PolishDave

Most of the NFL is like that? No it isn't. Are most of the guys on the Bills' team like that? Nope. Teams should be washing their hands of those kinds of guys not welcoming them into the NFL. Chad Kelly is an un-charismatic less talented version of Johnny Football. Best thing for NFL is to kick him to the curb where he belongs.

The hate comes mostly from him being a giant douche bag. He is the exact type of !@#$ player that nobody wants to root for. His character is ghetto.

I think it largely depends on what they do in free agency, the draft and whether or not the offense stays healthy all year. Let's say they resign Bob Woods because of his ability to block down field in addition to his average #2 receiver skills. Then suppose they draft one of the top 2 receivers coming out this year and sign a decent right tackle in free agency. And assuming they don't downgrade at QB, then things are really looking up. I would expect additional improvement. I wouldn't expect the same yards per attempt while running as this year was stellar, but it would still be possible the Bills have huge production increases in the passing game while also maintaining their number 1 yards per attempt running the ball. Of course it depends on how good these coaches really are too. I expect them to borrow heavily from this year's running game playbook.

No because he is a 3rd string QB. If he hadn't earned the right to be the number 2 QB yet, then that pretty much tells you all you need to know. It would be really nice, however, if the Bills did a video and blog post about him and how is development is coming along. - Like a really detailed one that shows what they are specifically trying to improve and how that is coming along. They will most likely keep quiet about QB's from now till free agency unless they want to try to release propaganda rumors in an attempt to influence the moves they want to make.

I didn't see any either. I am thinking NO.

I know it was covered in a bunch of threads, but there was also a lot of misinformation being posted. Tyrod is already under contract through 2017. His contract isn't up until 2018. Some people think his contract expires this year and he becomes a free agent. It doesn't. And he doesn't. The option is to extend him 2018 through 2021. And by doing so, it lowers his 2017 base salary and spreads out his bonus money over those years instead of giving him the $30 million all in 2017 which is what will happen if they don't trade him, release him or renegotiate by March 11th. The Bills can trade him any time after March 9th at 4PM. So they can trade him without picking up the contract if they trade him between March 9th and March 11th. Or if they were going to eat that whole $30 million or whatever it was, (which they won't do because of this year's cap) then they could trade him at any point in 2017 up to the trade deadline of November 1st 2017. Here are their options: The structure of Taylor's contract leaves the Bills with four choices: Exercise his option by March 11 for the 2018-21 seasons, reducing his 2017 cap number from about $29 million to $15.913 million. Decline to exercise his option but keep Taylor on the roster past March 12 at a fully-guaranteed salary and cap number of about $29 million. Release Taylor prior to March 11, carrying about a $3 million dead-money hit against the 2017 cap but opening significant cap space. Renegotiate Taylor's contract prior to March 11. Information found here.

Obviously. The point was that in his press conference after the season ending Jets game, Whaley explained to the press that Tyrod would have been the starter against the Jets if winning the game mattered. If he didn't want Tyrod in there the last 3-4 games of the season when the Bills were technically still in the hunt, why in the world would he explain how he would have started Tyrod in the last game if they were still in the hunt. It is a direct contradiction of what Vic is saying. More evidence. Just doesn't make sense the way Vic is spinning it. Or perhaps that was Whaley's opinion (but only temporarily) at one point during the season. And Whaley ultimately changed his mind more in favor of Tyrod before playing the final Jets game.

What reason would he have to lie about Tyrod starting in that game though? It's not like it would be hiding something. And if I recall correctly it wasn't a direct question either. It was volunteered information from Whaley to explain what his position was about Tyrod. He would have no reason to lie there regardless of his position on Tyrod.

Vic loses credibility here: "In fact, there was a push for rookie quarterback Cardale Jones to supplant Taylor as the starter for the final three or four games of the season, even though the Bills had yet to be mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. Coach Rex Ryan and offensive coordinator Anthony Lynn were said to have pushed back hard enough for Taylor to remain in the No. 1 role." He is saying that Whaley pushed to have Cardale start the last 3 or 4 games. Yet, when Whaley was asked about it after the Jet's game in his press conference, Whaley said that if the Bills were still in the playoff hunt, then Tyrod would have started against the Jets. That pretty much contradicts what Vic is suggesting.

Would help if you would explain yourself. Bills dump existing average QB and downgrade to Qb on his last leg in the league who is often injured. And draft a question mark QB in a lousy QB draft who is going to be the future of the team. The only thing missing yet is the Bills need to make a statement that whatever QB they draft is a piece of clay that can be molded into greatness. And it would be very Billsy to go with Kizer in the draft.

