You herd it hear last
-
Posts
1,372 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by You herd it hear last
-
-
can we get a thread that JUST has the updated roster and updated cuts on it? Would and could someone do that?
-
Seriously, is this guy ready for the real thing or does he ride the pine til he proves otherwise?
-
I think the ex-anti-EJ crowd should have to say a little more than "I was wrong" or "I'll eat my crow now". That's all and they can continue posting like nothing ever transpired and they weren't total A***** about it for the entire duration. Same thing about the accountability of local "reporters" with multicapital letters next to their names (e.g. WGR, BN, and others (but I don't want to hurt peoples feelings))
-
I guess those big wig reporters will have to start asking real QB questions to EJ now.
-
maybe one of the washington media will ask rg3 if he can see the writing on the wall
-
Good, I would hate for you to pull anything.
that's what...nah
-
I don't know what? Who will be the starting QB for the season? Well, I have been tipped by someone with inside knowledge, but no, I don't know for sure. What does that have to do with discussion?
But thinking: In the past whoever started preseason game #3 typically starts during the season THEREFORE the Bills staff is using that historical trend to decide who starts preseason game #3 and/or the regular season, is preposterous reasoning. You really should take a logic class or two.
jeez I was just puttin another line of thinking out there that's all. I think you guys got hung up on a couple words and really didn't think out the whole thing. perhaps I wasn't clear in my delivery though. My point is, If Rex was familiar with EJ from gameplanning against him and even mildly impressed, he may have penciled him in for the 3rd game starter before TC even began. Cassel was insurance, TT an unknown and perhaps he thought Roman could get this guy ready to go for the season. Therefore creating a rotation built around that, "fallacious" thinking. That's all.
-
I don't think that this can factor in at all. He often knew who his starter was like most teams. I will bet that every time Peyton Manning started preseason game 3 he also started the opener. This is an extreme example but you can tell how that piece of information isn't going to be very telling.
The division of the snaps with the 1st team will probably be pretty even during the game (if they are all going to play with the 1s). I would think that it will be 2 drives each. The play in the game will matter some but it isn't going to undo the last 7 months (or whatever it has been). The # of reps with the 1's in practice is probably going to be the most telling moving forwards. If someone is receiving 70% of the snaps with the 1's that is most likely the guy to start game 1.
This is why I go with "history is our best teacher". There are seven reasons in your short paragraph.
The fallacy is, because it is typically done in the past, it has to be in the plan this particular time. What has traditionally happened/what usually happens can be completely unrelated to what is happening this time. A bit of "post hoc ergo propter hoc". In the past, the QB that started the third preseason game had already been named the starter. It wasn't as if they became the starter because they started the third preseason game. Comprende?
My guess is, in the past, the staff had already decided who was going to start at QB for the season. What you should really look at, if you were doing a comparison, is what happens in the third game when the coaching staff has made clear statements the starting QB is not yet known. Even in those cases, they wouldn't necessitate the same thinking as in this particular case. Decisions of this type stand alone---they just fall into a pattern. The pattern doesn't make the decision.
So basically you don't know.
-
Not necessarily. I can't believe some can't manage to get past this fallacious reasoning.
OK, what is the prevailing school of thought on this then? What are the real percentages of this fallacy? Or did you just decide that's the way it is?
-
If the starter of PS game #3 is historically the starter of the season, wouldn't the staff put the QB they thought was going to be that guy in that slot for the game? Then reverse engineer the "rotation". This is what a logical person would do. So, with that said, NOT changing who is starting game #3 (if in fact it was a legitimate competition and rotational strategy would therefore be an endorsement for that QB. (EJ)
What is Rex's historical PS game #3 QB and how does it correlate with his season starter?
That may speak louder than the conjecture spewing out of media circles and blog posters.
-
Perhaps occasionally they should try for a mismatch and put a large person back there, creating mismatches.
Obviously it takes the home run out of it, but there might be instances where it may work.
Anyone aware of the history using a strategy such as this?
