Tyrod Taylor on goal line pass in Jacksonville

[BringBackOrton]

14 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

As soon as I posted that I wrote a list of twenty asswipes that would ignore my simple request and immediately say something stupid, thinking it was funny. You were number two and three.

Wow, sounds like you got a lot of free time on your hands.  Did the supermarket not need their groceries bagged today?

8 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

We had just gone 70 yards to get to the one, the majority on the ground.

That's true, but even so, I don't feel like we ran the ball effectively at all that day.

 

Without the PI, this is a non-issue.  KB's greatest asset is his size.  He was born for jump balls in single coverage in the RZ.  If the ball is bad, which it was, 2nd and goal at the one.  Which is fine.

Edited February 4, 2018 by jmc12290

[Shaw66]

5 hours ago, JoshBarnett said:

 

 

After messaging with Hap, I realize the proper etiquette is to include a brief summary and a quote so people can discuss the article without reading it, which often happens from other sources. 

Exactly. Your post should either contain enough information to start a discussion or add to an existing discussion, or it should link to a free source so that people can get information.  It shouldn't just say "I've got some great information for you. Come over and buy it."

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

 

 

There is no need to require a poster from the BN to indicate that a subscription is required because it is well known that the sports section is a subscription only service. If it is not known it will become evident once one clicks on to that link. This forum has had contributors from the BN and other sources participate in this forum. All of them left because of the ill-tempered responses from a faction of the people here. That's a shame. 

For me it's the thread title.  I don't look at every thread.  This thread title syasnits offerng information about a play I was interested.  In fact it offered no information. And once I read the OP, I thought that perhaps this link to BN WAS free, so I tried it.  

 

So I wasted my time and as Josh apparently now understands, that's bad forum etiquette.  Either the title should be clear or the OP should do contain enough information to make it a useful post on its own without the link. 

[Mango]

5 hours ago, JoshBarnett said:

 

That is actually not what happened here in my view. We did a staggered story off one interview at intervals. We wrote six paragraphs as soon as the interview was over about the pay cut issue. That was the top of the story and we published. There was nothing wrong with the teaser and that fueled the one discussion that seems to be ongoing here. No issue at all. It was going fine. 

 

We then came back and wrote a more in-depth version that talked about the Jax play, the playoffs, Dennison and Daboll about an hour later. We also wrote a separate story just about the Jax play about three hours later. My goal was to let the people here know there was more significant news in the interview than just the original item. I thought what he said was interesting and wanted to share it so I linked to the full story. 

 

At the time, we published the extended version, the first item already had a lot of discussion. I thought the other news would get lost if I threw it in there. Having been on this board, I often find interesting things buried when the topic veers from the original point. 

 

After messaging with Hap, I realize the proper etiquette is to include a brief summary and a quote so people can discuss the article without reading it, which often happens from other sources. 

 

I also would quibble  with your definition of click bait. To me, click bait suggests that the headline or teaser doesn't reflect what is in the story. That is not the case here or in the Tyrod story or the Eric Wood piece, in my opinion. In the previous instances, we were dealing with more nuanced subjects that have context that can't be fully captured in a teaser and conclusions were being drawn that might not have been drawn had the full article been available so I addressed that for the benefit of the subjects and my staff.

 

Despite your assertion, for the record, I don't view anything wrong with the tweets that were sent in either instance. My response in those instances has nothing to do with the tweets. We always can be better at everything we do but that was not my issue in those cases.

 

In the previous Tyrod story, he talked extensively about many subjects. We tweeted several pieces of the interview but some took it as a massive story all about race. That is why I came on here to explain. As Hap can attest after he read the full Wood story, there is more there than the one tweet that he seized upon. We also sent multiple tweets on that piece that focused on different facets. That again is why I came on here. In this case, there is a full story that was written after the discussion already started about new items so this has nothing to do with any tweets at all. 

 

I have had wonderful interactions with many Bills fans since I've been in town, including lots of emails and messages from people on this board. I've also had a few people tell me that I am not welcome in your community that exists here. I have acknowledged more than once that I understand that many people don't like my staff, don't like the subscription model and other topics. I have tried to be available to address concerns people have. I have worked in other NFL markets and for a national outlet, and taken that same approach. The customer isn't always right but you are always the customer and I respect that and will continue to do so. 

 

Thanks, Josh 

 

Although I don’t like Sully and Bucky, my issue with not paying is not them in particular. It’s the idea that there is very little meaningful Bills content. People like Vic because he’s a Buffalo guy and the voice of the Bills. People like Sully and Bucky because they are what’s always been available. But even the articles posted provide very little to the conversation that didn’t exist before. 

