Thurman#1

I can see how people might be "tired of the 'get rid of TT for $ and start some other middling QB'" argument. Doesn't mean it's not an excellent argument, though. Saving money in a year when you don't think we've got a chance in hell of competing for a championship makes a ton of sense. Yeah, Tyrod Taylor and Nick Foles aren't taking us to an SB most likely. They'd be bridges. And with bridges, money is important. Gotta disagree about Alex Smith, though. Smith has shown the ability to occasionally lift himself above his usual level of play as a game manager. Remember that playoff game against Indy in 2014? As for bringing in the youth movement, I'd be all for it. But some kinds of youth movement might also require a bridge QB. You must've loved being a Bills fan the last 16 or so years. Except for the year they shipped Bledsoe out to give Losman his shot. All the rest of those years they played the QB who gave 'em the best chance of winning now. The problem with it is that unless you hit the right QB you're headed for a lot of 7-9 type of seasons, and that doesn't give you a shot at the best QBs in the draft the next year. But we sure did work hard on building a culture of winning by winning as many as we possibly could each year.

No. It's not illogical at all. "Bridge players are worthless, they are just good enough to get you 5-7 wins and keep you out of a top 5 pick," you say. Fair enough, except for the worthless part. But yeah, that's the value of a bridge guy is spanning the time between now and when the guy you really want to be your QB is available. Sometimes putting a QB in the lineup will hurt his long-term chances, and that appears to be the case with Cardale. He needs another year before it would be a smart idea to put him in (if he is ever ready, a legit argument). Same with several of the guys in this year's draft ... they appear to need time. So if you want your offense to have a legitimate chance to practice their pass plays from the new system and have a useful season in their development, a bridge guy is needed. IMHO that doesn't mean there's an absolute necessity to bring in an expensive bridge guy. A Hoyer or a Sanchez would be much cheaper and still meet the terms of being a bridge guy. You don't want one? Fair enough.

Well, we'll see what'll happen in the future with Tyrod. I doubt it, but you could certainly be right. But you're talking about Kaepernick's second and third years, not his first and second. I'll agree with you that he got a bit worse in his third year. And you can refuse to say it's Tyrod's sixth year if you want, but that doesn't make it less true. It really is his sixth year. And yeah, he wasn't starting. But if he'd consistently outplayed Flacco for those four years, sooner or later he would've started. And that's not what happened. During those four years he should've been soaking up info on how to succeed as an NFL QB. How to attack and understand defenses, how to watch film, how to think about route complexes, and on and on. Which I absolutely assume he was doing. Tyrod has always been a hard worker and a bright guy. It just isn't fair to compare him going into his fifth year to rookies, even if it was his first year as a starter.

The Julio Jones deal did indeed seem to kill the Falcons for two or three years. They had a ton of holes they couldn't fill with draft picks. It hurt them a lot. Might they have made the Super Bowl with Torrey Smith or Randall Cobb - both available later in Julio's draft, and all those draft picks? It's not clear but it's certainly possible. Certainly if the Falcons win a title, it will put the argument to rest. Winning a title validates everything. It's arguable this year showed the trade was a success, though I'm not 100% convinced. At least the Julio Jones draft wasn't considered even before the draft as one of the strongest draft for WRs in history.

Coaches and schemes brought in under his watch. And at least so far I'd agree with you on the overall good job he's done with FAs but I would say his drafting has been below average, though trading away a first round pick surely hurt him, but it was he himself who made that trade. Last year, of the last two years' first and second round picks, Ryan was playing with one 2nd rounder and no firsts. That helps to understand why things didn't go all that well.

I think he's come down on every side of it. Which may be fair. Maybe the Bills are changing their minds. Or maybe he's hearing new things from Tyrod's agent about willingness to re-negotiate. Hard to know. Unless he said Hunh? Right now he's guaranteed $30.5 mill in the first one year and $40.5 mill in the first two years. And you're saying that the numbers you have there are moving money into the 1st two years of the deal? That's moving money out of the first two years, isn't it? If I understand you correctly, anyway.

