KD in CA Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 (edited) Was the era a success? Unless the franchise bar is so low that 3 years of .500 football and 3 total points scored in the playoffs is 'success' I'd say no. Is that all Taylor's fault? Of course not. He is what he is -- a limited QB. The fault lies wtih the front office who didn't treat him as a bridge QB from day 1 and instead punted the responsibility of finding a QB for yet another 3 years. It would be less frustrating if they hadn't just done the exact same thing with Fitz. Yes, the drought is over -- which is kinda like sleeping with the last girl at the bar after a 6 month dry spell. It's nice to reset the clock but otherwise doesn't do much to improve your long term propsects. Edited March 12, 2018 by KD in CA 1
QCity Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 7 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: Of course it was a success. The Bills broke the drought and he left the team in much better shape than when he got here. There is a process in sports that teams go through (sorry to use that word). You usually don’t go from out of the playoffs to champion (I realize that just happened). You usually have to be tested some. The Bills are AT LEAST a step ahead of where they were when he joined the team. I don’t know how that can be considered anything but successful? By that logic, if the Browns win 1 game this year their season was a success. Mediocrity is not success.
berg1029 Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: Of course it was a success. The Bills broke the drought and he left the team in much better shape than when he got here. There is a process in sports that teams go through (sorry to use that word). You usually don’t go from out of the playoffs to champion (I realize that just happened). You usually have to be tested some. The Bills are AT LEAST a step ahead of where they were when he joined the team. I don’t know how that can be considered anything but successful? I just don't understand how you can take several years of 0.500 football as being a success. It's like you said.. you don't just go from bottom dweller to super bowl champion overnight. But you also don't go from bottom dweller to superbowl champion by staying the course with a mediocre quarterback. What's the point? Teams that do become successful are usually teams that find success after a change in the quarterback position. We knew Tyrod wasn't the answer, why suffer through an entire era of mediocrity? Make a change at QB and bottom out due to poor play or make a change and have it work out. Either way, at least you're doing something then instead of just treading water
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 6 hours ago, bobobonators said: We obtained him for basically nothing. Paid him like a bottom-tier QB. Made the playoffs with him. Broke the curse/drought. The guy was brought in as an afterthought. There were zero expectations. Success ....agree....he gave it his "all", had a helluva work ethic and appeared to have the support of his teammates....taking the next big step was just not meant to be without rehashing his weaknesses.....on to Cleveland with a "thanks and good luck" memo.....
Misterbluesky Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 Having the team end the playoff drought with him behind Wood at center is what I will remember most.I wish him well in Cleveland..nothing more,nothing less..it was time to part ways.
Kirby Jackson Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 5 minutes ago, QCity said: By that logic, if the Browns win 1 game this year their season was a success. Mediocrity is not success. I believe that progress is success. The Bills motto this year was “playoff caliber.” They wore shirts that said that. THEY set a goal of going to the playoffs and achieved it. When a team achieves their stated goals I would say that it was a success.
Captain Murica Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 Turned a former 6th round pick into the first pick of the 3rd round along with getting the damn graphic of drought off the damn TV. Plus, possibly finally getting our franchise QB with that pick we got for him. I'd say it more successful than a failure. But the end game is to win a Superbowl and break another curse.
Kirby Jackson Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 6 minutes ago, berg1029 said: I just don't understand how you can take several years of 0.500 football as being a success. It's like you said.. you don't just go from bottom dweller to super bowl champion overnight. But you also don't go from bottom dweller to superbowl champion by staying the course with a mediocre quarterback. What's the point? Teams that do become successful are usually teams that find success after a change in the quarterback position. We knew Tyrod wasn't the answer, why suffer through an entire era of mediocrity? Make a change at QB and bottom out due to poor play or make a change and have it work out. Either way, at least you're doing something then instead of just treading water They didn’t stay with him!! They continued to progress and are moving on to someone hopefully capable of taking them another step!!
baskingridgebillsfan Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 no. they often won despite of him and not because of him no. they often won despite of him and not because of him
Teddy KGB Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 In 2012 the 49ers beat the Bills 45-3 In 2018 the Saints beat the Bills 47-10 Same irrelevant team with ? at QB.
