Bakin Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) Let’s not all so quickly forget who was the QB who led the Bills out of the swamp after 17 years. Was he dominant? No. Was he downright putrid at times? Sure. Did he carry a team after they traded his top 2 receivers to its first playoff birth in ever? yes. Let us not forget this. If we’ve seen the last of TT, the one thing I’ll be left with was that He was a great Buffalo Bill. He wasn’t the best player...but he was a great Buffalo Bill.... Edited February 3, 2018 by Bakin
Thurman#1 Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Wayne Arnold said: That's fair, I just roll my eyes when reporter's ask uncomfortable questions that they already know the answers to. A lot of times when reporters "know" the answer, the answer they get is actually different. It makes sense to ask the question. But I can see we're close on this issue. If the guy does give the expected answer it does seem like a waste of time. 1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said: If it is 3rd and 6 and a QBs runs for 7 or throws for 7 which is better? That’s why that argument is stupid. It’s not about yards. It’s about scoring when you have a chance and moving the chains on 3rd down. The Bills didn’t do those things well. Dennison was fired because he was a MASSIVE reason why. His red zone play calling was epically horrible. The offense will be much improved next year regardless of the QB. It's 3rd and 6 and a QB doesn't see a guy who's open for a ten yard pass downfield and instead puts up a nice run of 5 yards. It's not stupid. Yeah, runs count. But if you can't consistently pass, being able to run as a QB doesn't mean much. Sooner and not later you're going to be replaced. I'm no huge fan of Dennison, but the play people always talk about was the R-P option play that turned into a pass into the end zone and an interference penalty. People talk about what a horrible call it was. And then they talk about what a brilliant call it was to call the R-P option play for Foles that he turns into a passing TD. An awful lot of your success as a play caller depends on the execution of your players. Again, I didn't love Dennison or anything, but I also don't think he was as obviously terrible as some think. 20 minutes ago, Bakin said: Let’s not all so quickly forget who was the QB who led the Bills out of the swamp after 17 years. Was he dominant? No. Was he downright putrid at times? Sure. Did he carry a team after they traded his top 2 receivers to its first playoff birth in ever? yes. Let us not forget this. If we’ve seen the last of TT, the one thing I’ll be left with was that He was a great Buffalo Bill. He wasn’t the best player...but he was a great Buffalo Bill.... He didn't carry this team. Didn't carry them anywhere. He was their QB. Nobody can take that away, but the offense wasn't good and what carrying the offense did do was mostly done by the running game. Edited February 3, 2018 by Thurman#1 1
Kirby Jackson Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 9 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said: A lot of times when reporters "know" the answer, the answer they get is actually different. It makes sense to ask the question. But I can see we're close on this issue. If the guy does give the expected answer it does seem like a waste of time. It's 3rd and 6 and a QB doesn't see a guy who's open for a ten yard pass downfield and instead puts up a nice run of 5 yards. It's not stupid. Yeah, runs count. But if you can't consistently pass, being able to run as a QB doesn't mean much. Sooner and not later you're going to be replaced. I'm no huge fan of Dennison, but the play people always talk about was the R-P option play that turned into a pass into the end zone and an interference penalty. People talk about what a horrible call it was. And then they talk about what a brilliant call it was to call the R-P option play for Foles that he turns into a passing TD. An awful lot of your success as a play caller depends on the execution of your players. Again, I didn't love Dennison or anything, but I also don't think he was as obviously terrible as some think. Except you moved the goalposts by changing the scenario... The scenario was run for 7 or throw for 7. I’d actually argue that the run is a better play because it is less likely to be turned over. He lined Tolbert up wide on 3rd and goal from the 17 and threw him a slant. Dennison shouldn’t have been allowed back in the locker room after that. That call made Chuck Pagano’s fake punt look like the Boise State Statue of Liberty play.
RalphWilson'sNewWar Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said: That’s not right. Every player is a collection of all of their talents. Russell Wilson runs a lot. The goal isn’t to get passing yards, it is to get points. That’s how you win and lose. Cam Newton had 10 rushing TDs, was the MVP of the league and went to the Super Bowl in 2015. Would you say that he failed? I’d say his 35 td passes to likes of Ginn, fuchesss and cotchery powered the way to all the success the Panthers found in 2015.
