face.  You just have to make a better throw...its what seperates consistently good QBs from QBs like Taylor... when you have a chance to get a first down and another 20+ yards ESPECIALLY at the point of the game it happened, you don't want to be settling for a 3rd and short.

 

Details like this is what win and lose you games many times in the NFL. You don't get very many easy plays like that in the NFL and when you do you HAVE to capitalize on them. Details are not Taylor's strong suit.  He does a lot of big things right...he doesn't turn the ball over...he gets out of trouble a lot...he completes passes...but he doesn't do well on ball placement a lot of times...there are too many times receivers have to stop running or are stopped when he throws the ball to them, or dive to the ground to make catches when they shouldn't have.

 

I understand if you are wondering what the big deal is, but people who know football on a more than rudimentary level can appreciate what I am saying....Taylor can't be the franchise QB because he doesn't do the little things right often enough...he misses too many plays that should be easy and our drives stall out many times because of it...wonder why we tend to go 3 and out a lot with him?  That's why. Details.

 

 

 

I completely agree - and I'll say that his performance yesterday, even with this play, was good. Not perfect or great, but rock solid good, kept us in the game, put points on the board, made some throws, and killed time off the clock when we needed it. Now he didn't do all of these things to the fullest which is why we were sitting on the edge of our seats that last defensive series, but he played a good game.

 

To the play in question - this play in my mind sums up everything about TT. He's a good QB and like you said, does all of the big picture things well: doesn't turn the ball over, extends plays, completes passes, etc. All of this is needed of course, but what this play and your post perfectly capture is mediocrity. TT needed to hit O'Leary in stride. The ball wasn't completely off, it hit O'Leary just below the waist - the issue with it was that it was slightly behind him which forced him to open his shoulders while on a crossing route causing him to lose momentum and balance. That ball needs to be chest to shoulder high and in stride for that extra 15-20 yards. Even if there was a defender 5 yards off, he needs to hit him in stride to get that first. To me it wasn't giving up the extra 15-20 yds, it was more so the resulting 3rd and 2. Up 6 at this point in the game you put the dagger in them, take all the time in the world and put any amount of points on the board. 

 

He has made some window throws, particularly in the end zone with fades and out routes. He threaded the window on the slant route to zay at the start of the game and can make most throws within 10-15 yds. It's the 15+ range where his accuracy seems to take a drop. And by this I don't just mean completing passes over 15 yds, but hitting the windows needed vs. not.

 

TL;DR: I'm thrilled he made the completion, but the problems outweigh the simple completion when the result is 3rd and 2 and leaves our defense needing to make a stand. Making this throw is what an NFL QB should be consistently capable of.

Edited November 27, 2017 by ctk232

[Spiderweb]

20 hours ago, Jackington said:

The pass wasn't so low that O'Leary had to go to the ground. He thought there was guy going to hit him. Hence when he never rilled or got up after the catch.

 

That is just as much on O'Leary. 

 

Also, hey remember the holding call right before that? It was actually a +4 yard gain

Look at it again. The only things I commented on at the time was that the pass was pitifully low and that I  thought O'Leary was hesitant in trying to get up and run. He would have had to get up quickly though.

 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

27 minutes ago, Spiderweb said:

Look at it again. The only things I commented on at the time was that the pass was pitifully low and that I  thought O'Leary was hesitant in trying to get up and run. He would have had to get up quickly though.

 

he said f that!  I'm nor fumbling again

[xxxxxxxx]

3 hours ago, Stank_Nasty said:

lol. right? the sad thing is I don't even like going to bat for taylor becuz I've been ready to move on since early offseason. but some of these people are just awful....

 

i'm fairly certain the scramble he's speaking of happened on first down in the 2 minutue drill at the end of the half and it was a real nice 9 yd pickup to stop the clock..... this literally shows me some people have their minds made up even before the game starts. like..... who try and twists that play into anything but a positive?

 

3 hours ago, matter2003 said:

 

I'm not a fan of Bradford either...he checks the ball down far too often. Ball placement isn't going to help on 3rd and 10 when you throw a 3 yard pass very often.  Bradford is also injured every other play it seems like. No thanks. I'd take Case Keenum in a heartbeat tho.