 

Romo called it an option about 10 seconds after the play. Cover 1 broke down the play. We knew that. A month later an entire article on Tyrod feelings is being dealt as more meaningful journalism. 

 

For a city that’s incredibly rabid about their football team, it is odd that the BN hasn’t invested heavily in their staff at a very high level. Even you agnowledge the fact you hear about people’s unhappiness regarding the issue I would believe that the people paying and reading Sully and Bucky, are paying and reading regardless. They are BN sports lifers. But there is a huge opportunity to acquire new customers based on quality of the product regarding football specifically. Surely the BN has metrics on this right? 

 

Very few publications have a hard paywall. The move nationally is a soft paywall, purposefully taking it as an opportunity to acquire customers by proving their worth. I pay for the NYT. I’m not anti-pay for good content. 

 

I don't find it as shameful as other posters, but it’s a bit uncouth for the sports editor to come in and link their own paid content. 

 

Thanks for being around and listening. It’s appreciated. I’m sure the rest of the complainers, like myself on this issue, appreciate your overall presence. We’ll see if it results in any meaningful change. 

[Kelly the Dog]

13 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Different people seem to be objecting to what you did for different reasons.  This sentence is at the core of my objection. 

 

I come here for two reasons:  to share news about the Bills and to discuss the Bills.  I think that's why everyone is here.  Except you.  You admit that the reason you're here is to get people to look at what your organization has produced. You're not here to share information. You're here to sell it. 

 

You try to make it sound like you're doing a public service.  And in fact if I subscribed to BN and I posted the same thing you did it would be fine. That would be mw, a member of this community, sharing information others might be interested in.  But you aren't a member, at leastnnot in spirit.  You don't come here to share information or to talk about the Bills,noun aren't a participant.  It's clear you're here to sell subscriptions.

 

Now I have to admit, it sounds like you got a lot of great stuff from Tyrod and maybe I ought subscribe.  I give you credit for that.  

 

But as others have said, if youre going to come here and link too to contest that requires paymeet to see it, then telll people in the title of the thread that you're liking to paid material. 

 

Better yet, why don't you get your IT people to post some of the material, like say the discussion of the thrown to Benjamin, to a special free link?Then come here and post about THAT, giving people the free link.  Then tell us if we want to see the rest we have to sign up. In other words, actually share some of what you've produced. 

Shaw, a lot of people are here for different reasons other than just to share news and discuss the Bills. A huge number rarely if ever share news or discuss the Bills. Just because that is your sole reason, and a valid, perhaps the most valid reason, doesn't mean everyone has to follow that model.

 

In fact, if the editors from the R&C and the NYT and ESPN and NFL Network and Roger Goodell were coming here (and yes, Roger, I know you are here), and posting as much as Josh is - meaning once in awhile and not trying to take over or change the board in any fashion, it would be a better place. Different, but better. In my opinion. You may not agree. But there are not only two reasons for being here; yours.

[Foreigner]

This is a democracy and a Capitalistic country.

The business of the country is business or making money. It is why everything works

in the U.S.A. Stop complaining and harassing the man. He came to explain.

Without Bills news in the BN, there would be so many more empty seats, which would

mean not enough money to pay everyone in the organization, and the Bills would be gone.

Why complain here, go to Facebook and Twitter with complaints, that's what they are

there for besides to make money, just like the BN wants to make money, just like the

Bills want to make money, just like you want to make money. 

[Shaw66]

14 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

 

 

Without the PI, this is a non-issue.  KB's greatest asset is his size.  He was born for jump balls in single coverage in the RZ.  If the ball is bad, which it was, 2nd and goal at the one.  Which is fine.

Watch the replay. The pass wasn't bad. Hit him in the hands, high, where it's supposed to be for Benjamin. The problem was that that when Benjamin was interfering with the defender he should already have begun to turn for the ball.  If he'd done that he could have boxed out the defender and made the catch.  All on Benjamin. 

[Kelly the Dog]

5 minutes ago, Mango said:

 

Although I don’t like Sully and Bucky, my issue with not paying is not them in particular. It’s the idea that there is very little meaningful Bills content. People like Vic because he’s a Buffalo guy and the voice of the Bills. People like Sully and Bucky because they are what’s always been available. But even the articles posted provide very little to the conversation that didn’t exist before. 