Thurman#1 Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said: Just for some perspective Mike Glennon made $16M this year!! Most expensive draft smokescreen in history!! 2
transplantbillsfan Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 4 hours ago, #34fan said: Can't wait until this scrub is someone else's problem.. You'll probably have to deal with him for one more year. Sorry
Kirby Jackson Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 3 minutes ago, RalphWilson'sNewWar said: I’d say his 35 td passes to likes of Ginn, fuchesss and cotchery powered the way to all the success the Panthers found in 2015. Again, you are missing the point. It wasn’t one OR the other it was both!! They all count the same. Saying that you want the passing game to improve is beyond reasonable. Saying that passing is more important than running (or visa versa) isn’t reasonable. They are the same. Army football ran for 4710 yards and threw for 361 yards and won 10 games. All that matters is the score. 1
transplantbillsfan Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 3 hours ago, Augie said: Better question: Why would he admit to it in public? That’s just an invitation to the FO. Exactly! And that's the bind he got himself into last year when he said on clean out day of 2016 that he'd consider restructuring his contract. 3 hours ago, GunnerBill said: The contract he is on now is the bridge contract right in line with what Sam Bradford signed for when the Eagles were taking Wentz and what Glennon signed for when they were taking Trubisky it is the right market for a Quarterback a team believes can play but are not committing to (obviously the Bears now know Glennon can't play). Precisely why Taylor's still very likely a Bill for one more year 3 hours ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said: .....if what has been reported here about TT as well as Bridgewater not willing to sign with Vikes for back up money, both may have to test the market and I'd venture to say (OPINION) with less than favorable results......then again, crazy money and desperation DOES exist.....stay tuned........ Ummmm... except Taylor can't test the open market considering he's under contract
reddogblitz Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, John from Hemet said: Why would he agree to take another pay cut? Really. A deals a deal. The team hadn't sniffed the playoffs in 17 years. A team wins because of it's QB. Finally we do make the playoffs in a big part due to him. And he deserves a pay cut? We should build a statue of him and put it next to Ralph's or name a street after him or something. Edited February 3, 2018 by reddogblitz
transplantbillsfan Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 2 hours ago, Thurman#1 said: That is a good point. But if he'd wanted he could have avoided the question. "I don't want to talk about the dollars right now," or "That's all in the future." Whatever. Instead he said no. Seems probable to me that he meant it. And rightfully so. He made that mistake last year on locker room clean out day and it really killed any leverage he had in the off-season. We will all have a pretty definitive answer here in a month and a half, but talk about some douche-baggery in this thread. As I get through these pages and read more and more of the vitriol, I realize there are several posters who are the types of people you don't even cross the street to piss on if their heads are on fire. 2 hours ago, MAJBobby said: Find me a QB in the NFL right now that that teams HC would want a QB that needs a specialty offense. That is why Kaep is out of the league and I think alot of people that really like TT are going to see very soon. That he isnt valued as much as they think in the NFL Yah no... that's definitely not why Kaep's out of the league
Putin Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 50 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: I think that he gets 2 years and $20M guaranteed. Bradford is coming off of a 2 year $36M deal with $22M guaranteed. Mike Glennon got 3 years, $45M with $18.5M guaranteed. That’s the type of deal that he’s looking at. Alex Smith was guaranteed $71M this week!! We need to understand the market. That’s why you don’t take a pay cut. QBs get paid. Tyrod has been on an extremely team friendly deal. It has been considered one of the best values in football. He may not get $18M a year but he can get a good chunk of money guaranteed. That’s why he won’t take a pay cut. I agree with you and I understand the value of a QB in today’s market , but again we’re talking about a backup QB and IMO I don’t think any/team would offer anything more then a one year $5 - 7 million deal , 10 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said: And rightfully so. He made that mistake last year on locker room clean out day and it really killed any leverage he had in the off-season. We will all have a pretty definitive answer here in a month and a half, but talk about some douche-baggery in this thread. As I get through these pages and read more and more of the vitriol, I realize there are several posters who are the types of people you don't even cross the street to piss on if their heads are on fire. Yah no... that's definitely not why Kaep's out of the league SMH
transplantbillsfan Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said: Does anyone think that he will be? I do. The evidence so far this offseason keeps piling up that Tyrod is a Bill for one more year.
Kirby Jackson Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 Just now, Putin said: I agree with you and I understand the value of a QB in today’s market , but again we’re talking about a backup QB and IMO I don’t think any/team would offer anything more then a one year $5 - 7 million deal , So Mike Glennon will get 3 years, $45M and $18.5M guaranteed but Tyrod will get 1 year and $5M-$7M? We disagree, I think that he gets a bridge QB deal somewhere. Somewhere in the neighborhood of Bradford or Glennon. His worst case scenario is the 1 year $10M that Fitz got IMO. We will see I guess. 2 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said: I do. The evidence so far this offseason keeps piling up that Tyrod is a Bill for one more year. Financially it probably makes sense and it will be interesting to hear Daboll’s thoughts. With that being said it feels like a break is due for both sides.
