Is anyone here really a Tyrod fan?

[Jobot]

4 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

 

Actually I've taken tons of statistics classes.  And while there is a correlation between first round QBs and making it in the league, it is not anywhere near a correlation = 1.0

 

So you were taught to make a point by bring up the top 5 most outrageous outliers to infer correlation?

Let's see this so called data that there's no correlation to higher draft picks and performance... good luck finding that!

[grb]

55 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

We got a glimpse of what a 5th round rookie would look like....not every QB would perform like Peterman did.

 

In your first sentence, you think if lets say Carson Wentz was our QB....he would average around 185 yards passing in this offense?  No QB can be successful with Charles Clay, Kelvin Benjamin, Jordan Matthews, Zay Jones with Lesean McCoy in the running game?

 

It's not a rare miss.  We've been in the bottom of the league in YAC yards by receivers 3 years in a row.

 

Or let's say Dak was our quarterback. Check out how he's currently affected by a slight drop in talent, even though he's still got a way-better supporting cast than Taylor. Switch situations, Dak & Tyrod, and I wonder what would result? One clue would be to look at the fifteen games these past two seasons when Taylor had both Watkins and Woods playing. 

 

The numbers : 63.6% comp. 8.25 YPA. 27 TD passes. 6 INTs

 

Pretty good, huh? The 8.25 number is pretty exceptional even without ...... wait for it ..... YAC !! That was the result the one time Taylor had a true pair of NFL grade receivers to throw to. This year? No number-one (traded away). A bunch of number-twos / slot receivers who have divided their time between being injured and (first half of the season) being a head case. LeSean McCoy is a wonder, but he's running behind a line which resulted in a 9yd game (Panthers), 21yd game (Broncos), 25yd game (Jets), 49yd game (Saints & KC).

 

Speaking of the  O-line, I really wonder how Carson or Wentz are going to handle playing behind them in our hypothetical scenario. No doubt their play won't be affected at all, right?

Edited November 27, 2017 by grb

[SoTier]

56 minutes ago, TheTruthHurts said:

You keep him until you get a long-term answer. It shouldn't be one or the other. Do exactly what KC did this year. Draft a QB behind Tyrod. Not a 5th rounder but a 1st or 2nd rounder. 

 

This is what the Bills should do but it's not what they're going to do  IMO. 

[Billsfan1972]

1 minute ago, grb said:

 

Or let's say Dak was our quarterback. Check out how he's currently affected by a slight drop in talent, even though he's still got a way-better supporting cast than Taylor. Switch situations, Dak & Tyrod, and I wonder what would result? One clue would be to look at the fifteen games these past two seasons when Taylor had both Watkins and Woods playing. 

 

The numbers : 63.6% comp. 8.25 YPA. 27 TD passes. 6 INTs

 

Pretty good, huh? The 8.25 number is pretty exceptional even without ...... wait for it ..... YAC. That was the result the one time Taylor had a true pair of NFL grade receivers to throw to. This year? No number one - traded away. A bunch of number twos / slot receivers who have divided their time between being injured and (first half of the season) being a head case. Lesean McCoy is a wonder, but he's running behind a line which resulted in a 9yd game (Panthers), 21yd game (Broncos), 25yd game (Jets), 49yd game (Saints & KC).

 

Speaking of the  O-line, I really wonder how Carson or Wentz are going to handle playing behind them in our hypothetical scenario. Do doubt their play won't be affected at all, right?

Shhhhhh!!!!!  No one wants facts thrown in their face......

[26CornerBlitz]

I'm a fan of his hard work, professionalism, and class.  I root for him as a Bills' fan while at the same time recognizing the need for better at the position.  In the interim he remains the best QB on the team as it's currently constructed.  Go Bills!

[1billsfan]

This team will be going through A LOT more changes. Taylor is clearly not going to be the starting QB in 2018  for numerous reasons, with the biggest reason is that the team will no doubt be drafting a QB early and that QB will become the starter. This is what new young regimes do, they start over with a rookie QB.

 

So with that being said, I think that Bills fans should just enjoy this 2017 team without an eye towards 2018. This is Taylor's (and many other veterans) goodbye tour. I think the QB debates regarding Taylor need to start going away. He is who he is, the Bills will try to work with that to win games and get them into the playoffs. It's so clear that Taylor will be starting somewhere else next year. There's no need to debate it just like at some point there was no need to debate Fitzpatrick any longer.

