Thurman#1

Disagree. Sometimes you cut your best guy. It's not ideal, but sometimes you do it based on other factors such as salary cap impact, a belief that a guy has no long-term future with the team, a belief that a guy doesn't fit the system they're trying to implement ... on and on and on. Plenty of reason to cut the best guy if he's not really all that good anyway. Quick example: Jim Harbaugh put up a QB Rating of 86.2 in 1997. The Colts dumped him, drafted and played Peyton Manning, who responded with a QB Rating of 71.2 his first year. Still, dumping the better (at that time) Harbaugh was the move to make. Not to say they'll absolutely let Tyrod go, but it seems the most likely course. He'll absolutely be wanted. The question will be for what and how much they'll pay. He's instantly one of the best backups in the league, but probably some desperate team will give him money to start, though less than some people here think. If so, we'll see the same thing that happened here play out in another city, IMHO.

This is pretty much completely impenetrable. Seriously, not understandable. I did get a few things, though. First, I didn't put in that the figures from the article were a week or two old. Fair enough. My mistake. Second, I keep saying that he's better ranked at shorter range on third downs, and you keep saying, "No, look at the Washington Post things," and when you look they show exactly that he's better ranked at short and medium than he is at long ones. Third, you're admitting that Tyrod's 24th in Alex and apparently this thrills you. You're like "Yeeeeeeeehaw, my guy's #24 in the league at throwing as far as the sticks on third down. #24 of 32!!! Yeah, baby!!" You do know that 24th sucks, right? The guy's ALEX plummeted from his first year to his second year in Buffalo, and plunged again from his second to this year. And again, that doesn't seem like a surprise when you look at what happened on drive-ending third downs in the KC game. Four were on called runs, and seven were on called passes. On the seven called passes, there were three incompletions, an eleven yard sack on a 3rd-and-one, and three completed passes that didn't make first downs. That includes a 3rd-and-nine completed for seven yards and a 3rd-and-four completed for three yards.

Yeah, it was a pretty good game by Tyrod in KC, as long as you don't mind an almost total lack of explosiveness and long throws. Which is exactly the point you've been trying to dispute here. 6.31 yards per attempt. That's a Pop Warner number. But it's OK by you. A passer averaging 6.31 would be 32nd in the league this year. But it was a pretty good game by him. Thank goodness the defense played spectacular.

No, but one of those drive-ending runs came on 3rd and 11 with two minutes left in the game. We just wanted to make KC spend their last time-out so we tried a QB draw and Tyrod was caught for -1 yards. We were just burning clock. And I looked at your math, 4 out of 12 drives ended because of a called run, and I thought, jeez, doesn't that mean some ended on a called pass, too? I'm no Blaise Pascal, but I coulda sworn it did. After a few hours on the computer checking this assumption, I found I was right. So yeah, it didn't help that 4 out of 12 of our drives ended because of a called run. Nor did it help that after you remove the TD and the four runs you referred to above, the other 7 drives ended in called passes. Three incompletions, an eleven yard sack on a 3rd-and-one, and three completed passes that didn't make first downs. That includes a 3rd-and-nine completed for seven yards and a 3rd-and-four completed for three yards. Glad we did so much better on those called passes. Oh ... wait.

Yup. Last couple of years we heard all about how awful Roman was and how he was holding Tyrod back. Now under Dennison they're saying, "See, Rico is killing the offense. Look at how awful the running game is now. It's just like Dak Prescott. Prescott is good with Elliott, and terrible without. See? Same with Tyrod. If only he had a real running game, no telling how good he would look. And Tyrod keeps producing at nearly the exact same rates.

. Stafford and Eli would throw on time, unlike Tyrod. Not that the o-line is very good, but part of the reason they are having problems is that on plenty of plays Tyrod holds it too long. This is exactly one of Tyrod's main problems.

Seriously? I'm wrong? You don't have a clue (you got that right, actually) about where I'm geting my information from? That's pretty sad, Transplant. Typical, but sad. Why? Why do you not know where I got that? Seriously, why? Here's what you said about the place where I found that. You said, "This is a really nice find, Hap." A page or two back. In this thread. It's in the article about ALEX that Happy Days posted and you replied to and repeated the link. I shouldn't be surprised. That's your typical method, isn't it? Find something. Look for the part that might be used to cast a good light on Tyrod. And then ignore or forget the rest. I shouldn't be surprised, So I got all of them right. Again, the short ones are the ones he's converting. 10th in the league when they're 1 or 2 yards, 14th when they're 3 or 4 yards and 17th when longer. The longer they are the further down the list he slips in percentage of success. And again, from the same article, 29th out of 38 QBs this year in terms of ALEX. Only 11 guys averaged throwing less than as far as the sticks on third down. Tyrod was one of these 11.