Putin Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 2 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: So Mike Glennon will get 3 years, $45M and $18.5M guaranteed but Tyrod will get 1 year and $5M-$7M? We disagree, I think that he gets a bridge QB deal somewhere. Somewhere in the neighborhood of Bradford or Glennon. His worst case scenario is the 1 year $10M that Fitz got IMO. We will see I guess. I think Glennon got that deal because he was going to start , in your opinion a bridge QB = backup QB ?
Thurman#1 Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said: Except you moved the goalposts by changing the scenario... The scenario was run for 7 or throw for 7. I’d actually argue that the run is a better play because it is less likely to be turned over. He lined Tolbert up wide on 3rd and goal from the 17 and threw him a slant. Dennison shouldn’t have been allowed back in the locker room after that. That call made Chuck Pagano’s fake punt look like the Boise State Statue of Liberty play. Yeah, of course I changed the scenario. You made your point with your scenario and I'm making my point with mine. Which is that you actually make 7 yards more often passing than running. Passes make more yards on average than runs do. Even if Tyrod is your QB. Compare his YPA to his YPR. And I'm also thinking particularly of one play by Tyrod, in one of his best games as a Bill, the 2016 Seahawks game. 1:17 left in the 4th, Bills down by six, first and 10. Tyrod back to pass, leaves the pocket early goes right, holds the ball, holds the ball, run, gets out of bounds for an eight yard gain. Great play!!! Eight yard gain on first and ten. Except that the next three plays lose yardage and the Bills turn the ball over on downs. And except that on that first and ten play the coaches film showed a guy wide open in the end zone, I mean, unguarded and open by close to ten yards, who Tyrod doesn't see and pulls it down and runs. The game was there to be won on a pass. Tyrod didn't see it. Ran the ball on what looked like a good play but was actually a back-breaker. On the Tolbert play, was that the only read? Was he even the first option? Had Tyrod been told to ignore his other options? I didn't like that Tolbert play either but different things could have happened. 1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said: Again, you are missing the point. It wasn’t one OR the other it was both!! They all count the same. Saying that you want the passing game to improve is beyond reasonable. Saying that passing is more important than running (or visa versa) isn’t reasonable. They are the same. Army football ran for 4710 yards and threw for 361 yards and won 10 games. All that matters is the score. Great example, Army. Where's the modern NFL counterpart of that? Edited February 3, 2018 by Thurman#1
Kirby Jackson Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) 38 minutes ago, Putin said: I think Glennon got that deal because he was going to start , in your opinion a bridge QB = backup QB ? Pretty much what Glennon was. A guy that can start somewhere bringing in a young QB. A team looking at Lamar Jackson would make sense. FA coming first means that guys like Tyrod, Bradford, etc... sit out there and sign when the team doesn’t get their guy. What has happened in the past though (just like Glennon) those teams get insurance with a guy like Tyrod in case they can’t get their guy. A team like Arizona gives him a Glennon type of deal and if they get their guy fine but if they don’t they buy time. If they get a guy like Jackson or Allen they probably sit a year anyways. Edited February 3, 2018 by Kirby Jackson
Thurman#1 Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, transplantbillsfan said: You'll probably have to deal with him for one more year. Sorry Don't be sorry for having a bizarre opinion, dude. That's your problem, not ours. We're sorry for you on that. 1 hour ago, transplantbillsfan said: And rightfully so. He made that mistake last year on locker room clean out day and it really killed any leverage he had in the off-season.he types of people He didn't make a mistake there and he didn't lose any leverage. The Bills didn't think he was worth keeping at that salary. If he hadn't taken the cut he'd have been elsewhere. What he said then had no effect, any more than what he said this year did. Both were reasonable answers. Both opinions about a difficult-to-predict future. Neither had or will have much effect on his contract situation. Edited February 3, 2018 by Thurman#1
