Is this a playoff team with Tyrod?

[Royale with Cheese]

8 minutes ago, CuddyDark said:

No because we'd have a better running game and less TO.

 

#1 running game right?  Taylor makes that much of a difference I guess. 

[Stank_Nasty]

1 minute ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

I do and can agree with this....but with this offense, I think our offensive scoring would be roughly the same.  We had trouble scoring last year, especially in the 2nd half.  

and I guess that's where we disagree then. I don't believe it would have been historically bad leading up into week 10.

[Royale with Cheese]

10 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Again, what you're saying is just nonsensical.

 

Yeah, we couldn't score, but still scored 19 points per game.

 

Prior to Matt Barkley going off, we were scoring 10.6 points a game, and are only now scoring 13 points per game.

 

Every argument you want to make can be easily shot down by basic stats. 

 

2017 we had a bad offense.

 

2018 we have arguably the worst offense in NFL history.

 

I know we have one of the worst offenses in NFL history.  You're assuming with a regressed of talent, especially at the offensive line, we wouldn't have continued to regress even with Taylor under center.  We wouldn't average 19 points per game with him here and the talent he has.  

13 minutes ago, Stank_Nasty said:

come on man.... the offense was on pace to be historically bad. they had freaking 2 or 3 pass td's up until last week. in an nfl that's on pace to score more points combined in a season than it ever has the bills were competing for historical numbers from 20 and 25 years ago..... so YES, even a qb in the 20-30 range of starters is a SIGNIFICANT upgrade. what freaking team were you watching? 

 

apparently you don't understand the magnitude of what was happening.

 

I understand the magnitude.  The offense I saw last year, was bad.  We got worse on talent on that side of the ball this year.  I see Taylor play really bad this year with a team with better weapons....I think they bad play would have continued even in Buffalo.

[Stank_Nasty]

6 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

I know we have one of the worst offenses in NFL history.  You're assuming with a regressed of talent, especially at the offensive line, we wouldn't have continued to regress even with Taylor under center.  We wouldn't average 19 points per game with him here and the talent he has.  

 

I understand the magnitude.  The offense I saw last year, was bad.  We got worse on talent on that side of the ball this year.  I see Taylor play really bad this year with a team with better weapons....I think they bad play would have continued even in Buffalo.

oh they would have been bad..... just not 10ppg and 22 TO bad. and that makes a difference.

[T master]

13 hours ago, Tcali said:

possible. but I think barkley is better --so you could propose the same thing w barkley.Of course we are assuming a 4-5 start vs a 2-7 start caused by our impossibly horrid QBing so far.

 

Barkley has a ton more touch than any QB the Bills have put on the field to this point in his only game it seemed as though he could drop the ball into any spot where only the Bills receiver could grab it . If he was gotten earlier in the season i would say they could be in the play offs again but bad decisions that have surrounded the position all year will keep the team out of the play offs this year !! 

[berg1029]

Is it a playoff team with Tyrod?  Possibly.  It happened last year, it certainly could have happened again this year with our defense being what it is

 

Is it a superbowl team with Tyrod?  Not a chance.  Zero. Zip.  Zilch.  Tyrod is an okay starter for a team with a dominant defense, but nobody is going to be winning superbowls with him (unless he's a backup)

[Teddy KGB]

20 minutes ago, CuddyDark said:

Actually yeah. He'd run out of the pocket and up field for 5 to 20 yards.

 

Teams would have a mush rush against TT. The DT wouldn't even rush him the way they rush pocket QBs. He helps the line and the backs because he's a running threat.

 

That’s why the bills were 29th in yards in 2017 ? 

 

Too much emotion, not enough facts 

[Stank_Nasty]

1 minute ago, Teddy KGB said:

 

That’s why the bills were 29th in yards in 2017 ? 

 

Too much emotion, not enough facts 

you should just post a link to the saints or jags boxscores.

 

 

[Alphadawg7]

13 hours ago, KzooMike said:

We have almost a carbon copy of last years team in an even weaker playoff battle. With Tyrod I think it would have been back to back playoff years. Give him two turnovers in a game and he wins more often than not. No, I don't think he's good. But what he does do is protect the ball, enhance the running game, and to some extent mask poor offensive line play. Whats even more silly about the whole thing is he gets traded to the exact same situation he would have faced here. Perhaps he would have had the same fate in Buffalo he has in Cleveland if he was retained. I know Taylor has been talked to nauseous levels. I just find the thought process on this interesting and I'm curious what others think. Is this a playoff team with Taylor?   

 

Two things:

 

First:  We are certainly most likely a playoff contender right now with him.  This defense is better than last year, Tyrod substantially opens up the run game so we would be a much better rushing team with him and that would also help open the pass game.  So between an improved run game compared to this year and the likely significant reduction in turnovers would compliment this D and we likely are in wildcard race right now.

 

Second:  Doesn’t matter.  What people keep failing to realize is that trading Tyrod was the right move because we got such a premium draft pick for a guy who was not going to be part of the future and was gonna be gone by end of this season if he had been here anyway.  He had taken us as far as he was gonna get us, wildcard birth with an early exit. This regime has made the priority building a team that doesn’t just contend for the last playoff spot, but contends for a title.  And Tyrods upside was capped and they needed to find that QB that had the potential to help this team really contend.

