TheFunPolice Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 (edited) Just settle... could be worse... At least he doesn't throw picks! It might not work anyway! What a sad, pathetic way to think. Good luck winning a Super Bowl with that mentality. I'm glad we have an aggressive, forward thinking staff in here who isn't beaten down and rattled by losing. It's clear that the people running the team aren't going to settle for 1950's football. And yeah, it might not work. Luckily you can always heat up some milk and wrap yourself in a fluffy blanket to feel safe. Edited November 27, 2017 by TheFunPolice
THEHARDTRUTH Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 NE is the perfect follow up to a KC team thats going right down the drain. Its one thing to beat a slumping Chiefs team. Its quite another to beat NE. Tyrod and the team as a whole failed miserably against their toughest test to date in NO. Go beat the team thats owned you for a decade and a half.
Kelly the Dog Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 1 minute ago, TheFunPolice said: Just settle... could be worse... At least he doesn't throw picks! It might not work anyway! What a sad, pathetic way to think. Good luck winning a Super Bowl with that mentality. I'm glad we have an aggressive, forward thinking staff in here who isn't beaten down and rattled by losing. It's clear that the people running the team aren't going to settle for 1950's football. Except these coaches are reeling him in even more than the previous coaches did. They aren't aggressive on offense one bit. They are much more conservative and 1950s so you're not making any sense.
THEHARDTRUTH Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 3 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said: Just settle... could be worse... At least he doesn't throw picks! It might not work anyway! What a sad, pathetic way to think. Good luck winning a Super Bowl with that mentality. I'm glad we have an aggressive, forward thinking staff in here who isn't beaten down and rattled by losing. It's clear that the people running the team aren't going to settle for 1950's football. And yeah, it might not work. Luckily you can always heat up some milk and wrap yourself in a fluffy blanket to feel safe. Exactly.
HappyDays Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 1 hour ago, Gugny said: How many 3rd and longs, yesterday, did we run the ball - effectively playing for a FG try? A lot. Ask yourself why. When I ask myself why, I answer myself with, "because we don't have a QB who can pass on a passing down." http://stats.washingtonpost.com/fb/leaders.asp?range=NFL&rank=098&type=Passing Tyrod Taylor ranks 12th in the NFL in 3rd down pass conversion rate. Slightly above average. Are you saying there are 20 starting QBs that can’t pass on a passing down?
TheFunPolice Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 Just now, Kelly the Dog said: Except these coaches are reeling him in even more than the previous coaches did. They aren't aggressive on offense one bit. They are much more conservative and 1950s so you're not making any sense. Why is that? Is it because he lacks awareness and accuracy, so the less he throws the better your chances to win? Or is it because they WANT a passing game that averages under 200 yards a game? We know the answer, because they benched him already this season because the offense wasn't moving.
BringBackOrton Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 24 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: False. The Bills would not have finished first in 2016 (Dallas would have) but rather third overall. They would have finished 9th in 2015 if Taylor's stats were eliminated. McCoy only had 895 yards in 2015, btw. OK. I agree with you! You are including Dak's yards, silly. Do you remember Karlos? 16 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: The claim was that the Bills would have led the league in rushing straight up if Taylor's rushing stats were cut from the totals in 2015 and 2016. That is simply false and easy to show. You easily misunderstood the claim. You have to eliminate ALL QB yards, not just Tyrod's.
HappyDays Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 1 minute ago, TheFunPolice said: Why is that? Is it because he lacks awareness and accuracy, so the less he throws the better your chances to win? Or is it because they WANT a passing game that averages under 200 yards a game? We know the answer, because they benched him already this season because the offense wasn't moving. They cut Jon Williams and used Tolbert as the #2 back until he got injured. They gave Ducasse a job over Miller. Maybe their decisions aren’t gospel? They have been clueless about the offense all along. Why would we trust that they can evaluate Tyrod correctly? They actually thought Peterman would do better...
BringBackOrton Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 30 minutes ago, Bangarang said: Beane’s pitch to any potential trade partner for Tyrod: “You want the best rushing attack in the league right? He is literally all you need.” It was all him, don't pay attention to 2017!
Kelly the Dog Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 2 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said: Why is that? Is it because he lacks awareness and accuracy, so the less he throws the better your chances to win? Or is it because they WANT a passing game that averages under 200 yards a game? We know the answer, because they benched him already this season because the offense wasn't moving. No, because they are playing not to lose and not playing to their own players strengths like the previous coaches did. They are hurting their own team. You said yourself you hated that philosophy and then complimented these coaches for doing the exact opposite.