. It has indeed been pointed out that Tyrod's contract numbers are not that high. Wrongly. $40.5 mill - guaranteed - for two years on the roster .... is extremely high for Tyrod. Which is probably a lot of the reason he seems to be a bad bet to return. Disagree? Feel free to talk about it in some thread you won't be hijacking. And yes, our cap space is terrible. Not getting that is missing the point. 25th in the league. For a 7-9 team. If we'd been competitive, this would have been somewhat understandable. As it is, it's rotten planning. And we've got only $26 mill available with only 45 players signed, about 13 of whom are purely camp bodies like Logan Thomas, Cedric O'Neal, Charles Gaines, Joe powell, Max Valles, Josh Woodrum, Gerald Christian and Colt Anderson who will need to be replaced by more expensive guys who can play at an NFL level. We're in awful shape in terms of cap room and that's even if we don't sign guys like Gilmore, Corbin Bryant, Jordan Mills, Zach Brown, Robert Woods, Ihedigbo, Lorenzo Alexander, Douzable, Blanton, Cory White, Spikes, Gragg, Marquise Goodwin, Justin Hunter and Brandon Tate. And of course we will give offers to some of those guys, and down will go the available cap number. Oh, and as for no RTs in the first two rounds, that's nonsense. Ryan Ramczyk says hello and he could easily end up an RT. And I didn't say the first two rounds, I said "somewhat high." And character is what keeps you from getting a 15 yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty when your team is behind by two and driving at your opponent's 30 yard line when somebody punches you and the official doesn't see him do it. It's also what keeps you from getting long suspensions for marijuana on your blood tests, keeps you out of jail and in the lineup and gets you to meetings on time. If you want unaccountable slimeballs on your squad, fine. I don't. Nor did Bill Walsh and plenty of other great coaches. And while I'm answering you, I'm only doing it because you answered me. This thread asks for your prescription. Go ahead and give yours, and feel free to leave mine out.

Russell Wilson didn't regress in his second year. From 64.1 to 63.1% in completions percentage, an improvement in Y/A. From 26 TDs and 10 INTs to 26 TDs and 9 INTs. A miniscule improvement in passer rating. A slight improvement in yards per run ... Wilson had another very good year. And again, this wasn't Tyrod's 2nd year he was regressing in. It was his sixth year. Kaepernick didn't regress in his second year. Randall Cunningham got better, Yes, every QB misses throws. And if you hear anyone saying bad things about Tyrod because he isn't perfect, you'll have a point there. But being imperfect isn't the problem. It's being inaccurate too much of the time. I'd still take him as a bridge QB if his salary allowed that. But my guess is he's gone because of that, and that he'll be backup two or three years from now. Did you see Andy Dalton's play in 2015 when they had a functional OL? He's no game manager. The guy had a QB rating of 106. When they fix the OL there, he's going to show people and probably win a title or two during his career. That's like saying what's the downside of taking arsenic other than health risks? Not that Tyrod is arsenic at all - he's not - but the financial commitment they would be forced to make for him is huge for a QB of his ability, and we're a team with serious cap problems.

It isn't Trubisky's record. It is his team's record. Because at two years for $40.5 mill guaranteed, Tyrod would be the most expensive bridge QB in the history of the NFL and by a huge margin. If you keep Tyrod, it should be because you believe in him as a potential franchise QB. If he stays here for five years and becomes a franchise QB, he will be a great bargain at $18 mill per year. I don't see that happening, but it's not beyond the realm of possibility. But if he is only a bridge QB for two years, $20 mill per year is outrageous and you'll be hurting the chances of the future team's overall success by spending that money. If you want a bridge QB, bring in a cheap one. Doesn't matter if he isn't as good, as a few extra losses the next couple of years would only help us draft better anyway. And it should ideally be a guy who could then act as a mentor / 2nd QB coach for the young draftee, a guy in his thirties who's done bridge jobs before.

Smith 426 for 653, for 4881, 30 TDs, 10 INTs, 68 sacks, 6 4th Quarter Comebacks, 6 Game-Winning Drives, 311 rush yards on 73 rushes, - - Qualitatively: 65.2% Completions, 7.47 YPA, 4.59% TDs, 1.53% INTs, 96.53 QB rating Tyrod 511 for 816 for 6058, 37 TDs, 12 INTs, 78 sacks, 2 4th-Quarter Comebacks, 3 Game-Winning Drives, 1148 rush yards on 199 rushes. - - Qualitatively: 62.6% Completions, 7.42 YPA, 4.53% TDs, 1.47% INTs, 94.19 QB rating So overall, Smith was a better passer and improved in his second year, while Tyrod was a much better runner but regressed in passing in his second year. And you're comparing stats from 2011 and 2012 to stats from 2015 and 2016, and it's become easier to pass, so passing stats got higher during that period.

Agreed. And especially since he's $10 mill cheaper than Tyrod over two years. But he's better anyway. However, I keep drafting QBs also. Smith was bad for five seasons, not six. And he had had five different OCs and five different systems in each of those five years. He switched systems again before his sixth year and still had a breakout season under Harbaugh / Roman. Whereas Tyrod has only been in two offensive systems and yet he regressed last year.