 

Romo called it an option about 10 seconds after the play. Cover 1 broke down the play. We knew that. A month later an entire article on Tyrod feelings is being dealt as more meaningful journalism. 

 

For a city that’s incredibly rabid about their football team, it is odd that the BN hasn’t invested heavily in their staff at a very high level. Even you agnowledge the fact you hear about people’s unhappiness regarding the issue I would believe that the people paying and reading Sully and Bucky, are paying and reading regardless. They are BN sports lifers. But there is a huge opportunity to acquire new customers based on quality of the product regarding football specifically. Surely the BN has metrics on this right? 

 

Very few publications have a hard paywall. The move nationally is a soft paywall, purposefully taking it as an opportunity to acquire customers by proving their worth. I pay for the NYT. I’m not anti-pay for good content. 

 

I don't find it as shameful as other posters, but it’s a bit uncouth for the sports editor to come in and link their own paid content. 

 

Thanks for being around and listening. It’s appreciated. I’m sure the rest of the complainers, like myself on this issue, appreciate your overall presence. We’ll see if it results in any meaningful change. 

Then you don't know what is on there. Mark Gaughn breaks down video like Cover 1. Both do a very good job. There is all kinds of information there, not just Sully and Bucky, who comprise perhaps 5% of the content, if that.

Edited February 4, 2018 by Kelly the Dog

[Shaw66]

2 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Shaw, a lot of people are here for different reasons other than just to share news and discuss the Bills. A huge number rarely if ever share news or discuss the Bills. Just because that is your sole reason, and a valid, perhaps the most valid reason, doesn't mean everyone has to follow that model.

 

In fact, if the editors from the R&C and the NYT and ESPN and NFL Network and Roger Goodell were coming here (and yes, Roger, I know you are here), and posting as much as Josh is - meaning once in awhile and not trying to take over or change the board in any fashion, it would be a better place. Different, but better. In my opinion. You may not agree. But there are not only two reasons for being here; yours.

Why else are people here?  If they post they do one of those two things - share information or discuss. What else do they do?

[Kelly the Dog]

Just now, Shaw66 said:

Why else are people here?  If they post they do one of those two things - share information or discuss. What else do they do?

A lot just joke with other posters, discuss other topics on Off The Wall, just read and never participate, some just B word (those are my faves!), discuss problems/issues/trends with the NFL or TV (not Bills related).

 

I understand where you are coming from, I do. That's why I said your two stated reasons were probably the most valid. And I'm against just shamelessly shilling for products here, even if it is Bills related. But I don't think that is what he is doing. And not everything is, must be, or should be, discussion directly on the Bills for purist purposes. If you break it down, there isn't all that much of that. Surely less than half.

[Shaw66]

3 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

A lot just joke with other posters, discuss other topics on Off The Wall, just read and never participate, some just B word (those are my faves!), discuss problems/issues/trends with the NFL or TV (not Bills related).

 

I understand where you are coming from, I do. That's why I said your two stated reasons were probably the most valid. And I'm against just shamelessly shilling for products here, even if it is Bills related. But I don't think that is what he is doing. And not everything is, must be, or should be, discussion directly on the Bills for purist purposes. If you break it down, there isn't all that much of that. Surely less than half.

Got you. Thanks. 

 

I'm only talking about this forum.  

[Kelly the Dog]

Just now, Shaw66 said:

Got you. Thanks. 

 

I'm only talking about this forum.  

Cool. But I mean on this forum. You take any thread of 100 responses and less than half of them will be purist, serious discussion on the thread premise or Bills, especially if you count posts that are just 100% repetitions of a point just made. And that's fine. Preferred in fact. The entertainment on this board is at least as good or better than the Bills content and discussion. 

[3rdand12]

16 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Watch the replay. The pass wasn't bad. Hit him in the hands, high, where it's supposed to be for Benjamin. The problem was that that when Benjamin was interfering with the defender he should already have begun to turn for the ball.  If he'd done that he could have boxed out the defender and made the catch.  All on Benjamin. 

exactly. it is on KB. either he was thinking run or not sure where his spot should have been.
get that head turned sooner Benjamin, its the goal line where split seconds and  one yard can make all the difference in a game

[BADOLBILZ]

1 hour ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Yeah that was a serious indictment of Dennison. I actually thought that was Tyrod throwing Dennison under the bus more than I would have expected from him. It kinda surprised me and you can tell Taylor wasn't happy with the call and feels the blame he's shouldered since has been unwarranted.

