Apparently the offense is holding Tyrod back

[LABILLBACKER]

6 hours ago, grb said:

 

The latest example is the downturn w/ Dak. Up to now he's been in quarterback heaven, with a stellar offensive line, good receivers and a great running attack. So people all last year wailed over the Bills passing on him in the draft. But how well would he perform in Buffalo? He's still in a much better situation than Taylor, but looks decidedly more mortal with just some of his supporting cast gone. Another example is Case. You can find any number of posts from people convinced the Bills should sign him - as if his massive improvement could be lifted up from its ideal setting of Minnesota and dropped into place in Buffalo. I'm skeptical that would prove true.

 

 

Everything here is spot-on, but one caveat : When Taylor had Watkins and Woods to throw to he was much more efficient : A higher completion percentage, more td passes, and over 8yds per attempt. I think there have been two parallel developments : The talent around TT has gotten a lot worse / dysfunctional (ie, running game), but Taylor has gotten a degree better (though not as much as even his supporters would wish). I think the Taylor of '15 would have been much less successful transplanted to the situation of '17

 

 

  

As I understand it (tho I'm notoriously weak on NFL contract stuff), cutting Taylor saves about 9.4 million in cap. But McBeane probably won't stake next season on Peterman and a rookie, which means they'll have to sign a journeyman veteran. That will chew-up 3-4 million of the savings from cutting Taylor - so is it really what's best for the team? The question is probably moot, as McBeane will cut Taylor for no other reason than to justify their recent embarrassing clumsiness.

Tyrod Taylor has a 92.1 qb over his 3 years with the Bills. 49 tds + 13 rushing tds. Only 15 int's. Yes he's safe and has his annoying quirks but he gives you the best chance at winning. He lost Woods, Goodwin, Hogan and Watkins.  That's  a ton of firepower. He's had a very mediocre pass protection oline in front of him during those 3 years. And with the new blocking scheme Shady is less effective  which also hurts TT.  I still want to draft a QB this April and keep NP as insurance,  but I think dumping TT would be foolish and premature. Dennison is the problem!! And we've already put ourselves out of the running for any of the top 4 and unless we give up all our picks. This will be a crazy off season for the Bills.

Edited December 2, 2017 by LABILLBACKER

[grb]

4 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

 

Points 1-3 show your lack of understanding (or deliberate misinterpretation) of usage-based statistics, so let me clarify: by taking a small sample of arbitrary games in an attempt to represent a QB's actual quality, when said QB is ALREADY at or near the bottom of the league in attempts year in and year out, you've simply doubled down on an already flawed premise and exposed your bias. You aren't revealing anything, you're obfuscating. And it's patently obvious.

 

As for 4, all you forgot was 'an inept OC' to fill out the quadfecta of prerecorded mediocre QB excuses. 

 

Well, this is definitely like talking to a brick wall, but one more shot. After all, reason should be common ground for everyone.

 

(1) Fifteen games is not a "small sample". I pointed that out before; I'm doing so again.

(2) The metrics I provided - completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdowns and interceptions - are highly important. The metric you provided  - number of attempts - is almost completely worthless. That's a real big problem for your argument.

(3) I have one point to make in this particular debate : Taylor performed very well with good - not elite - talent at wide receiver. That isn't an opinion; it's just following the numbers. And there shouldn't be any controversy in pointing that out. You have to wonder why some people are so desperate to deny such a simple fact.

 

Edited December 2, 2017 by grb

[GoBills808]

16 minutes ago, grb said:

 

Well, this is definitely like talking to a brick wall, but one more shot. After all, reason should be common ground for everyone.

 

(1) Fifteen games is not a "small sample". I pointed that out before; I'm doing so again.

(2) The metrics I provided - completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdowns and interceptions - are highly important. The metric you provided  - number of attempts - is almost completely worthless. That's a real big problem for your argument.