... understand that we're not going to win many games, and use the year to develop for the future. - trade back and acquire extra draft picks - start making free agent decisions with acquiring comp picks in mind - give up on Tyrod and save the money - let most of our expensive FAs go. I usually hate this, but our terrible cap status dictates getting back in good cap shape as one of our one or two highest priorities - draft an RT somewhat high - draft for character and talent both

They're looking at each player with an expiring contract. And offering an opinion on what should be done with each. And they reached Reggie Bush. Spent an extremely short time on him and came up with the decision that it's an easy call, that he's got to go. And this is causing outrage? An all-time-low? Some of you people have too much time and too strong a drive to get angry and rant. This.

What does you "Yes" refer to? Wasting a season? As for whether you're concerned about the cap during the season ... um, I'm not really concerned with whether or not you're concerned with it. I'm concerned with it all the time. It means a lot to what you can do with a team. You have no earthly idea yet whether or not we have long-term cap issues. Chances are we do, though there are ways around it. We've got very few guys signed up this year who show signs of being around after camp. Somewhere around 30. Where do we fill those spots? How do we pay the people we bring in? Do we restructure people like Dareus this year to kick the problem down the road as suggested in an article here? http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2017/2/18/14657012/buffalo-bills-salary-cap-contract-restructure-marcell-dareus-cordy-glenn There's a very good chance that we do have cap problems in 2018, not least because our GM is Doug Whaley and he's slowly, consistently worked us into serious cap problems. And he's still here. So again, it would be the exact opposite of a wasted season if they get the cap under control, do a good job of inputting the new system and did a good job drafting. It would be laying the foundation for what could maybe eventually be a team that could be competitive for a title. That blows the hell out of upgrading from maybe five to eight wins this season. About as much of a waste as it is digging the foundation before you start putting on the rooftiles when you build a house. I'm with you there. Start trading back and accumulating picks.

Couldn't see them keeping Tyrod and going after Foles as well, as I would guess he won't come for the $2 or $3 mill you want to pay a backup. IMHO he'd be in play if they let Tyrod go. Don't really know enough about him to say much more than that with what I know right now I wouldn't mind. Wouldn't be a waste if during that season they got their salary cap issues under control, did a good job of inputting the system and getting everybody familiar with the terminology and their roles and did a good job drafting. Not a waste at all. You do remember that a year ago they were all saying this year's class was going to be excellent. Happens nearly every year there's no Luck at the top - next year's the year to get someone.

Dalton is seriously underrated around here. Not so much around the league, though. He was sensational in 2015 and worked behind a really had OL this year and still looked pretty good. He hasn't always been very good. But two years ago he made a leap upwards. IMHO he's on the bubble of the top ten and will show that again next year if they can get the OL working again. I'd take Cousins. If I were the Skins I'd do whatever I had to do. Knowing that I would have to pay $24 mill per year, would I acquire him for Buffalo paying two 1sts to do it? Man, hard question. I'd take him as an FA. Man, I don't know. But in the end, this wanting to be elsewhere comes down to not thinking they're going to give him what he thinks he deserves. A long-term contract and I think he's suddenly thrilled to be there. Four 4th quarter comebacks and 4 game-winning drives last year says he doesn't. Or at least not at a high rate.

If we're looking for a bridge guy, Foles would be one and for a salary that is appropriate for a bridge guy. As for being a backup, no thanks. We need a backup who can mentor Cardale and the new guy we draft over the next couple of drafts. Foles isn't the smart, seen-everything type of grizzled vet you want. Hoyer, maybe.

If you agree that he's here for the next two years, then you're advocating paying a bridge QB $40.5 mill for two years. That would make him the highest-paid bridge QB in the history of the NFL, pretty close to double the next highest bridge guy whoever he was exactly. Fitz in Buffalo, maybe? And on a team with severe cap restrictions. This does not make sense. And having cap problems drastically reduces your chances of winning. Particularly when your team severely lacks depth and is changing scheme which generally means roster turnover. And you are absolutely kidding yourself if you think nobody would care if we draft somebody and he beats out Tyrod. If that happened the board would be filled with frustration ... "Why did we pay Tyrod $40.5 mill for two years of play, a lot of which has been spent on the bench because of the emergence of QB YoungGuy?" And they'd have that concern for good reason. It would make us less able to take advantage of having that good young QB supported by good players around him. Agreed that FA is where he's had an awful lot of his success. And with our current cap difficulties, he's not going to be able to do too much there.