 

 I think it's interesting how direct he is here... I wonder if he had a conversation about it with McDermott and felt validated.

 

Oh Dennison... if only  

 

 

Personally,   I think too much was made of that call.

 

The refs had just accidentally given the Bills a first down........the Jags player had gotten back onside on the FG attempt.

 

So.......as refs often do........they threw a make-up flag.

 

Had the Bills run the ball on that play they were going to get a holding call.

 

Dennison made plenty of bad calls.........he EARNED his firing...........but pounding McCoy at the goal line is no sure thing either.    That's why he had not been used in most short yardage situations from 2014-2016.

 

The issue is the people blaming Tyrod for doing what the play called for.........10 in the box......man coverage on your giant #1 WR.......the correct read was a throw to KB and Taylor put it on his hands and he couldn't catch it.   

 

It's reminiscent of the blame put on Tyrod for Zay Jones stumbling and botching his route on the ill-fated play at the end of the Panthers game.    TT threw the ball where Jones should have been at that time in the designed route.    The players acknowledged as much.......and yet the idiots persisted to blame TT.

 

TT is a flawed player but the depths of exaggeration that his haters go to to discredit him are embarrassing for the board.    It makes the board IQ look very low which is unfortunate.

[Manther]

On 2018-02-03 at 9:31 AM, billsbackto81 said:

It was a terrible call! That drive was over 5 minutes up to that point and Buffalo was running the ball very well  regardless of what the Jax D was doing. YOU RUN THE BALL!!

 

Jax D was on fumes and deflated from an offside penalty that cost them.  1st and GOAL. Running well all drive. I don't care if 10 are in the box, RUN THE BALL!

Agreed!  Classic over coached in the situation.

[JohnC]

8 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Shaw, a lot of people are here for different reasons other than just to share news and discuss the Bills. A huge number rarely if ever share news or discuss the Bills. Just because that is your sole reason, and a valid, perhaps the most valid reason, doesn't mean everyone has to follow that model.

 

In fact, if the editors from the R&C and the NYT and ESPN and NFL Network and Roger Goodell were coming here (and yes, Roger, I know you are here), and posting as much as Josh is - meaning once in awhile and not trying to take over or change the board in any fashion, it would be a better place. Different, but better. In my opinion. You may not agree. But there are not only two reasons for being here; yours.

You more deftly stated what I have wanted to state in my posts on this topic. Some posters are responding to me as if I am haranguing them on how they responded to Josh. That's not my intention. I've observed that for a segment of posters (not generalizing to a wider group) any subject matter related to the BN stimulates a reflexive hostile response. My position is that because he is a representative of the BN and because he doesn't regularly post here there should have been more forbearance toward him. (You also smarly noted that because of his limited participation here that there was no intention to hijack or redirect this forum.)

 

We have had people from a variety of media organizations participate here. Invariably, a hostile faction use their energy to hostilely  engage instead of civilly engage. The predictable result is that the outside source leaves the scene. The end result is that this platform ends up losing useful sources and perspectives. Instead of calling out the guest contributor for technical violations of protocol he should have been given more latitude. 

[BringBackOrton]

7 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Personally,   I think too much was made of that call.

 

The refs had just accidentally given the Bills a first down........the Jags player had gotten back onside on the FG attempt.

 

So.......as refs often do........they threw a make-up flag.

 

Had the Bills run the ball on that play they were going to get a holding call.

 

Dennison made plenty of bad calls.........he EARNED his firing...........but pounding McCoy at the goal line is no sure thing either.    That's why he had not been used in most short yardage situations from 2014-2016.

 

The issue is the people blaming Tyrod for doing what the play called for.........10 in the box......man coverage on your giant #1 WR.......the correct read was a throw to KB and Taylor put it on his hands and he couldn't catch it.   

 

It's reminiscent of the blame put on Tyrod for Zay Jones stumbling and botching his route on the ill-fated play at the end of the Panthers game.    TT threw the ball where Jones should have been at that time in the designed route.    The players acknowledged as much.......and yet the idiots persisted to blame TT.

 

TT is a flawed player but the depths of exaggeration that his haters go to to discredit him are embarrassing for the board.    It makes the board IQ look very low which is unfortunate.

Thank you!

 

Objectivity.

 

I actually don't see a lot of blame for TT on that goalline throw around here.  It's a contested throw to a covered player and it's low percentage as all hell.