(3) I have one point to make in this particular debate : Taylor performed very well with good - not elite - talent at wide receiver. That isn't an opinion; it's just following the numbers. And there shouldn't be any controversy in pointing that out. You have to wonder why some people are so desperate to deny such a simple fact.

 

You legitimately don't get it. 

 

Selecting certain games from a <3-year career, in which the passer in question's usage is at or near the bottom of his contemporaries, tells you as much about the motives of the person providing the statistics as it does Taylor's abilities as a quarterback. There are SO VERY MANY problems with that kind of analysis and you just go around taking it for granted that the statistics in these games you've selected represent 'facts' about Taylor's value and you're wide-eyed in wonderment about how on earth anyone couldn't take them as gospel proving your point...it's about as narrow a mindset as you can approach this topic with.

 

I prefer ANY/A for my general QB analysis, followed closely by BuffaloHokie's system. I also use the 3-5+ NFL games I happen to watch each week as reference, too. You've got 15 arbitrary games and a bunch of excuses...next.

[SoTier]

7 hours ago, Buffalo30 said:

Woods was gone in March and Beane didn't arrive until May...

To you those players aren't equivalent because they don't matchup to Tyrod's needs as a QB.  Both Mathews and Benjamin have had 1,000 yard seasons or pretty close to it.  And the Goodwin part of this just makes me laugh.  They have had injuries no doubt but to say they are a joke...I'm done with this conversation because there is no chance we will remotely come close to agreeing on anything or having a decent chat about it. Just a waste of time at this point. Good day

 

 

The claim has been that Woods and Goodwin were allowed to walk because they didn't "fit the skill set" that the Bills needed.  Who would have decided the "skill sets" players needed in March?  McDermott and Dennison. 

 

Get a clue.  Every team needs at least one speedy WR to stretch the field.   Benjamin and Matthews are not going to catch passes 30 yards downfield, juke the DB, and sprint to the EZ.  They aren't fast enough, and that's why they're not equivalent.  They are not going to force defenses to play well off the LOS simply because the DBs are concerned about keeping them from catching long passes and scoring.   By not having at least one WR like Watkins, Woods, or Goodwin, the Bills automatically limit their ability to make chunk plays, and that would be true no matter who their QB was, including Rodgers, Brady, Brees, etc.

[Teddy KGB]

1 hour ago, grb said:

 

If you watched the game you know Taylor played well. Why pretend otherwise?

 

Qbs that play well don't lose to Josh Mccown and the NY jets. 

 

Im not a fan, and it's time for a change.   Jmo 

 

You have more patience than I.   

Edited December 2, 2017 by Air it out Fitzy

[Alphadawg7]

On 11/29/2017 at 2:00 PM, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Good article.

 

As I've said many times.......all but a very few QB's in the current NFL are system QB's.  

 

That's the way the game is now..........it's not good or bad........unless your system and supporting talent are.....well, good or bad.

 

Wentz and Goff are the greatest young QB's...of all-time....uh da' week.

 

Both are system guys who were given great talent otherwise they could be going thru what Dak is going thru right now..........and if you don't know........Dak is averaging about a buck and a half thru the air with zero TD's and 5 pics since Zeke and Tyron stopped being available.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shhhhh you will upset the "Its all Tyrods fault" crowd.

 

Bottom line is this, Tyrod can win games, and has a winning record to prove it as a starting QB.  Even though some refuse to admit how much better this team is WITH Tyrod, all you have to do is look what happened to the offense the 2 times he was benched in the last 2 years to "look" at the other guys.  Week 17, last year, the Bills going into that game against a bad Jets team had the 3rd most TD's in the NFL only behind Atlanta and the Saints.  And this was DESPITE the fact Sammy played only one game where he was somewhat close to healthy (week 16 where he also had 150 yards and a TD), McCoy missing most of 2 games and all of a third game, and having a putrid coaching staff.  Not to mention injuries to all his other WR's, backup skill players, Clay, etc.  

