Thurman#1

Yeah, tank's a stupid word for it. It implies the wrong things. It's a full rebuild that people are actually referring to. Players and coaches don't tank. They can't. It's diametrically opposed to their best interests. Fighting your way through a rebuild, though, can be something that can help your career in the long term. Seems plain at this point that they aren't doing a full rebuild. But they look like they're rebuilding in some areas where it makes sense, like getting the salary cap in order, switching systems, which is a process that usually sets you back for a year or so and often means some personnel who fit the last system don't fit the new one. And so on. So yeah, seems like a partial rebuild is in the cards.

First, there's plenty of evidence. It might be evidence you're not willing to accept, but it's been reported again and again from different reporters with different sources that this has been going on with Whaley. His behaviour has shown it as well, on many occasions. Second, you're misreading the story. It didn't say that they want to cut him. It says they don't want to pay him. People want to avoid, deny, ignore and take every other way people pretend things they don't like don't even exist that the contract isn't a huge part of this. But it is. He will impact the Bills at a franchise QB level if they pick up the option and he stays the length of time he's most likely to stay, two years or so. They don't want to pay that contract. The story doesn't say they wouldn't keep him if a re-negotiation makes it more reasonable to keep him. But doesn't rule it out either.

I don't like what's said. Therefore it's the media's fault. Again, yeah, it's the media. I'm sure the approach of the decline on the Tyrod decision has nothing to do with it.

Ouch.

If you can get Tyrod to re-negotiate - and not just change the cap numbers but actually lessen the front-loaded nature of the contract and/or lessen the guarantees - then it's a reasonable path. If he won't do that, one year for $30.5 million or two years for $40.5 million simply, all of it guaranteed if he's on the roster in March of each of the two years, .... absolutely is too much money for a bridge quarterback. Most particularly so on a team in serious cap trouble due to GM cap over-spending.

Agreed. And your emphasis is in the right place. Down the road a year or three ... exactly. When we might possibly be good enough if things go well to start challenging for a title. And I agree Tyrod isn't it.

You're right that the cap number isn't bad this year. But cap number this year is simply not the problem. The very high guarantee is the problem, that and the front-loaded nature of the contract. From what we've seen from each side, I'd guess the negotiations, at least unless somebody eventually backs down, go like this: OBD: Look, the cap numbers aren't the problem. The problem is the front-loaded nature of the contract and the guarantee ... if we keep him for one year it would cost us $30.75 mill and if we keep him for two it would cost us $40.5 mill and those numbers just don't work for us. Tyrod's negotiator: We'd be willing to change things so the cap numbers go down for you. OBD: Um, I said the cap numbers are NOT the problem, the problem is the front-loaded deal. Tyrod's negotiator: I hear you. We are totally willing to work with you on making the cap numbers more reasonable for you. What we're not willing to do i accept less up front. OBD: So you aren't willing to address our concerns. Again, we don't care about the cap numbers. Tyrod's negotiator: Yeah, we're completely willing to be fluid on those cap numbers. OBD: Uhhhhhhhhhhh.

That isn't the question. It is one of several questions. Plural. One of the other main questions is whether it makes sense to pay Tyrod Taylor the amount he will receive based on his contract as it is now written. Another would be whether Tyrod's group is willing to work on changing the parts of the contract that the Bills actually have problems with. So far they haven't, and there's been no grounds for agreement from what we've heard. Perhaps one side will make some concessions as deadlines near.

Put them in a pretty good spot to be good, maybe even really good, over the next couple of years..

Cutting Taylor and signing some journeyman QB who can win us five games while saving us maybe $25 - $30 million bucks would make a lot more sense than keeping Tyrod, spending the extra $25 - $30 mill and winning seven or eight. Five games would have us drafting around third or fourth.