The high scoring numbers came from the running game. Add up both years together and we had more running than passing TDs. By far. Again, 29 run TDs and 17 pass TDs this year. Last year we had more pass TDs than run TDs, but by one of the lowest amounts in the league. The Bills have eight more run TDs than pass TDs over the past two years. Care to guess how many teams have a differential of more than eight? That would be zero. Care to guess how many teams have more run TDs than pass TDs over those same two years? Again, zip-padeedoodah. Thank goodness our run game was productive, because our pass game sure wasn't. And as for being the most productive Bills QB since Kelly, man, you must be desperate. That's like saying a woman is closer to being an SI swimsuit model than any of the Golden Girls.

No. I really wouldn't feel any significant satisfaction whatsoever. I understand - emotionally - why others might. But no, being a fodder team would mean nothing to me. I saw them lose four Super Bowls. They won a lot of playoff games to get there. I've seen them win playoff games over the years. Not interested. I'm interested in them becoming a team that's competitive for a championship. Period. Then I guess nothing does. This is Tyrod's nature. He's too cautious. Which has a very positive result, few turnovers, but also a very negative result, leaving a ton of opportunities on the field. If he took more risks, he would have more turnovers but would also score more TDs and get more yardage. He leaves a ton of chances out there. It's who he appears to be.

Points scored is NOT a QB stat. It just isn't. It's a stat that reflects probably 75 - 80% the whole offense and the rest STs and the defense, who give the offense their field position, which is huge, and also score some points. And when you look at our whole offense, our run game was terrific this year, and our pass game substandard. 29 rushing TDs this year. 17 passing TDs. And 3 scored by the defense. In a league where not a single other team scored more rushing TDs than passing TDs. Sorry to repeat this stat so many many times, but people just keep on pretending that our offense scoring a lot proves they had a good pass game, and it simply doesn't show that. "His PPG offense," you say. And it wasn't "his". It was the Bills offense, mostly powered by the run game.

Because there are two types of teams that make the playoffs, teams with a chance, and fodder teams. Generally around three teams a year with none but a theoretical chance. And that's what the Bills would be with TT unless they also have the Buddy Ryan - Mike Singletary defense from the year they won the Super Bowl, or one on just about the same level. And we're years away from that if it ever happens. There's never been a fodder team that's won the Super Bowl. Never. People talk about the Giants the year they beat the Pats, but they absolutely were not a fodder team. They were peaking at the right time, Eli's light had come on and they had almost beaten the Pats in the last week of the season. The three fodder teams that year were the 9-7 Jeff Garcia Bucs, the 9-7 Jason Campbell Redskins and the 10-6 Titans, QB'd mostly by Vince Young, who'd scored four points more than had been scored on them that year. No, the best team doesn't always win. But one of the best eight or so in the playoffs does. The fodder teams don't. Aristocrat is the one who brought up the Seattle comparisons, not FireChan. And no, we shouldn't lower the bar. There should be one goal and one goal only moving forward. Winning the Super Bowl sometime in the next few years. Nothing else matters. That bar should never be lowered.

. "The drive stats of our website also features drive stats compiled by Jim Armstrong. These stats are computed from NFL Drive Charts and are not adjusted for strength of schedule or situation. Take-a-knee drives at the end of halves are discarded." - Football Outsiders

Wilson that year: passer rating 101.2 (7th in the NFL), 8.2 YPA (7th in the NFL), TD Percentage 6.4%, 4 4th Quarter Comebacks, 5 Game-Winning Drives Tyrod last year: Passer Rating 89.7 (20th in the NFL), 6.9 YPA (26th in the NFL) TD Percentage 3.9% , 1 4th Quarter Comeback, 1 Game-Winning Drive NOT ... EVEN ... CLOSE! We do indeed have a better run game. And a much worse pass game.

I doubt it. Roman had much the same approach in San Francisco. What he didn't have in either place is a QB who was especially efficient. Very likely his approach has depended on who his QB was. Which makes total sense. Here's the key quotation: "'I wouldn't try to pigeonhole us just yet that we're going to try to be ground and pound,' Roman said, via the team's official site. 'Who really wins big doing that? I think you have to have balance. But that doesn't mean we're not going to make people respect us in that phase of the game.' "Perhaps it was entirely on accident. Roman was described by the interviewer as a 'ground and pound' coordinator earlier in the conversation but that also happened to be the mantra of former Bills head coach Rex Ryan, who always leaned toward a hard-nosed rushing attack."