TheFunPolice Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 Tyrod was Rex's hand picked guy at QB and even then they were a running team. I feel a bit bad for Tyrod because the previous HC (who was his biggest backer) got canned before he could get his full plan in place. The team got Rex Shaq and Ragland, but it didn't matter was part of the argument, ignoring the fact that both were injured and between the two you got 1/4 of the playing time you expected, with Reggie never seeing the field. We had 10 guys on D this year vs Atlanta for the last play but it worked out. Stuff happens. Now Tyrod is a holdover for a team that doesn't really want him. Whaley didn't want him, this current front office doesn't want him and the HC doesn't seem to want him. He's "perfect for Buffalo" in the eyes of the national media. Who are we to want more?
sleeby Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 4 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said: Just settle... could be worse... At least he doesn't throw picks! It might not work anyway! What a sad, pathetic way to think. Good luck winning a Super Bowl with that mentality. I'm glad we have an aggressive, forward thinking staff in here who isn't beaten down and rattled by losing. It's clear that the people running the team aren't going to settle for 1950's football. Other than maybe SI I don't see anyone here advocating what you're putting down here. We want great! But as we saw last week - and in previous times over the last 20 years - drafting a high ceiling qb kid, calling him the magic bullet and throwing him out there behind a porous Oline and medicore receivers and less than average play calling is not a likely winning recipie. We should certainly get a qb with our first pick but that's not the same as saying dumping TT now is a step in the right direction.
dave mcbride Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 3 minutes ago, jmc12290 said: You are including Dak's yards, silly. Do you remember Karlos? You easily misunderstood the claim. You have to eliminate ALL QB yards, not just Tyrod's. You continue to be incorrect. I can see that you've given up on 2015, for which you don't have a case no matter how you slice it, but in 2016, the Bills minus Tyrod had 2050 yards rushing. The Cowboys minus Prescott had 2114.
Boatdrinks Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 2 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said: I don't think we're trading for another QB were trying to acquire one of these mid-level free agents. I think we're drafting a guy high. But that doesn't preclude us from keeping Taylor for 2018. The way they built his contract and almost seems like that was in the plans. The way they built Tyrods contract was based on the ability to walk away after this season with no large future commitment. In a sense, keep their options open. I wouldn't rule out the trade market, as the price for the Bills to move high enough in the draft to get a QB could be exorbitant . The 49ers will have a high pick plus Garappolo to dangle as trade bait if they want to accumulate more. They will have CHI 's pick as well. The Keenum / Bridgewater situation bears watching, and who knows what nutty Irsay will do with Luck. Drafting a QB high might not be in the cards. There will be QBs available when the Bills pick, but maybe not the one they like. This FO seems to like a particular style of player, so they might not just take the best remaining QB on the board.
Spiderweb Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 18 hours ago, Azucho98 said: Maybe they should look at his throw to O'Leary....He Simply Ain't Good Enough. That throw broadcasted Taylor's major flaw. He simply isn't accurate enough to give his receivers a chance for some YAC.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 5 minutes ago, jmc12290 said: You are including Dak's yards, silly. Dak's yards don't make a difference. Buffalo had 2,630 Yards - Tyrod's 580 = 2,050 Dallas had 2,396 Yards - Dak's 282 = 2,114
BringBackOrton Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 1 minute ago, dave mcbride said: You continue to be incorrect. I can see that you've given up on 2015, for which you don't have a case no matter how you slice it, but in 2016, the Bills minus Tyrod had 2050 yards rushing. The Cowboys minus Prescott had 2114. Goodness, how can one person get a post so wrong? go back and read what I said. Thanks.
dave mcbride Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, jmc12290 said: Goodness, how can one person get a post so wrong? go back and read what I said. Thanks. I read it more than once. You are wrong. Just admit it. You wrote as follows: "We had the #1 rushing attack over two years even with QB rushing yards eliminated. TT ain't it. The RB's are." That is objectively false. Edited November 27, 2017 by dave mcbride
Comebackkid Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 1 hour ago, SlamnSam said: I just said it. He can actually throw a ball tyrod cannot . Three of those ints were not pertermans fault. Didn’t you hear Bosa say “they aren’t even blocking me”. So your saying the two were his fault, with the same o-line that has allowed free rushers to come at tyrod about every game. Not to mention his completion % has never matched tyrods.
BringBackOrton Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 1 minute ago, dave mcbride said: I read it more than once. You are wrong. Just admit it. You wrote as follows: "We had the #1 rushing attack over two years even with QB rushing yards eliminated. TT ain't it. The RB's are." That is objectively false. When adjusted with ALL QB rushing yards eliminated, the Bills rushed for more yards over 2015 and 2016 than any other team in that two year span. You're wrong, again and again and again and again. Thanks for playing.
Recommended Posts