 

Yeah, he has great deep throw potential.  Then we go and trade his only real deep threat.  Deonte Thompson SHOULD be a deep threat as he is faster than Watkins in straight line speed but he almost never has any separation on deep throws which is baffling, even against middling CB's. 

 

Tyrod will get us to 9, maybe 10 wins with enough pieces around him and a first round playoff exit.  If the goal is to simply make the playoffs than we should keep him and build around him.  That isn't and shouldn't be the goal.  Keeping him would just hamstring our ability to be better than that and actually compete longterm for championships.

This year the ceiling is probably 10 wins and a wild card loss, or a wild card win and a subsequent drubbing at the hands of New England. Obviously, the coaching staff and the organization feel the same way. I actually think that there will be a window where a team can compete for a championship with Taylor in the future, but I don't think that team will be Buffalo, given how he has been treated. O-lines are going to crap, fewer and fewer franchise QB's are available, a franchise QB takes up a lot of cap space, and secondaries are getting stronger as more elite athletes choose to play CB. In the near future, a team will likely win a Superbowl with average to above average QB play, and Taylor could easily be that QB.  

Edited November 27, 2017 by MURPHD6

[BillsMedia]

Perfect example by beating the former 5-0 Chiefs? I'll have what you're smoking, sounds like a lovely place. 

[Kelly the Dog]

1 minute ago, BillsMedia said:

Perfect example by beating the former 5-0 Chiefs? I'll have what you're smoking, sounds like a lovely place. 

Well, to be fair, we don't get credit for beating the previously undefeated Broncos because they have sucked since then even though they were playing quite well until we played them. We don't get any credit for beating the previously undefeated Falcons, because they went into a tailspin for a few games after we beat the, although they are 7-4. We don't get any credit for beating the Raiders even though they were flying high when they came in because they floundered after we beat them. And we don't get any credit for beating the Chiefs even though they are winning the division because they weren't playing good when we beat them.

 

Sure, it makes no sense, but it's true.

[Royale with Cheese]

1 minute ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Well, to be fair, we don't get credit for beating the previously undefeated Broncos because they have sucked since then even though they were playing quite well until we played them. We don't get any credit for beating the previously undefeated Falcons, because they went into a tailspin for a few games after we beat the, although they are 7-4. We don't get any credit for beating the Raiders even though they were flying high when they came in because they floundered after we beat them. And we don't get any credit for beating the Chiefs even though they are winning the division because they weren't playing good when we beat them.

 

Sure, it makes no sense, but it's true.

 

It actually makes complete sense.

6 minutes ago, BillsMedia said:

Perfect example by beating the former 5-0 Chiefs? I'll have what you're smoking, sounds like a lovely place. 

 

The former 5-0 Chiefs?  Does that really matter, especially the way they've been recently?  

[LABILLBACKER]

TT gives us the best chance to win, which isn't saying much.  That throw was very inaccurate but that's been Tyrod's resume for 3 years. What we gain in pocket elusiveness we lose in accuracy. I just wish our running attack wasn't so bad right now....

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

6 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Well, to be fair, we don't get credit for beating the previously undefeated Broncos because they have sucked since then even though they were playing quite well until we played them. We don't get any credit for beating the previously undefeated Falcons, because they went into a tailspin for a few games after we beat the, although they are 7-4. We don't get any credit for beating the Raiders even though they were flying high when they came in because they floundered after we beat them. And we don't get any credit for beating the Chiefs even though they are winning the division because they weren't playing good when we beat them.

 

Sure, it makes no sense, but it's true.

Try repeating this Kelly

 

I Must Remember Where I Am Posting 

I Must Remember Where I Am Posting 

I Must Remember Where I Am Posting 

[Kelly the Dog]

3 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

It actually makes complete sense.

 

 

How so? We get no credit for beating teams that were totally hot at the time because later they werent, we get no credit for beating teams that were once hot because they weren't hot when we played them, and we get no credit for beating teams that were hot at the time AND are good now and good overall. How does that make sense?

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Just now, LABILLBACKER said:

TT gives us the best chance to win, which isn't saying much.  That throw was very inaccurate but that's been Tyrod's resume for 3 years. What we gain in pocket elusiveness we lose in accuracy. I just wish our running attack wasn't so bad right now....

Compared to a disastrous half TT give us a better chance 

 

Compared to NFL  TT give us a better chance staying meh