 

 

Edited November 27, 2017 by 1billsfan

[buffalobloodfloridahome]

I don't hate the guy but, I am not a fan of his play. We left allot on the table yesterday and his accuracy leaves allot to be desired. A good quarterback, not even a stellar QB and we win yesterdays game handily probably by 17 points or more. People were open and he was flat out missing them. Unfortunately allot of the analysts only see the highlight reels of him dodging this guy or that guy and throwing a dart to Zay in the end zone, that is the exception with him and not the norm though. I have no question he has allot of heart he just leaves too many plays on the field. Can't wait to find that next level guy that is capable of putting the team on his back.

[Royale with Cheese]

4 minutes ago, grb said:

 

Or let's say Dak was our quarterback. Check out how he's currently affected by a slight drop in talent, even though he's still got a way-better supporting cast than Taylor. Switch situations, Dak & Tyrod, and I wonder what would result? One clue would be to look at the fifteen games these past two seasons when Taylor had both Watkins and Woods playing. 

 

The numbers : 63.6% comp. 8.25 YPA. 27 TD passes. 6 INTs

 

Pretty good, huh? The 8.25 number is pretty exceptional even without ...... wait for it ..... YAC !! That was the result the one time Taylor had a true pair of NFL grade receivers to throw to. This year? No number-one (traded away). A bunch of number-twos / slot receivers who have divided their time between being injured and (first half of the season) being a head case. LeSean McCoy is a wonder, but he's running behind a line which resulted in a 9yd game (Panthers), 21yd game (Broncos), 25yd game (Jets), 49yd game (Saints & KC).

 

Speaking of the  O-line, I really wonder how Carson or Wentz are going to handle playing behind them in our hypothetical scenario. Do doubt their play won't be affected at all, right?

 

Or could it be Dak has a year of film and has been figured out a little more?  is that not a possibility?  

Can we take a look at Cam Newton in 2015.  His leading WR was Ted Ginn after Benjamin went down?  How bad was their offense affected without a true #1 WR?  Lead the league in scoring?  

 

His one game with Benjamin, a true #1, he had 56 yards passing and did not throw to him outside of the first drive.  Deonte Thompson in 4 days can have a big impact but Benjamin can't after 10 days?

 

You don't think the defenses focusing on McCoy has anything to do with it?  Keep Taylor in the pocket and focusing on stopping McCoy is the game plan against us.  

 

 

[teef]

i completely support tyrod, but am not a big fan if that makes any sense.  he does some things well, but i'll be furious if he's in the long term plans as qb.  if he's here next year while qbs develop, i'm more than good with that.

[Royale with Cheese]

2 minutes ago, teef said:

i completely support tyrod, but am not a big fan if that makes any sense.  he does some things well, but i'll be furious if he's in the long term plans as qb.  if he's here next year while qbs develop, i'm more than good with that.

 

I agree with this.

Although I'm not sure why Taylor would want to stay.  Benching 2 years in a row and showing obvious signs they aren't viewing him as a long term answer.

It took McDermott until Wednesday to name him starter after Peterman had 5 first half INT's.  McDermott was still deciding after on which QB after that disaster.

[xRUSHx]

I want a stud at QB for my favorite team after all these decades of fail. I want a QB teams do not game plan to make him be a QB something he is suppose to be.

 

It's easy to point at the OC with a top drafted talented QB prospect but after 3 OCs I just can not blame another OC for a late round prospect in Tyrod not being good enough. Comes back to the old saying you can only make so much out of a rock, you can shine it, you can point it in the right direction over and over again it still is what it is. You can even pretend the rock is Montana but it is still the same old rock that was a backup to Flacco. In Baltimore he was good enough to back him up, not good enough to take his job after 4 years of development. The question is do you want our leader to be the guy not good enough in Baltimore to even beat out Flacco or do you want a QB that has the potential to be the next Montana.

 

OC#4 will not make Tyrod be Montana, after 3 have failed you need to blame the QB not do what Chicago did and give a QB not good enough 5 OCs.

 

After all these seasons of our HCs trying to build other spots first while using lower grade starters before finding a franchise worthy QB brings us down the same failed road over and over again. I want this team to go all in on finding a better prospect first.

 

Build around said QB, the other way has us in the longest playoffless drought in all of sports, maybe someday we can have top of the line things over the lower grade things. If you want a chance at a dynasty you have to start by getting a QB that lead the team to be that dynasty and Tyrod IMO is not that guy.

 

We need our starting QB to be on the same page as the backup QB, said backup needs to learn and play what the OC runs and the starter is showing him being played. You can not have the starting QB need to have a Taylor made offense while the backup is playing/learning a different one. Tyrods Taylor made offensive simple scheme has proven to only work for so long, good teams have it figured out.