 

Then comes in EJ and Cardale to show just how bad this offense was without Tyrod.  Fast forward to the Chargers game, and I don't need some long reminder of what a disaster that was.  

 

No one is denying there are weak parts to Tyrods game, but when the coaching staff built the offense for him the Bills and the run game were one of the highest scoring teams over those 2 years saddled with one of the worst defenses in the NFL.  This year, when the D was holding its own, the Bills and offense were doing just enough to win.  The issue is, Dennison has turned the #1 run game in the NFL over the last 2 years into a mediocre one at best while also trying to fit Tyrod into a system that doesn't play to his strength.  

 

All that being said, there have been some positives in Tyrods game to develop more this year like use more of the field, especially the middle.  But we still know a quck strike west coast offense isn't the right fit for him, but they are trying to run it anyway.  

 

Put Tyrod on a team like Jax, Hou, AZ, or Denver with an OC who can build an offense to take advantage of his strengths and minimize his weaknesses and those teams can both win and make the playoffs.  What he won't ever be able to do is carry a bad team on his shoulders...but then again, few guys in the NFL can do that.  

 

But at this point...it doesn't matter...Bills have clearly made the decision to go in another direction with how they benched him, and I think the next QB of the Buffalo Bills is going to be Baker Mayfield.

[LarryMadman]

6 hours ago, grb said:

 

Here's the thing : Over 2015 & 2016, Taylor had a real pair of NFL receivers only 15 games total (Watkins & Woods playing). 

When that occurred he did this : 63.6% comp. 8.25 YPA. 27 TD passes. 6 INTs

 

Posting this again for the 100th time, really! Like it means anything.

 

In 2013 Nick Foles had 64% comp, 9.1 YPA, 27 TD passes, 2 int and ran for 3 TDs in basically 11 games. 

[GoBills808]

29 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Shhhhh you will upset the "Its all Tyrods fault" crowd.

 

Bottom line is this, Tyrod can win games, and has a winning record to prove it as a starting QB.  Even though some refuse to admit how much better this team is WITH Tyrod, all you have to do is look what happened to the offense the 2 times he was benched in the last 2 years to "look" at the other guys.  Week 17, last year, the Bills going into that game against a bad Jets team had the 3rd most TD's in the NFL only behind Atlanta and the Saints.  And this was DESPITE the fact Sammy played only one game where he was somewhat close to healthy (week 16 where he also had 150 yards and a TD), McCoy missing most of 2 games and all of a third game, and having a putrid coaching staff.  Not to mention injuries to all his other WR's, backup skill players, Clay, etc.  

 

Then comes in EJ and Cardale to show just how bad this offense was without Tyrod.  Fast forward to the Chargers game, and I don't need some long reminder of what a disaster that was.  

 

No one is denying there are weak parts to Tyrods game, but when the coaching staff built the offense for him the Bills and the run game were one of the highest scoring teams over those 2 years saddled with one of the worst defenses in the NFL.  This year, when the D was holding its own, the Bills and offense were doing just enough to win.  The issue is, Dennison has turned the #1 run game in the NFL over the last 2 years into a mediocre one at best while also trying to fit Tyrod into a system that doesn't play to his strength.  

 

All that being said, there have been some positives in Tyrods game to develop more this year like use more of the field, especially the middle.  But we still know a quck strike west coast offense isn't the right fit for him, but they are trying to run it anyway.  

 

Put Tyrod on a team like Jax, Hou, AZ, or Denver with an OC who can build an offense to take advantage of his strengths and minimize his weaknesses and those teams can both win and make the playoffs.  What he won't ever be able to do is carry a bad team on his shoulders...but then again, few guys in the NFL can do that.  

 

But at this point...it doesn't matter...Bills have clearly made the decision to go in another direction with how they benched him, and I think the next QB of the Buffalo Bills is going to be Baker Mayfield.

