dave mcbride Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 1 minute ago, Alphadawg7 said: How is he a problem here? I dont get this kind of venom. He works harder than anyone on the team, didn't complain with his benching, always a leader and good team mate and led the Bills to snap the 17 year streak. He has done a LOT for the Bills despite 2 years of terrible coaching and a terrible D, terrible weapons due to injuries, FA, and trades almost the whole 3 years, a terrible pass blocking OL, 3 different OCs in 3 years and 2 HC changes, and a fan base that doesn't appreciate what he does do right on the field and only focuses on how he isn't a prolific passer. I get people wanting to try something different, but the amount of hate he gets here is just crazy. He is no where near as bad as people make him out to be, and has done what no one since Kelly has done despite a SIGNIFICANT amount of things working against him. It can get a LOT worse than TT. I dont blame him for not wanting to take a pay cut, he already did it. Agree 100 percent. The venom directed at him here really sucks. 1
Kirby Jackson Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) 7 hours ago, MAJBobby said: That makes sense as well. But i think outside the Jimmy G (wont hit UFA) and Cousins i think the stregnth of the draft at QB is going to tamper down and slow the secondary QB market this year. I’d agree with this too. It may very well slow it. I’m not sure if it is better or worse for these bridge type of guys that FA is first? I’d say that it is probably worse. 7 hours ago, jmc12290 said: Upside is everything. I think Glennon as a FA last year had more upside than TT does as an FA in 2018. I doubt he beats $18.5M. I think that pendulum is swinging though. After Osweiler and Glennon fell on their faces I’d think that teams would rather have more of a resume. This holds especially true after guys like Keenum, Foles and Bortles played for conference championships. Teams will start shifting the dollars away from boom or bust guys and towards guys that have some production. They will draft upside and invest in the higher floor. Edited February 3, 2018 by Kirby Jackson 1
Kelly the Dog Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 3 minutes ago, jmc12290 said: I hear you. But here's the thing Dave McBride said. The official stat keepers have to have rules. They don't interpret the stats, they just record them. Cassell started that game. If someone says that Taylor doesn't deserve credit for the win because he didn't start, they are being disingenuous. But to call into question the stat keepers is to subject the entire process of stat collection to subjective interpretation rather than objective and factual evidence. Cassell started that game at QB. That's a fact. That's also why there is a letter of the law argument and a spirit of the law argument. You are free to believe in technicalities. I am free to believe in realities. 1
MAJBobby Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said: I’d agree with this too. It may very well slow it. I’m not sure if it is better or worse for these bridge type of guys that FA is first? I’d say that it is probably worse. I think that pendulum is swinging though. After Osweiler and Glennon fell on their faces I’d think that teams would have more of a resume. This holds especially true after guys like Keenum, Foles and Bortles played for conference championships. Teams will start shifting the dollars away from boom or bust guys and towards guys that have some production. They will draft upside and invest in the higher floor. Yep agree with Both. My TGT for the Bills in terms of a Bridge QB would be Josh McCown. Will come cheap and will offer better production passing 1
Kelly the Dog Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 2 minutes ago, MAJBobby said: According to NFL definition he started the 2015 season yep. And he started that first game. Yep. So again TT by definition is 22-20 as a starter those are the facts IAW the NFL Not sure where you are going with this by quoting me and then 100% ignoring what you just quoted.
BringBackOrton Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: Taylor was the announced starter of the game. They ran a trick play. It's probably the only game in NFL history where a qb in Cassell's position got a phantom victory. It's not as if this is a regular occurrence. It is, quite literally, unique and should be treated as such and dealt with accordingly. I'm sure with the advent of the Wildcat, this has probably happened before. 3 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said: That's also why there is a letter of the law argument and a spirit of the law argument. You are free to believe in technicalities. I am free to believe in realities. There's no argument, actually. Matt Cassell started that game under center at QB. He wasn't really the starter, but he did start. Again, I'd agree that Taylor should receive credit for that win, and I consider the Bills 23-20 or whatever the higher number is when Taylor starts. But he still didn't technically start that game. Edited February 3, 2018 by jmc12290 1
Kirby Jackson Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 2 minutes ago, MAJBobby said: Yep agree with Both. My TGT for the Bills in terms of a Bridge QB would be Josh McCown. Will come cheap and will offer better production passing I’d be more than good with that.
Alphadawg7 Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 6 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: Agree 100 percent. The venom directed at him here really sucks. Thanks, yeah I just don't get it. No issue with people thinking we can get better with a different QB, its the utter hate and venom spewed on him that makes no sense and is unnecessary.
BringBackOrton Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 4 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: I’d agree with this too. It may very well slow it. I’m not sure if it is better or worse for these bridge type of guys that FA is first? I’d say that it is probably worse. I think that pendulum is swinging though. After Osweiler and Glennon fell on their faces I’d think that teams would have more of a resume. This holds especially true after guys like Keenum, Foles and Bortles played for conference championships. Teams will start shifting the dollars away from boom or bust guys and towards guys that have some production. They will draft upside and invest in the higher floor. This operates under the assumption NFL FO's are quick to adapt I think there's a myth that UFA QB markets have exploded. Here's the top 5 contracts last year in UFA GTD dollars. 3 years $18.5M 2 years $9.85M 2 years $7M 1 year $6M 1 year $5M Outside of Glennon, nothing looks too outrageous out there. Let's look at 2016. 4 year, $37M 3 year, $12M 2 year, $6.75M 1 year, $12M 2 year, $2.75M Brocketship was obviously the highest. I don't think the markets for the Foles and Keenums and Taylors of the world will rise. The markets for the Glennons and Osweilers will just fall.