Matt Waldman interesting film breakdown on Mayfield: https://mattwaldmanrsp.com/2017/11/21/matt-waldmans-rsp-boiler-room-no-118-qb-baker-mayfield-coverage-reads-and-footwork/ Yeah, sure wish we were those tolerant fans that love two-INT games. And as for somebody getting open way after the QB looked his way, nobody minds that. Unless the QB is scrambling and has time to look again and still doesn't see him. Bottom line ... of course people are going to be frustrated sometimes, at whoever is here. But guys in their first and second years get a lot more leeway than guys in their seventh year, which is as it should be. But as long as the as yet unknown new guys is able to become a franchise QB down the line, fans will be plenty happy. Haven't had one since Kelly, so it's pretty reasonable that we're pissed off.

The short ones are the ones he's converting. 10th in the league when they're 1 or 2 yards, 14th when they're 3 or 4 yards and 17th when longer.

Agreed.

You're spinning a bit here, Happy. Tyrod doesn't just rank "below average (16th)" this year. He's 29th. That's well past "below average" into poor. 27 of the 38 QBs who qualify have an average length of throw of at least to the sticks. Only 11 of the 38 average below the length required for a first down. Tyrod is one of those eleven. This problem of throwing short so very often even in situations where it didn't make sense hasn't been traditionally identified as a problem for Tyrod. It's really only started to be mentioned as a problem this year. The ALEX data you linked to here shows why. In Tyrod's first year in Buffalo he was rated really high in ALEX, 2nd in the NFL, averaging a throw +4.5 yards beyond the sticks. That dropped last year to +2.3 which is still really excellent. This year people have been talking about how he has so often thrown short of the sticks on third down and the data backs it up. He's 29th in the league at -0.1. So yeah, if you average those three years together he comes off pretty well, but that's not how he's playing now. Why? Dunno is really the only answer. Could be he's less aggressive this year. Could be the playbook encourages it. Could be nobody is open enough for him to let it loose downfield. We can't know for sure. The article points out he's throwing a lot to McCoy on these plays, the safety valve, but why? In any case, it's now obvious that the people who've been saying that he'd been throwing short were correct.

Wait, you mean that when we're ahead, that the Bills - a team widely known to have intended to feature the run game - ran a lot to burn clock? And won the game? Holy smokes, this is clearly an anti-Tyrod conspiracy and bad play-calling.

Again, Peterman's season high as a collegian was 193 throws. Tyrod never threw that many. Peterman's second-highest total, 185, was higher than all but one of Tyrod's college seasons. So if it's true that we should mark Peterman down as an impossible chance, clearly Tyrod had the exact same Your desperation to do the impossible - proving that when a guy has thrown less than 30 NFL balls, all of them as a rookie, that you can know his future and what he will become - is palpable and is leading you to make poor observations. Tyrod threw 495 passes in his four years of college. Peterman threw 398. They are extremely comparable. But Tyrod's second-highest number of throws was 136. Peterman college attempts over four seasons: 10, 10, 193, 185 Tyrod college attempts over four seasons: 72, 99, 136, 188

If you can say that Peterman's coach barely let him throw the ball, the same is even more true of Tyrod. Peterman's college high of attempts in a season is higher than any of Tyrod's college years. Peterman's career was about as impressive to the NFL as Tyrod's. That's why Tyrod was chosen in the 6th round and Peterman in the 5th. As for early performance, in Tyrod's first four NFL years, he went 19 for 35 for 199 yards, 0 TDs and 2 INTs. Passer rating of 47.2. Peterman has gone 13 for 28 for 145 yards, 1 TD and 5 INTs and a passer rating of 34.6. Both of those are wretched. Worth noting that Tyrod in his first year threw one NFL pass. He had more time to think and get used to defenses and the NFL game. Also worth remembering that 3 of those 5 Peterman INTs came as a result of a WR serving up a tip on a pretty good pass and twice being hit as he threw. No excuse for the other two, though. Bottom line is that both guys were pretty awful early. Wanna insult Peterman for that? You ought to look at Tyrod's results and insult him as well.