Just to illustrate how silly it is to credit Taylor (or any Bills QB lately) with offensive PPG: the Bills in 2015 averaged 23.7 PPG. In the two EJ Manuel led games, the Bills offense averaged 26 PPG.

 

OMG and he didn't even have Watkins for one of them. 

[Wayne Arnold]

15 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Just to illustrate how silly it is to credit Taylor (or any Bills QB lately) with offensive PPG: the Bills in 2015 averaged 23.7 PPG. In the two EJ Manuel led games, the Bills offense averaged 26 PPG.

 

OMG and he didn't even have Watkins for one of them. 

 

Shhhhh you will upset the "None of it is Tyrods fault" crowd.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

13 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

You do realize this "their system" is total BS, right?  Successful OCs adapt their system to the skills of their players and to their opponent.  Or they are not successful.  Period.

Playbooks are thick.  Even if a guy wants to run a specific system as far as terminology, route trees, etc he can choose from it plays that will suit the skills of his players and successfully create mismatches with his opponent.  Failure to do so is failure as an OC.  (....)
Expecting that an OC who WON'T change his approach game by game and season by season to create mismatches, will somehow win, is simply unrealistic. 

 

10 hours ago, Buffalo30 said:

I'd agree with this if Tyrod was coming back.  He's not.  Why make the rest of the team wait another year to learn a new system because one guy doesn't know how to throw a football without holding onto it for 7 seconds?  I'm not just looking at one player here.  The entire team is affected when you do something like this, especially the young players on the team.  I don't want to have to change the scheme next year when Tyrod's gone and potentially hurt the young players development.  Constantly switching schemes needs to stop.  They just decided to do it this past offseason instead of next year to try and speed things up.  Tyrod doesn't get it but Zay Jones has seemed to pick it up and Dawkins...those are their guys.  They don't want to hurt their development by appeasing Tyrod's plentiful needs and changing the scheme.  

 

So they punted away a year on offense where we wouldn't have been much better even if we played to his strengths.  If you are gonna change anyway and get rid of Tyrod, does it make sense to create the offense he needs and make everybody else wait a year?  To me it doesn't.  Maybe I just look at things differently.  Tyrod isn't their guy.  They absolutely will do this when they get their QB but not with Tyrod.  It just doesn't make sense if you are looking for long term success

 

You just talked into an echo chamber instead of reading what was written now, didn't you?  I know you did.

 

If they really didn't want to tailor (HA!) THEIR SCHEME (and I bold it only because I don't know how to put in a Wordart font and make it flash) to Taylor, they should not have kept him.  It makes no sense.
 

 

10 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

Since when did the Patriots win with Garoppolo or Brisset? I mean I GUESS you could say they won with Cassel, but he went 11-5 one season removed from a 16-0 team, meaning they actually reverted -5 wins once Brady went down. 

 

There has to be a word for That Guy who reads a substantive post and has to hone in on one minor point so he can be all "you have a misplaced nit nyah nyah" about it. 

Does it give you a puffed up feeling, or what?

But since you ask: Patriots 9-11-2016 v Ari, 9-18-2016 v Mia, Garoppolo started and won both.   Brissett played a half then won 9-22-2016 v Hou (a short week no less).  That's when.  You don't have to GUESS they won with Cassel, they factually did win 11 games with him (the "reversion" point is BS since teams records vary with the same QB)

 

To my main point, in the MIA game, Brissett came in with 4 min left in the 2nd Q and played the rest of the half; while he isn't credited with the win, he certainly didn't lose.  it's an example of an OC taking the same SYSTEM and even the same GAME PLAN and successfully tailoring it to the strengths of his raw rookie backup, who only threw 9 passes for 92 yds (no sacks, and no INTs or fumbles)

Edited December 2, 2017 by Hapless Bills Fan

[Hapless Bills Fan]

9 hours ago, grb said:

 As I understand it (tho I'm notoriously weak on NFL contract stuff), cutting Taylor saves about 9.4 million in cap. But McBeane probably won't stake next season on Peterman and a rookie, which means they'll have to sign a journeyman veteran. That will chew-up 3-4 million of the savings from cutting Taylor - so is it really what's best for the team? The question is probably moot, as McBeane will cut Taylor for no other reason than to justify their recent embarrassing clumsiness.