First, it's simply not true that he's moderately priced. He's a bridge QB who if he stays for five years will have these five QBs as the closest to him in terms of average yearly salary: Tom Brady, Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Phillip Rivers and Eli Manning. Those are the only five QBs who would be within a million dollars per year of Tyrod's two-year average. He's guaranteed $40.5 mill if he stays for two years, so that's $20.25 mill per year, and only those five QBs are within a million of that. And the reason our offense scored a lot was our run game. The pass game was below average. Our TDs last year looked like this: 3 defensive TDs, 17 passing TDs and 29 running TDs, in a league where not a single other team scored more running TDs than passing TDs.

Agreed, the analysts do indeed have the luxury of talking about moving on from TT without providing a viable alternative. And the Bills have the luxury of actually moving on without a bridge who if they pick up his contract would be paid like a top 10 or 12 guy. Two years is his most likely length of stay and if that's indeed how long he stays, he would cost the Bills $40.5 mill, $2.25 mill, the most expensive bridge QB in NFL history by a factor of about three. It's the first year for the new coach, we've got the luxury of a year or so a the very least to get things in place and get out of salary cap hell. If the best car in your town is a '97 Jetta priced like a '15 Porsche, you might be better served by going to the third or fourth-best car in your town, a car that's reasonably priced. If Tyrod is willing to make himself affordable, I'd be all for keeping him as a bridge guy.

Did I say that his word was God? Didn't I in fact say that people can disagree? But no, that's not a thin line at all between good enough to make the playoffs and good enough to win the Super Bowl.. Extremely few QBs outside the top 10 to 12 ever win Super Bowls, and the exceptions were almost without exceptions paired with defenses that were not just good but historically spectacular. Make the playoffs and you are either for real or a fodder team. There are three or four fodder teams in the playoffs every year, and that's what we would be. As for Polian saying that there's nobody in FA or the draft as good as Tyrod, I don't know if Cosell would disagree. Beside the point, though. Cosell is saying that outside Buffalo there really isn't much disagreement about what Tyrod is, a QB who's fun to watch and a terrific runner but not a good passer. The specifics are at the link but that's the main idea.

People are stupid if they don't notice that in the years since those "outdated payouts of other QBs" nobody has been put above the numbers Tyrod would collect as his average salary for two years of work except these 13 guys: Andrew Luck Carson Palmer Drew Brees Kirk Cousins Joe Flacco Aaron Rodgers Russell Wilson Ben Roethlisberger Eli Manning Philip Rivers Cam Newton Matt Ryan Tom Brady That's it. Those are the only guys who make more than Tyrod would make per year if he stays for two years as seems the most likely scenario if they keep him. He is a lot of money. And again, he's Tyrod Taylor. It isn't $15 mill per year. If he stays five years, the whole contract, it's $18 mill per year. If he stays two years, it's $20.5 mill per year.

No, it's you who's being sneaky. Pretty much nobody actually expects Tyrod to stay here for five years. Best bet is two. And if he stays for two, he'd be making $40.5 million - a guarantee that he is apparently unwilling to give up - for those two years. Which again is not the 20th best. Instead it puts him at $20.25 mill per year. And at that rate, the five closest QBs are Brady, Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Philip Rivers and Eli Manning. He does not belong with that group in any form or fashion. Arguing that paying Glennon like RGIII or Chase Daniel somehow would support the idea of paying Tyrod like Brady, Ryan, Newton, Rivers or Eli Manning simply doesn't make sense.

A solid running game? Seriously? And you're asking if he actually even watched Denver play? They ran for 3.6 yards per carry. If that's solid, I'd hate to see your idea of bad. It was much the opposite of the situation with Tyrod. Denver's opponents didn't have to worry about the run game so they spent their efforts trying to figure out ways to attack the pass game. Whereas Buffalo's opponents didn't have to worry about their pass game, just tried to "make him be a QB," and did their best to stop the run game, with little success. What they would have to give in trade for the second-year Siemian would not reasonably allow them to keep him as a #2. I don't see them actually getting Siemian, but I'd like it if they did. He's not near his ceiling.