So ... one sentence? All opinion, without bothering with any of that inconvenient evidence, logic or separating Tyrod's situation from the situations of guys like ? Got it. That writer would fit in well here. I like Tanier overall, but assuming that the situation is making Goff and Wentz is ignoring the obvious, that plenty of young QBs suck big-time in their first year and improve a great deal in their second as they begin to understand what goes on around them. Same thing for many young QBs he's talking about here ... the second year is often a time when there is huge improvement, but the third and fourth years often see lights coming on for guys who will make it as franchise guys in the NFL. Of course the surrounding players and systems will affect QB performance. It goes without saying. But the best QBs still show advanced skillsets and abilities even in poorer situations. Their overall numbers can fall and they might not look as good, but they still show advanced abilities. Same with guys who don't have the talents. Put a Trent Dilfer in one of the best situations in NFL history and he still looks like a guy who will never be a franchise QB, which is why the Ravens dumped him in the offseason in the year after the SB, an unheard of move for a QB on a team that won the SB. If the system defines the QB, how come Osweiler's not one of the best in the league? He had a great situation in Texas. Tom Savage must be terrific!!!!! After all, he's in the same situation that DeShaun Watson looked great in. Savage must be excellent because he's in a good situation. Tyrod's situation has been different year to year. Problem is, he's still Tyrod. He is what he is.

Yes, Cousins is a large part of that. He plays QB very very well. That's the part that he plays. And that's a good thing, a very good thing indeed. 66% completions with a freaking 8.1 YPA. That's terrific. 19 TDs and 6 INTs. A QB Rating of 101.1. PPG is simply not a good way to rate QBs. Teams with maybe 70 - 80% a reflection of the offense, yes. QBs, no. Their run game is awful, averaging 3.9 YPC. That's not on Cousins. Their pass game DVOA is 27% better than the average and the rush game is 13% worse. So when the offense comes out only 5% better, it isn't rocket science to know that is not on Cousins. Teams scheme to stop Cousins. They scheme to make Tyrod play quarterback. That's the difference. And again, winning is simply NOT a QB stat. It just isn't. It's a team stat. Until you get that, you're missing the point. Even the name of that stat is actually "TEAM record in games started by this QB (Regular Season)."

Incorrect. His team has a below .500 record when he starts, meaning his team does not win games.

Cousins. Then Bridgewater.

Really? Not the Steelers? 9-2 and one of those losses to Jax and they don' t get credit for consistency? Not the Rams with three losses, one to Minny and one to Seattle? Not the Vikes, with only two losses, one to the Steelers and they're not consistent? Not the Panthers? The Panthers did lose two in a row, but one of those losses was to Philly. Granted not a ton of teams count, but those seven do, IMHO.

Um, no. They're saying yeah, everybody makes mistakes. But saying that since everyone makes one here or there, however many Tyrod makes are OK is ridiculous. Yes, every QB makes mistakes. Tyrod just makes them at a considerably higher rate. I do understand being a bit irritated with the OP's contention that one throw makes his argument. No one throw could. It's the rate they happen at. With Tyrod it's higher and especially when you look at the throws he didn't make but should have. It's a shame he's not better, but he's Tyrod. Pulling him shows what they think of him and undoubtedly pissed Tyrod off plenty as well.

Great? Really? Looked nice to me, but if anything he could've thrown it a step or two earlier and made it a ton easier. Zay looks like he's going to get open, but he was going to be open from the minute he crossed the hashes. He has three steps on his guy and nobody else is headed in the right direction to cover him. He's going to be open and Tyrod sees it early, even skips a step to wait, which IMHO he shouldn't have done. Solid play, right on target, but great is really an exaggeration. Tyrod has some great plays sometimes. This isn't one. Though it certainly is a solid good play.

The Colts didn't tank. They suffered a key injury, an injury of the single guy their entire offense - their entire team, really - was built around. The problem was that when they drafted Luck, they didn't rebuild. That was their huge mistake. They said, "We're going to build and at the same time, we're going to win." And they kept good but aging and expensive guys like Reggie Wayne, Robert Mathis and Freeney. And because of that they were able to be good enough to make the playoffs every year but not to be nearly good enough to win a title, and yet they also had crappy draft spots. They middled it, trying to both win and rebuild. And it didn't work. They won but they didn't rebuild. Should've sucked for a year or two and brought in some young impact players. Fourteen is an exaggeration, but so is two, just exaggerating the other way. The argument we hear is that every QB has plays like that. And that's true. But Tyrod has more than the better ones. It's his particular problem.

This is another person that just doesn't get it. 20-18 and we're supposed to be thrilled about it, according to him? And it's Tyrod that keeps us in the wild-card picture, not the whole team doing it? It's not the slightest bit puzzling. This. I agree Tyrod seems to be a good leader, a hard worker and a good guy. But so was Fitz. Give me a guy who can make quick correct decisions and go through a lot of reads. The problem with Cutler isn't that his teammates don't like him, it's that too often he makes bad throws.

Man, do I agree with you here. I always thought the NFL was being petty but these guys look like idiots with the choreographed and yet incredibly weak celebrations. Awful.