-
EJ is doing his part by having a good practice followed by a terrible practice. He has not been consistent in practice, which is why he has fallen. He has had too many bad practices. Taylor and Cassel haven't been as inconsistent.
Perhaps he's allowing himself, as well as the coaches, to make some mistakes in practice.
So he doesn't do the foolish 'rookie maneuvers' his detractors note him for, in the games. "letting it rip"
So, if EJ's practices result in learning the game and making mistakes (which we all know the OTHER guys practicing are also making mistakes and great plays affecting the result of the QB's performance), BUT his preseason game result is TD's and game winning drives, who cares?
I really don't see him "trailing" this competition nearly as much as most do.
-
Matt Ryan is to me. Drew Bree's certainly is. There are some other examples.
Don't get hung up on the semantics. It was a term used and then defined to level the playing field for those voting. It wasn't to debate the term. It was "can he play at ____ level?"
Sorry to hijack.
Admittedly, it's a vague term defined by all a little differently
Aren't 'franchise QBs' supposed to drag the team out of the gutter and win, or at least always in the competition?
If a franchise QB has a bad season, is he one anymore?
If he's great statistically but chokes in the playoffs every year, what about then?
If he was one for another team, then goes to a different one, is he still a franchise QB?
etc...
OR
Is he just that guy that you don't EVER let go because he is the path of least resistance to winning you a championship? Even though he's exhibited/not exhibited one of the above traits?
-
This theory seems highly unlikely. We all know Rex is different, but there are some things that simply can't be done. EJ is still a young QB who needs reps with his team. Especially now that there are a lot of new faces on offense. All reports indicate that he's hardly had any reps with the first team offense this summer ( including before they all got injured). There's no way you throw him out against Indy with the 1st team, and expect good things.
It's going to be difficult for Rex to hide this very fact, if indeed he's trying to smokescreen for the opener.
The reps will be the tell.
If so, the competition may already be over and they have moved on to implementing their plan for the season with these guys.
-
Did you not read the original post? They are all in it together to make it seem like its TT. They will come out and say they were apart of the master plan!
I did read it. But I tend to forget ridiculous things quickly, get distracted, and move on to type my own ridiculous things.
-
If this happens, the local media will, after the first game, insist that EJ change his name to Tyrod Taylor so they can profess to themselves as have been right all along.
-
Franchise QB to me is a guy that is an unquestioned starter that is better than 1/2 the guys. It's the same for other positions.
Another way to look at it is "will ____ enter 2016 without competition for the starting role?"
Can you call any QB on a poor team a franchise QB? I seriously don't know. A lot probably has to do with the quality of the Franchise itself.
-
Time to gamble and go with EJ and Taylor. They will lose games with mistakes but that is the only way to develop them.
Even in the regular season , each play a half ?
When we need good, clutch QB play, EJ can come in at the end and lead one of his game winning drives. Seems he doesn't get a lot of credit from his detractors for this quality.
-
We should keep 75 players this year. Somehow, pay them under-the-table. They will call it "rostergate" when we get caught.
-
I'm starting to believe that EJ's best chance for success in Buffalo is to be the #2 guy and somehow "rescue" the season (by playing well) when the #1 goes out through injury or poor play. This would serve his detractors by allowing their guy to start AND he would, through his solid play, probably turn some around in his favor.
If the other QB succeeds AND can stay on the field, that's a good problem for the Bills to have. But at this point, who still WOULDN'T want EJ as the backup?
-
As much as I want EJ to step up and take it. I went with too early to tell. But I just go by what you guys report about the game, as I've yet to see any action.
-
Is there anything written on the wall? If so, what does it say?
Shhhhh, there's probably a big wig reporter that wants to break that story. Don't ruffle feathers.
-
I like EJ's chances against a team that has prepped for him more than TT for some reason. Do you think TT stands up to the rigors of adjusting DC's over the course of the season? Not to mention his style of play and physique contributing to a higher injury risk. All of those traits together has me cringing in fear.
-
Rediculous.
Bluediculous.
This is fun!
Favorite Bills Logo
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Huh, must not be too many evangelicals here. They'd hate any bison.