 

So they moved Tyrod (a player not part of the future with only 1 year left on his contract) to get back a premium draft asset that paid dividends this past draft as we used that pick to trade up to get Edmunds.  And I will say that was overwhelmingly the best move for the Bills.  

 

The real question is simple:  Would you rather have Tyrod right now to MAYBE help contend for the last wild card spot before he leaves for nothing as a FA at end of the year...or Edmunds for the next decade quarterbacking and anchoring our defense?

 

I think the answer is pretty obvious.

 

Edited November 16, 2018 by Alphadawg7

[Steptide]

23 minutes ago, Stank_Nasty said:

so you wouldn't care if they were still winning and still able to develop the young qb on the bench, just because they wouldn't be winning the way you wanted....

 

solid. that makes sense.

 

correct me if i'm wrong but didn't I see you clamoring for Peterman repeatedly last year?

Damm right I was. Tyrod was horrendous at times last year. After the saints game I was all for Peterman starting. I don't think anyone expected him to be as bad as he was and is. Tyrod was/is an ok qb. He does some things well and he does other things horribly. The jags playoff game was maddening. I spent half the game screaming at the TV to throw the ball. He isn't a franchise qb. To your other point, I think a guy sitting behind another guy for a year is a bit overrated. Yes I think in some cases it can be beneficial, but I don't think it makes a huge difference at the end of the day. Allen needs to be out there learning defenses and learning how to run this offense. 

[billsfan1959]

33 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Again, what you're saying is just nonsensical.

 

Yeah, we couldn't score, but still scored 19 points per game.

 

Prior to Matt Barkley going off, we were scoring 10.6 points a game, and are only now scoring 13 points per game.

 

Every argument you want to make can be easily shot down by basic stats. 

 

2017 we had a bad offense.

 

2018 we have arguably the worst offense in NFL history.

And I am sure Taylor's 49% completion percentage, 5.6 yd passing avg, and 64 rating before he was benched (which, since you are so into stats, is NOT significantly better than what Allen posted) would have made this offense sooooooo much better. Talk about nonsensical.

[Stank_Nasty]

1 minute ago, Steptide said:

Damm right I was. Tyrod was horrendous at times last year. After the saints game I was all for Peterman starting. I don't think anyone expected him to be as bad as he was and is. Tyrod was/is an ok qb. He does some things well and he does other things horribly. The jags playoff game was maddening. I spent half the game screaming at the TV to throw the ball. He isn't a franchise qb. To your other point, I think a guy sitting behind another guy for a year is a bit overrated. Yes I think in some cases it can be beneficial, but I don't think it makes a huge difference at the end of the day. Allen needs to be out there learning defenses and learning how to run this offense. 

I bet you were screaming to put peterman in weren't you?

 

i'll take the wins and the rookie qb sitting and learning with the potential to earn the job if the starter struggles any day of the week over what this year has been. I don't even know how anyone could argue otherwise.

[Freddie's Dead]

Maybe.  But consider the fan revolt if we paid that guy $16M and he continued to put up 150 yd. passing games.  No thanks.  I'm good with where we are.

[Stank_Nasty]

Just now, billsfan1959 said:

And I am sure Taylor's 49% completion percentage, 5.6 yd passing avg, and 64 rating before he was benched (which, since you are so into stats, is NOT significantly better than what Allen posted) would have made this offense sooooooo much better. Talk about nonsensical.

its always best to use a very small sample size when forming arguments. 

Just now, Freddie's Dead said:

Maybe.  But consider the fan revolt if we paid that guy $16M and he continued to put up 150 yd. passing games.  No thanks.  I'm good with where we are.

nobody should be good with where we are. I'm cool with what I think we might be.... but not where we are. 

 

and theres an argument to be made that there are other ways to get to a good spot.

[billsfan1959]

Just now, Stank_Nasty said:

its always best to use a very small sample size when forming arguments. 

Apparently a small sample size is good enough to judge Allen, so, there's that.....

[Stank_Nasty]

Just now, billsfan1959 said:

Apparently a small sample size is good enough to judge Allen, so, there's that.....

well not for me. earlier on the page I stated i'm annoyed with that posters thoughts on allen but his points in this thread and topic are fairly accurate.

[Teddy KGB]

10 minutes ago, Stank_Nasty said:

you should just post a link to the saints or jags boxscores.

 

 

 

Or pats, Bengals, panthers.   

 

Its why I used the whole year.    You have a beef with facts ? 

[Stank_Nasty]

Just now, Teddy KGB said:

 

Or pats, Bengals, panthers.   

 

Its why I used the whole year.    You have a beef with facts ? 

it would be as dumb as somebody picking out the good games he had and basing their whole stance off of it. 

 

but by all means.  you do you.

[John from Riverside]

I was  a Tyrod fan and I say no not a playoff team

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

We would OBVIOUSLY be a playoff team with Tyrod.  

 

I cannot even fathom how anyone would think otherwise.  We have the number 1 defense in the league.  We are losing because of turnovers, the one thing TT consistently did not do.