 

Agree with you on Taylor of '15 doing worse in this system; he has improved and advanced as a player, which is only to be expected of a guy playing regular season for the 1st time.

 

Correct, $9.4M cap: They save $15M in salary ($16 if someone else pays him >$1M), but take a hit from accelerating his amortized bonus into next year.

[GoBills808]

12 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

There has to be a word for That Guy who reads a substantive post and has to hone in on one minor point so he can be all "you have a misplaced nit nyah nyah" about it. 

Does it give you a puffed up feeling, or what?

But since you ask: Patriots 9-11-2016 v Ari, 9-18-2016 v Mia, Garoppolo started and won both.   Brissett played a half then won 9-22-2016 v Hou (a short week no less).  That's when.  You don't have to GUESS they won with Cassel, they factually did win 11 games with him (the "reversion" point is BS since teams records vary with the same QB)

 

To my main point, in the MIA game, Brissett came in with 4 min left in the 2nd Q and played the rest of the half; while he isn't credited with the win, he certainly didn't lose.  it's an example of an OC taking the same SYSTEM and even the same GAME PLAN and successfully tailoring it to the strengths of his raw rookie backup, who only threw 9 passes for 92 yds (no sacks, and no INTs or fumbles)

My contention with your post was to the point. I wasn't trying to nit pick. You said they won with Brissett, Garoppolo, and Cassel and I disagreed. You then pointed to two games that Garoppolo started and won, and then two halves where the Patriots won and Brisset played. That's not convincing of anything resembling your point about 'tailoring' an offense to suit your QB, at least in my mind...the sample size doesn't justify your conclusion. Brisset also started a game for the Pats and lost to the Bills, badly, and while I'd be foolish to point to that particular game as a way of proving the counterpoint, it's only because that kind of logic suffers from the same problem your original point did: insufficient sampling. 

 

The Cassel thing I still stand by, too. 11-5 is a big downgrade from 16-0, and while I grant you that teams' records vary from season to season with the same QB I don't see how that has any bearing on whether or not the Pats were successful in tailoring their offense to Cassel when Brady went down. I just think that was a dominant roster, particularly on defense. The rest of the article you linked can be chalked up to how good a QB Brady is and that he can run a lot of different offenses. 

 

I just disagree with your rationale of using the Patriots and Brissett/Garoppolo/Cassel as proof of the benefit of adjusting offensive systems and gameplans to a particular QB, that's all. I'm definitely not saying it doesn't happen or isn't of benefit.  But again: what that article really says to me is how good a quarterback Brady really is, not how Belichick/McDaniels have figured out how perform alchemy with marginal QBs.

[Bing Bong]

17 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

I hate your screen name - the guy screwed the pooch but it's one game, let it go

Sorry "Hapless Bills Fan" (generic negative screen name), I love the name. what happened is objectively funny, imagine if the Cowboys did the same thing, we'd be laughing our arses off. No matter how his career turns out, that was one of the most memorable self destructive moments l have witnessed watching the Bills, let alone any team, far beyond EJ vs Jags. 

 

I'm young I haven't seen better part of the Bills history. But we saw NFL history. Just saw Bills history that may never be broken. #neverforgetBillsHistory

[Bing Bong]

20 hours ago, Air it out Fitzy said:

 

??‍♂️??‍♂️??‍♂️.    Worst idea ever 

why

[Rochesterfan]

On 11/29/2017 at 4:23 PM, Gavin in Va Beach said:

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2746257-where-is-the-nfls-next-wave-of-great-quarterbacks-hiding

 

 

 

It is all so dumb in the analysis.  This is TT 3rd year and he is on the exact same pace as year 1 and year 2.  The offense is not holding TT back at all - he is exactly the same QB as the last 2 years - the difference in the Bills offense this year is in the running game which has dropped about 40 yards a game - still in the upper half of the league. 