Well, first, he didn't say the replacement isn't in this draft. He said he wouldn't draft anyone at #10. That doesn't mean he's saying that after #10 you can't get a franchise guy, as proven by Russell Wilson, Carr, etc. Second, he thinks they might use the year to look at Cardale, who he also has real doubts about. Essentially, what he seems to be saying is that Tyrod is a bridge QB and that we've seen his ceiling. And that a guy at that level isn't worth spending $30.75 mill guaranteed if you only keep him for one year, and $40.5 mill if you only keep him for two. Wow, you're stretching that beyond all reasonable bounds. That article is from a year and a half before they drafted Winston, November 2013, when Glennon was having a really good first few weeks of his rookie year.. Everyone was impressed at that time. He certainly wasn't telling the Bucs not to draft Winston. More, it's a quote from Cosell taken out of context. You can't tell what he said in the rest of the radio interview. Cosell has made mistakes, as has every single evaluator of QBs in the history of the world, but he isn't saying anything like what you're implying he was. BullBuchanan, that's not true.. Finance figures into it. It just does. Through the years plenty of potential bridge QBs have gotten cut when it would've cost too much to keep them even if they were the best QB on the team. You only have to go back to the Bills cutting Fitz. He was the best QB on the team, but he was asking for too much money. They made the right move dumping him. He might have won a game or two more that year but he wasn't the long-term answer, he wasn't taking them to the Super Bowl and he wanted too much money. Same situation here.

You don't have to agree, but Cosell is a highly respected guy, a tape study maniac.

It would make sense. If the price is right. He's young and still developing. For those saying they'd rather have Siemian, IMHO the relevant response is that Tyrod just finished his sixth year in the league and has 29 starts, while Siemian just finished his second year and his 14th game, and had three fourth-quarter comebacks and two game-winning drives in those 14 games. If Siemian is at his ceiling, I'd agree that - money aside - Tyrod would be a better choice. But there's no reason to think Siemian is at his ceiling. It's early days for him.

Feel like I just stepped out of a cold shower, had a rubdown, a margarita and a chat with a stunningly beautiful Nobel Prize winner.

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/sports/football/nfl/bills/2017/03/02/qb-guru-greg-cosell-thinks-bills-should-move-on-from-tyrod-taylor/98640594/ Excerpts: "While it might seem like Bills quarterback Tyrod Taylor is currently one of the most polarizing players in the NFL — is he good, or isn’t he? — Greg Cosell thinks the exact opposite. “'I think people in the league are not polarized at all,' said Cosell, an analyst and senior producer at NFL Films who is widely considered to be one of the foremost evaluators of quarterbacks anywhere. "So, what does that mean? Simply put, Cosell thinks anyone who has watched tape — and Cosell spends dozens of hours every week doing just that — knows that Taylor is a fun guy to watch, but he’s limited in many areas and at this point is probably who he’s always going to be." ... and ... “'Taylor doesn’t throw with the anticipation that you need on a consistent basis,' Cosell continued. 'He’s relatively erratic with his accuracy, and his arm is slightly above average but not more. I think he’s a quarterback you can start in the league, but I think people know who Tyrod Taylor is. The larger question is, do you believe he can be your starting quarterback for a lengthy period of time?'” ... and ... “'If I’m the Buffalo Bills I probably move on because he’s the kind of quarterback that you can line up and more than likely, unless you’re dominant in other areas on your team, you’ll tread water with him,” he said. “You’ll line him up, he’ll play some good games, he’ll struggle in some games, and three years down the road you’ll be having the exact same conversation we’re having right now.' "Anthony Lynn, who was the Bills’ offensive coordinator for the last 14 games of 2016 and is now the head coach of the Chargers, was asked Thursday about whether he thinks Taylor can be a franchise quarterback “'I don’t have the answer to that,' said Lynn, which wasn’t exactly a ringing endorsement. 'I think he’s definitely a starting quarterback in this league, and he won a few games with the Bills that we could not have won without him. And, working with him 1-on-1, I understand his upside maybe better than others. I think the sky’s the limit for Tyrod Taylor. He’s a very smart, hard-working professional.” Again, Lynn didn't exactly identify what that sky was, and as Cosell said, many people around the NFL believe Taylor is already at his zenith." ... and ... "If the Bills do cut Taylor, Cosell said they shouldn’t spend the No. 10 overall pick in the draft on anyone in this crop of quarterback candidates."