 

When Brady goes out NEs backup comes in and plays the exact same system but with Tyrods scheme only Tyrod can play it so the Tyrod bridge is not a bridge to a new trained franchise worthy QB it's a bandaid that has the next guy up in real trouble IMO.

 

I want better and can only hope this new staff goes for it over the way the last bunch of staffs were fired trying the bandaid the problem. IMO Fitz was more of a bridge then Tyrod ever is only because Fitz played the system designed by the OC over the Tyrod simplified Tyrod only Taylor made system only he runs.

[bigduke6]

2 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

I agree with this.

Although I'm not sure why Taylor would want to stay.  Benching 2 years in a row and showing obvious signs they aren't viewing him as a long term answer.

It took McDermott until Wednesday to name him starter after Peterman had 5 first half INT's.  McDermott was still deciding after on which QB after that disaster.

the only reason Taylor would want to stay is,   nobody else in the NFL will give him a shot at starting.    He took a pay cut last year to stay with this team,  his agent knows the landscape,   u dont do that if you have better options elsewhere.   this is Taylors only shot at playing.    and its coming to an end.

[Royale with Cheese]

Just now, bigduke6 said:

the only reason Taylor would want to stay is,   nobody else in the NFL will give him a shot at starting.    He took a pay cut last year to stay with this team,  his agent knows the landscape,   u dont do that if you have better options elsewhere.   this is Taylors only shot at playing.    and its coming to an end.

 

There's always Cleveland.

[Jobot]

Just now, bigduke6 said:

the only reason Taylor would want to stay is,   nobody else in the NFL will give him a shot at starting.    He took a pay cut last year to stay with this team,  his agent knows the landscape,   u dont do that if you have better options elsewhere.   this is Taylors only shot at playing.    and its coming to an end.

 

If it wasn't clear before... the Peterman experiment has shown Tyrod's actual value.  I'd would typically guarantee that he get's a big contract in the offseason, but I have no idea what teams will be in the market.

[The Now Moment]

While I know he's the best option on the team, that fact reminds me of why we are an average team.  Should have no part of the future here. There's a handful of passes every game that he doesn't make that could push him into the next level of QB but he consistently doesn't make them.  Great bridge QB but nothing else imo

[nedboy7]

Well said OP.  It seems to me the OC is much more of an issue than the QB at this point.  And there is a group of the fan base that is just senseless.  Not sure what you get out of hating on your team every single week.

[oldmanfan]

32 minutes ago, Jobot said:

 

So you were taught to make a point by bring up the top 5 most outrageous outliers to infer correlation?

Let's see this so called data that there's no correlation to higher draft picks and performance... good luck finding that!

Did I not just say in my above response that there is a some correlation to picking in the first round, but that it is not a perfect correlation of 1.0?  Did I not just say that?  I am responding to the OP who claims it would have been OK to throw Peterman in if he had been a first round pick, but because he was a fifth round pick it was not. 

 

But you now ask me to show there is a correlation coefficient of 0.  Which is equally absurd as the OP claiming a correlation coefficient of 1.

 

Perhaps you should go review what correlation means.

[xRUSHx]

2 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said:

With this OC I just don't buy that we can develop a qb.  That's what scares the heck out of me.

I would be ok with a new OC but not if he has to come in and scrap his scheme to Taylor made. Can not train a new talent at QB while running a scheme only Tyrod runs IMO. Go ahead and bring in a new OC but keeping Tyrod will make finding one hard to find, who wants a job that says we like your scheme but our QB needs you to change it.

Edited November 27, 2017 by xRUSHx

[Marty McFly]

CoT

 

 

Idk how you could be a Bills fan and root against a QB jua cuz u dont like them.

 

Im a leader at the CoT but even we know you can have tyrod on the team and still draft a 1st round QB while we try to win now. We need a better OC more or as much a new QB.

 

 

It is what is is. We won. No turnovers. 183 yards of glory leaving arrowhead with a W. Im good wit it.

Just win. Just win.

CoT

[teef]

10 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

I agree with this.

Although I'm not sure why Taylor would want to stay.  Benching 2 years in a row and showing obvious signs they aren't viewing him as a long term answer.

It took McDermott until Wednesday to name him starter after Peterman had 5 first half INT's.  McDermott was still deciding after on which QB after that disaster.

money?  is there anyone willing to pay him more and declare him a likely starter than the bills?  you may be completely right though...he may be done with buffalo.