 

I think by the end of the year we will have another top 10 rushing attack (currently 12th, but have been moving up) and a bottom 5 passing attack (currently 30th) - just as we have the last 2 years under TT.  So how is this offense holding him back?

 

People blaming the offense or the changes are just arguing semantics at this point - TT is the QB that he has been - his numbers are consistent year to year - bottom tier passing while having a top flight rushing offense.  3 OC have been involved and all 3 have gotten the exact same results - almost nothing out of the passing game and a rushing attack that features 2 threats in McCoy and Taylor.

 

TT will continue to put up what will statistically be another decent year with middle of the pack numbers that work great when things are perfect, but do nothing to help the team win games.  He is the ultimate game manager - no turnovers and no chances - just dink and dunk and punt away.  One or two drives a game to get scores and we will play a close tight game.

 

 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

11 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

It is all so dumb in the analysis.  This is TT 3rd year and he is on the exact same pace as year 1 and year 2.  The offense is not holding TT back at all - he is exactly the same QB as the last 2 years - the difference in the Bills offense this year is in the running game which has dropped about 40 yards a game - still in the upper half of the league. 

 

I think by the end of the year we will have another top 10 rushing attack (currently 12th, but have been moving up) and a bottom 5 passing attack (currently 30th) - just as we have the last 2 years under TT.  So how is this offense holding him back?

 

People blaming the offense or the changes are just arguing semantics at this point - TT is the QB that he has been - his numbers are consistent year to year - bottom tier passing while having a top flight rushing offense.  3 OC have been involved and all 3 have gotten the exact same results - almost nothing out of the passing game and a rushing attack that features 2 threats in McCoy and Taylor.

 

TT will continue to put up what will statistically be another decent year with middle of the pack numbers that work great when things are perfect, but do nothing to help the team win games.  He is the ultimate game manager - no turnovers and no chances - just dink and dunk and punt away.  One or two drives a game to get scores and we will play a close tight game.

 

 

 

...spot on as usual RF......good show............

[Billsfan1972]

41 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

It is all so dumb in the analysis.  This is TT 3rd year and he is on the exact same pace as year 1 and year 2.  The offense is not holding TT back at all - he is exactly the same QB as the last 2 years - the difference in the Bills offense this year is in the running game which has dropped about 40 yards a game - still in the upper half of the league. 

 

I think by the end of the year we will have another top 10 rushing attack (currently 12th, but have been moving up) and a bottom 5 passing attack (currently 30th) - just as we have the last 2 years under TT.  So how is this offense holding him back?

 

People blaming the offense or the changes are just arguing semantics at this point - TT is the QB that he has been - his numbers are consistent year to year - bottom tier passing while having a top flight rushing offense.  3 OC have been involved and all 3 have gotten the exact same results - almost nothing out of the passing game and a rushing attack that features 2 threats in McCoy and Taylor.

 

TT will continue to put up what will statistically be another decent year with middle of the pack numbers that work great when things are perfect, but do nothing to help the team win games.  He is the ultimate game manager - no turnovers and no chances - just dink and dunk and punt away.  One or two drives a game to get scores and we will play a close tight game.

 

 

How about them going into a game with the expectation and game plan to throw for 300 yards?  If Taylor fails miserably you are right.

 

Not a single is their expressed purpose to air it out and thus very team stacks the line and awaits to stuff the Bills.

 

The only time it appeared they had that game plan was when Peterman was at qb, as if to prove a point.

Edited December 2, 2017 by Billsfan1972

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

5 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

How about them going into a game with the expectation and game plan to throw for 300 yards?  If Taylor fails miserably you are right.