I'd have to guess this is it. But this will have a major spillover effect on the rest of buffalobills.com Why go there now? I used to go regularly, now I can't imagine going there except once in a great while to hear Murph. I disagree. The mods there had their moments, but overall they did a great job. The outright insult kings were gone very quickly. I loved that about that site.

It's also that Tyrod is a lot of money. For Tyrod. Lemme repeat that if Tyrod stayed with us on this contract, for two years, he'd be paid $40.5 mill. And the four closest QBs to that average salary are Brady, Ryan, Newton, Rivers and Eli. Looks like McDermott wants to try to win immediately. Since that's true, Tyrod gives him the best chance to do so. But has absolutely not showed signs of being in the Brady-Ryan-Newton-Rivers-Eli neighborhood. Paying Glennon like Chase Daniel and Griffin III makes a ton more sense than paying Tyrod like Brady, Ryan, Newton, Rivers and Eli

The information we have from that story tells little or nothing about how Tyrod's contract should be looked at. Let's say the report is correct at $7 mill per year. How much is guaranteed. Is it front-loaded or back-loaded. If they cut him after a year, will they have to pay him $4 mill, $7 mill or $15 mill? We don't know. All we know is that we don't know. But let's be imaginative and say it would be $7 mill if he were cut after a year, and $14 mill after two years. Does it somehow indicate that Tyrod, roughly the 20th best QB in the league, a bridge QB, should be paid $20 mill per year for two years (we can be very clear that the problem with Tyrod's contract is the guarantee and the fact that the contract is so front-loaded) that Glennon Last year Glennon's stats were insane, passer rating in the 120s, because he only threw 11 passes. But you sure can't say anything negative about how he performed. The last time before that that he has stats was 2014, when he had the 30th best passer rating in the league. The year before, his rookie year, he was 24th. Glennon is one of the guys you think about when you think about bridge QBs. He's certainly not as good of a bridge QB as Tyrod, but he's a guy who is a bridge/backup, not a pure backup. So paying a bridge guy like Tyrod like a franchise QB - $20.25 mill a year for two years - is certainly not justified by paying a bridge/backup guy like the one of the highest bridge/backup guy around. He's getting a bit less than Griffin III got per year. Putting it in more perspective, if Tyrod stayed two years here, the amount he'd be paid is closer to Tom Brady's yearly salary than anyone else's. Brady at #12 gets $20.5 mill, and Tyrod would be just behind that and a million ahead of the next guy. He'd also be within a million dollars per year of the next four guys ahead of Brady, Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Philip Rivers and Eli Manning. Whereas if Glennon were paid $7 mill per year, he would be tied with Chase Daniel and just behind RGIII at $7.5 mill per year. I'm sorry, but that just is not that unreasonable. It's above Griffin that the huge leap upwards occurs, from Griffin at $7.5 mill to Dalton at $16 mill. Particularly when we don't know how Glennon's contract offer is structured, this says absoluely nothing about how reasonable it would be to pay Tyrod money that's close to Brady, Ryan, Newton, Rivers and Eli Manning if he stays with us for two years.

As I say, if you want to talk about the Halls' rules, fine, start another thread about it. It may be a legit concern, but it doesn't connect to what Polian said. Polian said he didn't belong in the HOF, and he doubtless means based on how people do or don't belong. As things stand. Fine. Start a thread about it. But of course you can pick and choose. Everybody does, in every decision they make. It's just what gets included and excluded. There have to be guidelines, even if the guidelines are that everything should be considered. Your objections don't seem crazy to me at all, they just seem irrelevant to what Polian said.