Kirby Jackson Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) 45 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said: Yeah, of course I changed the scenario. You made your point with your scenario and I'm making my point with mine. Which is that you actually make 7 yards more often passing than running. Passes make more yards on average than runs do. Even if Tyrod is your QB. Compare his YPA to his YPR. And I'm also thinking particularly of one play by Tyrod, in one of his best games as a Bill, the 2016 Seahawks game. 1:17 left in the 4th, Bills down by six, first and 10. Tyrod back to pass, leaves the pocket early goes right, holds the ball, holds the ball, run, gets out of bounds for an eight yard gain. Great play!!! Eight yard gain on first and ten. Except that the next three plays lose yardage and the Bills turn the ball over on downs. And except that on that first and ten play the coaches film showed a guy wide open in the end zone, I mean, unguarded and open by close to ten yards, who Tyrod doesn't see and pulls it down and runs. The game was there to be won on a pass. Tyrod didn't see it. Ran the ball on what looked like a good play but was actually a back-breaker. On the Tolbert play, was that the only read? Was he even the first option? Had Tyrod been told to ignore his other options? I didn't like that Tolbert play either but different things could have happened. Great example, Army. Where's the NFL counterpart of that? Passing certainly gets more yards than rushing but more can go wrong as well. If a guy has a lane for a 1st down I’d prefer that he run it. It may be conservative and not have the big play potential but it is more likely to convert. I’m also a guy that wants to run power on 2nd and 1. You can run a play action bomb but you might have a holding call. Good things can happen but bad things can too. The play in Jax is a great example. There are examples to support all sides of the debate. Good and bad things can happen either way. The trick is maximizing the good while minimizing the bad. That’s not easy. For me coaching is the difference in a game of inches. The Bills outscored their opponents by a lot in 2016. The Bills were outscored by 3 and a half points a game this year. One year they went to the playoffs and one year they were 7-9. You need to be able to execute in close games. Good coaches do and bad ones don’t. McDermott proved to be strong in year 1. In terms of the Tolbert play I’m not sure what else was out there. I am sure that any play with Tolbert our wide, running a slant is an awful one. That shouldn’t be in the playbook. I honestly think that play had a huge impact on Dennison getting fired. The fact that was even an option at that point was enough to can him. Army is a total extreme which is why I used them. They threw for 361 yards on the season!! I wanted to find a team on the opposite end with a similar record but couldn’t think of one. I guess the old Hawaii teams would fit. In the NFL typically teams are more balanced. The point was just that you can win a variety of ways. The Jags are a run heavy team and the Pats a pass heavy team. They battled to the end to go to the Super Bowl. You can win a variety of ways as long as you make plays at the right time. Edited February 3, 2018 by Kirby Jackson
Thurman#1 Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 16 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: Pretty much what Glennon was. A guy that can start somewhere bringing in a young QB. A team looking at Lamar Jackson would make sense. FA coming first either means that guys like Tyrod, Bradford, etc... sit out there and sign when the team doesn’t get their guy. What has happened in the past though (just like Glennon) those teams get insurance with a guy like Tyrod in case they can’t get their guy. A team like Arizona gives him a Glennon type of deal and if they get their guy fine but if they don’t they buy time. If they get a guy like Jackson or Allen they probably sit a year anyways. How does the Glennon deal look now? If they had it to do over again, would they bring in someone cheaper like McCown or Fitz? I think they would. The Bradford deal is a bit better but he was injured again and they might easily let him go figuring it's just too much for what he's likely to be. I agree with you that I think Tyrod's going to get a good deal more than $5 mill a year somewhere. But I'd guess that you're overestimating a bit. My guess is more like $8 - $12 mill per year for two or three year. Guess we'll see. 1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said: I think that he gets 2 years and $20M guaranteed. Bradford is coming off of a 2 year $36M deal with $22M guaranteed. Mike Glennon got 3 years, $45M with $18.5M guaranteed. That’s the type of deal that he’s looking at. Alex Smith was guaranteed $71M this week!! We need to understand the market. That’s why you don’t take a pay cut. QBs get paid. Tyrod has been on an extremely team friendly deal. It has been considered one of the best values in football. He may not get $18M a year but he can get a good chunk of money guaranteed. That’s why he won’t take a pay cut. I think you used the wrong verb tense there. When you say, "It has been considered one of the best values in football," you should have used the simple past, not the present perfect. There was a time when some people thought that. That time was exclusively in the past. The fact that nobody thinks that way anymore should be wildly obvious from the fact that he was forced to re-negotiate and take $10 mill less. And is now being asked about it again. And is unlikely to be here even though nobody argues he's the best QB on the roster right now. In any case, if he plays next year and then leaves, it will cost the Bills $23.6 mill on the cap, $18 mill on the 2018 cap and $5.6 mill on the 2019 cap. For one year of Tyrod Taylor. That isn't one of the best values in football, it just isn't.
Recommended Posts