 

Not a single is their expressed purpose to air it out and thus very team stacks the line and awaits to stuff the Bills.

 

The only time it appeared they had that game plan was when Peterman was at qb, as if to prove a point.

 

....safe to say Dennison has you on IGNORE......guy is a Fairchild clone....or clown.............

[Bills757]

45 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

It is all so dumb in the analysis.  This is TT 3rd year and he is on the exact same pace as year 1 and year 2.  The offense is not holding TT back at all - he is exactly the same QB as the last 2 years - the difference in the Bills offense this year is in the running game which has dropped about 40 yards a game - still in the upper half of the league. 

 

I think by the end of the year we will have another top 10 rushing attack (currently 12th, but have been moving up) and a bottom 5 passing attack (currently 30th) - just as we have the last 2 years under TT.  So how is this offense holding him back?

 

People blaming the offense or the changes are just arguing semantics at this point - TT is the QB that he has been - his numbers are consistent year to year - bottom tier passing while having a top flight rushing offense.  3 OC have been involved and all 3 have gotten the exact same results - almost nothing out of the passing game and a rushing attack that features 2 threats in McCoy and Taylor.

 

TT will continue to put up what will statistically be another decent year with middle of the pack numbers that work great when things are perfect, but do nothing to help the team win games.  He is the ultimate game manager - no turnovers and no chances - just dink and dunk and punt away.  One or two drives a game to get scores and we will play a close tight game.

 

 

 

It's funny how fans like yourself wants to indict Taylor on his offensive numbers yet it's very apparent the Oline sucks and the WR corps isn't nearly as good as many other teams.  Add in the fact Shady's had more so-so games this year than the last two.  And let's not forget Dennison and his "go-for-broke" approach (sarcasm) and you get what you get.  

 

Peterman plays, throws five picks in one half and all of sudden we have an Oline problem....like it didn't exist when Taylor was the QB.  The simple truth is Taylor masks the crappy Oline and rather than throw balls up for grabs, he opts to tuck and run.  If Dennison would actually play to Taylor's strengths (getting him outside the pocket and actually running him), we might see a better offense.  You can't tell with a straight face that Dennison's approach with over two minutes to go last week was smart.  

 

Carry on though.....I'm sure you can't wait until the Bills draft a "franchise QB".  Better hope Beane and McD do something about the Oline or else said "franchise QB" will be on the IR faster than you can say Billsy.

[Big Gun]

3 minutes ago, Bills757 said:

 

It's funny how fans like yourself wants to indict Taylor on his offensive numbers yet it's very apparent the Oline sucks and the WR corps isn't nearly as good as many other teams.  Add in the fact Shady's had more so-so games this year than the last two.  And let's not forget Dennison and his "go-for-broke" approach (sarcasm) and you get what you get.  

 

Peterman plays, throws five picks in one half and all of sudden we have an Oline problem....like it didn't exist when Taylor was the QB.  The simple truth is Taylor masks the crappy Oline and rather than throw balls up for grabs, he opts to tuck and run.  If Dennison would actually play to Taylor's strengths (getting him outside the pocket and actually running him), we might see a better offense.  You can't tell with a straight face that Dennison's approach with over two minutes to go last week was smart.  

 

Carry on though.....I'm sure you can't wait until the Bills draft a "franchise QB".  Better hope Beane and McD do something about the Oline or else said "franchise QB" will be on the IR faster than you can say Billsy.

He's had Watkins, Woods, Goodwin, Clay, Benjamin (1 game), Matthews, McCoy, and a bunch of scrubs over the last 3 years and his stats say the exact same thing from year to year. 

I guess your type will only be satisfied and only be able to see that TT is the problem if they had Rice, Moss and Owens in their prime catching balls from TT. How blind can you be? The endless arguing and parade of excuses for a bad QB is disturbing.