Kirby Jackson Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 8 minutes ago, jmc12290 said: This operates under the assumption NFL FO's are quick to adapt I think there's a myth that UFA QB markets have exploded. Here's the top 5 contracts last year in UFA GTD dollars. 3 years $18.5M 2 years $9.85M 2 years $7M 1 year $6M 1 year $5M Outside of Glennon, nothing looks too outrageous out there. Let's look at 2016. 4 year, $37M 3 year, $12M 2 year, $6.75M 1 year, $12M 2 year, $2.75M Brocketship was obviously the highest. I don't think the markets for the Foles and Keenums and Taylors of the world will rise. The markets for the Glennons and Osweilers will just fall. That’s where we disagree. The NFL is a “copycat league.” How many times has that cliche been thrown out? Teams will be all over the draft picks which is all the more reason that they will want an experienced bridge guy. In terms of the guaranteed dollars, good QBs never hit the market.
dave mcbride Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 14 minutes ago, jmc12290 said: I'm sure with the advent of the Wildcat, this has probably happened before. There's no argument, actually. Matt Cassell started that game under center at QB. He wasn't really the starter, but he did start. Again, I'd agree that Taylor should receive credit for that win, and I consider the Bills 23-20 or whatever the higher number is when Taylor starts. But he still didn't technically start that game. I just went through all of Miami's games from 2008. They opened with the wildcat more than once. Ronnie Brown is not credited with any qb victories, however. Pennington got them all, going 11-5 in the official stats. I think that pretty much closes the case here. 23-20 it is. 1
BringBackOrton Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said: That’s where we disagree. The NFL is a “copycat league.” How many times has that cliche been thrown out? Teams will be all over the draft picks which is all the more reason that they will want an experienced bridge guy. In terms of the guaranteed dollars, good QBs never hit the market. Who did the NFL copy giving Glennon and Osweiler those deals? Why hasn't the NFL been all over bridge guys and draft picks for 30 years? Are you telling me that's never been done successfully before? Exactly right, good QB's never hit the market. So comparing what Alex Smith, a good QB, got in GTD dollars to Taylor, who will hit market and is not a good QB, is really apropos of nothing. 3 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: I just went through all of Miami's games from 2008. They opened with the wildcat more than once. Ronnie Brown is not credited with any qb victories, however. Pennington got them all, going 11-5 in the official stats. I think that pretty much closes the case here. 23-20 it is. Whoops, I guess because the stat is "started at QB" they would probably never credit the RB for the win.
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Missing the point. The point is SBF specifying "half dozen" expect TT to be here is off by an order of mag. Not whether or not more people want him to be, or expect him to be - that's clear Yup. I stated half a dozen. An obvious underestimation. I’d think my point was clear enough. The vast majority still stands at nearly 200. Also being on the team does not mean they also agree that he will be the starter for the full season. Edited February 3, 2018 by ShadyBillsFan
Fadingpain Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 You can lead a Tyrod to the football field, but you cannot make him throw. Auf wiedersehen mein Freund!
JohnC Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 The team that is going to be interesting to watch this offseason is Minnesota. Bradford will probably be gone. The tough issues for the Vikes is whether they decide to keep both Keenum and Bridgewater followed by how much will they play one of them or each of them. Or are the Vikings going to commit to Keenum or will it be Bridgewater? Does Bridgewater want to stay or will it be in his best interest to hit the market when there should be a demand for his services? The Alex Smith signing definitely takes away a competitor in the qb draft market for us, and so will the signing of Cousins. This qb market still has a lot of scrambling to do before the free agent market winds down and the draft is upon us. As it stands I have no clue as to how McBeane is going to address the qb issue from either the draft and free agency standpoint. It is both perplexing and intriguing!
Teddy KGB Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 45 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: Agree 100 percent. The venom directed at him here really sucks. He should stop sucking then, it will stop. 1 1
reddogblitz Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 5 hours ago, Teddy KGB said: The offense was a bore that couldn’t pass ???????????????? Correct. ?? Someone forgot to take their meds. Tyrod is a backup. (174 ypg). Can’t pay starter money for backup play. You forgot one. 56 yards. 1 minute ago, reddogblitz said: The offense was a bore that couldn’t pass ? Winning is fun regardless of if the offense is "exciting" or not IMHO. Its all about WINNING. They don't tally up the Passing yards and "exciting" plays at the end of the game to determine the winner.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 1 hour ago, MAJBobby said: Nope want to add a phantom win (who started the game) then I add a phantom loss. If we want to manipulate stats then cool i will play that game so keep trying http://www.espn.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=400791541
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 I have to say: I've seen silly arguments on TBD before, but this one does "take the cake" 1
Teddy KGB Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 23 minutes ago, reddogblitz said: Winning is fun regardless of if the offense is "exciting" or not IMHO. Its all about WINNING. They don't tally up the Passing yards and "exciting" plays at the end of the game to determine the winner. No winning occurred in the playoffs. Because Taylor stinks. Dont pull the 9-7 playoff card on me. I’ve heard all of you bash Andy Dalton for losing every year.
Recommended Posts