Edited February 4, 2018 by jmc12290

[Foreigner]

Finally, from Badolbilz and J clarity and good sense.  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

Better yet, why don't you get your IT people to post some of the material, like say the discussion of the thrown to Benjamin, to a special free link?Then come here and post about THAT, giving people the free link.  Then tell us if we want to see the rest we have to sign up. In other words, actually share some of what you've produced. 

 

To Josh: there might be 100 reasons why that's complicated to do, or shouldn't be done.

 

But IMHO this from Shaw66 is actually a great idea - give a periodic taste of what's behind the paywall

 

As long as it's up front what you're doing - giving a free sample to assess the quality of a product available for a fee is an honored American tradition.

Edited February 4, 2018 by Hapless Bills Fan

[transplantbillsfan]

1 hour ago, jmc12290 said:

Talk about hindsight.  We couldn't run at all during the game, Eric Wood was hurt, but we should have called the play that required our OL to manhandle Dareus and co at the LOS?

 

On a drive that, at the point of that play call, had already eaten up 7 minutes of clock and where our RBs were relatively effective averaging 4+ YPC against that vaunted defense and we were on the 1 yard line...?

 

Yes. You run on 1st down.

 

Run on 1st down in that situation is NEVER a bad call whereas passing on 1st down there absolutely can be, as it was.

On 2/3/2018 at 4:31 AM, billsbackto81 said:

It was a terrible call! That drive was over 5 minutes up to that point and Buffalo was running the ball very well  regardless of what the Jax D was doing. YOU RUN THE BALL!!

 

Jax D was on fumes and deflated from an offside penalty that cost them.  1st and GOAL. Running well all drive. I don't care if 10 are in the box, RUN THE BALL!

 

Who do you blame? Tyrod or Dennison it was a terrible call and cost us the game potentially.

 

Actually that drive was over 7 minutes up to that point  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

58 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

Personally,   I think too much was made of that call.

The refs had just accidentally given the Bills a first down........the Jags player had gotten back onside on the FG attempt.

So.......as refs often do........they threw a make-up flag.

Had the Bills run the ball on that play they were going to get a holding call.

 

I don't have all-22 this year and can't convince myself of that 100% from the film clips available online.  Can someone else confirm this interpretation? (Edit: I mean that the Jags player clearly got 100% back before the snap)

 

IMO, the push-off from Benjamin was pretty clear, I recall Romo even coaching him in real time on the play-by-play saying "Benjamin, you got to push off low, if you push off up at the facemask or pads level it's easy to spot and they'll flag it every time.  Was there an element of "make up call" in an infraction they might otherwise overlook, perhaps, but it was a pretty obvious push-off up at neck level and right in front of the ref.

 

If a run play had a flagrant hold right in front of the ref sure holding on something they might otherwise let slide, but I don't see the refs making a "phantom call" on either as sometimes happens.   Neither the Jags nor Bills are in the category of teams that get those.

 

Quote

Dennison made plenty of bad calls.........he EARNED his firing...........but pounding McCoy at the goal line is no sure thing either.    That's why he had not been used in most short yardage situations from 2014-2016.

 

You're right, but you know what else is sickening?  We have two freakin' FBs, not one FB but two, on the @#$! roster and we're talking about our finesse back, Mr "Cut on Dime", as the one to pound at the goal line.  WTF man? (to McDermott)

 

Quote

 

The issue is the people blaming Tyrod for doing what the play called for.........10 in the box......man coverage on your giant #1 WR.......the correct read was a throw to KB and Taylor put it on his hands and he couldn't catch it.   

 

It's reminiscent of the blame put on Tyrod for Zay Jones stumbling and botching his route on the ill-fated play at the end of the Panthers game.    TT threw the ball where Jones should have been at that time in the designed route.    The players acknowledged as much.......and yet the idiots persisted to blame TT.

 

TT is a flawed player but the depths of exaggeration that his haters go to to discredit him are embarrassing for the board.    It makes the board IQ look very low which is unfortunate.

 

It's a stretch to say Taylor put it on KB's hands - but KB did not put on much of a vertical leap for a ball no further over his head than many he has caught, and it did touch his hands.  Either he couldn't put on a vertical leap, because knee, or ??  (Compare and contrast with Diggs leap in the Eagles Vikes, for example)

 

About the depths of exaggeration, you're right on.  Just as we're so bereft of quality QB play that we go nuts over 5th round rookie backups, it's been so long since we've seen championship-caliber WR play that we no longer expect our WR to make grabs players on other teams regularly haul in - both the Jones catch and the KB play fall into that category.

Edited February 4, 2018 by Hapless Bills Fan