berg1029 Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said: They didn’t stay with him!! They continued to progress and are moving on to someone hopefully capable of taking them another step!! Lol, I realize they didn't stay with him. But was 3 years of him really necessary? Was there ever a point in those last 2 years where you said to yourself "the Bills have a shot to win the superbowl this year"? It was 3 years of expected failure (except maybe the first). The whole time we were just treading water, man.
transplantbillsfan Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said: THE TEAM DID sorry caps lock Yep, you're right, the team made the playoffs for the first time in 17 years with Tyrod Taylor at QB... not something a long list of QBs since Doug Flutie couldn't do, including Rob Johnson/Kelly Holcomb/Drew Bledsoe/JP Losman/Trent Edwards/Brian Brohm/EJ Manuel/Thad Lewis/Jeff Tuel/Kyle Orton. You can argue that sets the bar low. It absolutely does. But we got the playoff monkey off our back and Taylor was a big part of that. So yes, success. Moving on...
Kirby Jackson Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 Just now, berg1029 said: Lol, I realize they didn't stay with him. But was 3 years of him really necessary? Was there ever a point in those last 2 years where you said to yourself "the Bills have a shot to win the superbowl this year"? It was 3 years of expected failure (except maybe the first). The whole time we were just treading water, man. I don’t believe that you go from worst to first in sports. You build winners over time. The Bills are further along now than they were 3 years ago. You keep buying lottery tickets and I’ll but blue-chip stocks. Will see which investment strategy is smarter over the long-term. The Bills have a clear deck financially, a ton of assets and an opportunity to add a top end QB. That’s how you build a winner. If they just aimlessly threw darts each year they’d be behind where they are now. The plan takes time.
Teddy KGB Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 1 minute ago, transplantbillsfan said: Yep, you're right, the team made the playoffs for the first time in 17 years with Tyrod Taylor at QB... not something a long list of QBs since Doug Flutie couldn't do, including Rob Johnson/Kelly Holcomb/Drew Bledsoe/JP Losman/Trent Edwards/Brian Brohm/EJ Manuel/Thad Lewis/Jeff Tuel/Kyle Orton. You can argue that sets the bar low. It absolutely does. But we got the playoff monkey off our back and Taylor was a big part of that. So yes, success. Moving on... So success is losing a wildcard game to Blake Bortles ? Im not sure that is correct.
transplantbillsfan Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Teddy KGB said: So success is losing a wildcard game to Blake Bortles ? Im not sure that is correct. Yes. It is. And it was. So agrees the message board. Edited March 12, 2018 by transplantbillsfan
K-9 Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: Of course it was a success. The Bills broke the drought and he left the team in much better shape than when he got here. There is a process in sports that teams go through (sorry to use that word). You usually don’t go from out of the playoffs to champion (I realize that just happened). You usually have to be tested some. The Bills are AT LEAST a step ahead of where they were when he joined the team. I don’t know how that can be considered anything but successful? He joined them coming off a 9-7 season and leaves them coming off a 9-7 season with .500 and 7-9 seasons in between. Treading water at best; the definition of mediocrity. For me, I can’t make non failure mean the same as successful. Although, he leaves them trending upward. Edited March 12, 2018 by K-9
berg1029 Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: I don’t believe that you go from worst to first in sports. You build winners over time. The Bills are further along now than they were 3 years ago. You keep buying lottery tickets and I’ll but blue-chip stocks. Will see which investment strategy is smarter over the long-term. The Bills have a clear deck financially, a ton of assets and an opportunity to add a top end QB. That’s how you build a winner. If they just aimlessly threw darts each year they’d be behind where they are now. The plan takes time. I understand what you and a lot of other people are saying. But I think where we are having a difference of opinion is over who is due to credit for our present financial situation (and draft capital situation). The change of GM from Whaley to Bean is, imo, more deserving of credit than saving a couple bucks by having Tyrod as our QB. Yes, his contract was reasonable, so it did play in to it. But more of the reason why we're in a better financial spot is because we have a GM that isn't spend happy anymore. It has next to nothing to do with Tyrod. Our current financial situation is a result of Bean. The only thing that Tyrod presided over was mediocre football results. Edited March 12, 2018 by berg1029
Teddy KGB Posted March 12, 2018 Posted March 12, 2018 7 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said: Yes. It is. And it was. So agrees the message board. They must not follow the Bengals.
Recommended Posts