Just doesn't make sense to me. I don't see where he fits in. I don't see the Bills drafting a QB in round one unless (their guy) is there at 10 and they are completely sold on that guy. Seems like a big risk where they could very likely end right back up where there were with EJ and Kolb. And there is no way Russ Brandon can spin that into something worth looking forward to. Because you don't spend a number 10 draft pick on a QB that you don't completely believe in. And I highly doubt there is going to be more than one QB the Bills are completely sold on in this draft if there is even one at all. Bills won't just "settle" for whatever QB is left at 10. They either get their guy there or pass on it until a later pick. If the Bills are going to bring in a vet and release Tyrod, it only makes sense that they bring in someone who is obviously better - not an obvious downgrade. If TT and McCown are here - then either no rookie or bye bye Cardale. Otherwise 4 QB's on roster.

Of course they may move on from Tyrod and start someone else. They still have to be able to sell it to the fans. Good luck selling McCown. A rookie...yes they could sell if they take a guy in the first round. A second round draft starter = no sale McCown = no sale

They could argue starting a drafted rookie isn't tanking - yes I give you that. They could use the argument that they are developing the guy. Starting Cardale = blatant tanking unless the guy completely lights it up in training camp and preseason where fans can see him actually win the job. Does anyone honestly think that is a reasonable possibility? If they draft a rookie, why do they need a vet backup? Cardale competes with rookie for number 2 spot. Winner gets it. Anything is possible of course. Who knows what the Bills will do. But I can see massive fan outrage if they go into next season starting either McCown or Cardale unless one of them looked unbelievably good in preseason. Not betting for that to happen. Know what I mean?

That would be as big of a joke setup as Kolb and EJ. I don't see Whaley making that mistake unless they already have their rookie QB picked out because they are confident he will be great and they plan on getting him in this draft at all costs.

Who starts? Rookie?

If the Bills get him, then what are the odds they draft a qb this year? They aren't likely to keep 4 in the regular season. So, either no Cardale or no rookie if they get him. Don't ya think? Unless they were planning on starting McCown. (which would mean tanking)

I have to agree. Teams that took more QB’s Oakland 3 Denver 4 Cleveland 3 Jets 4 Phily 3 Washington 3 LA 3 How many of those teams have been to the Superbowl in that time frame? Answer 1 How many of those teams still suck? 4 out of 7 I don't see how this chart proves anything at all to be honest, at least not about quarterbacks.

Pegula is going to buy him a couple McDonalds franchises in the Carolinas, then say - "Will you take 10 million a year now?"

Jets are going to suck bad next year regardless of whether they try to tank or not. It is very possible that they will have the first pick overall after next season. If I am the Bills, I consider trading out of my first pick this year for the Jet's first pick next year. Or perhaps some other bottom feeder team like Frisco or Cleveland if someone is up for it.

I bet you are right about that. And I think it happens regardless of where they get the safeties from whether it is in the draft or in free agency. I expect the defense to take huge steps forward (against the run) next year compared to this year. Against the pass, I don't know, this defense could be worse. Not sure about that one way or the other. We shall see.

I want them to focus on tackle in free agency because you aren't going to draft a guy who is going to start day 1 and be good day 1. Find a guy with experience who is an upgrade from what we have now. I would address as many positions as possible in free agency but tackle is priority one for me. Draft first pick = wide receiver if one of the top 2 is available

Everybody knows somebody like that. It happens in many areas of lie though, not just football. For example, if you pay attention to politics a lot, you will probably find someone who says something along the lines of "I don't pay any attention to politics because politicians are all crooks and your vote doesn't count anyway. I hate politics. I think people who get all worked up over politics are stupid." - Political snob Or take a sport like Golf. If you have never played golf before then there is a 99% chance that watching golf on television is the most boring way you could possibly spend a Saturday afternoon. And you might even get mad at and resent a person who is forcing you to watch it because you are at a family party or something where the guy who owns the house wants to watch it. And someone around the room is thinking "I can't think of a bigger waste of time than going outside and chasing a little white ball around that you hit with a stick. Golf is dumb. Golfers are dumb." That person is a golf snob. Or the guy who thinks it is barbaric to take a gun out in the woods and shoot small furry critters. He is a hunting snob. Shooting small furry critters or big furry critters or airborne feathered critters is the best sport in the world to some guys. Or the woman who thinks you shouldn't have the right to take a gun to a sportsman's club and shoot at clay targets whizzing through the air just because she heard some kid shot another kid in the ghetto last night and that kid used one of those gun thingy's. So you shouldn't be able to have one of those gun thingy's either. Gun owners are stupid. She is a gun snob. Snobs are everywhere. A lot of the football lovers here are probably Anti-sport snobs about some other sport.

Great point. And I can also tell which way you lean politically because you are smart/wise enough to see/think something like this when you are presented with a statistic. Good on you mate.

The coaches certainly attribute much, if not all, of that drop off to the fact that Sammy was gone for half the year and he was throwing to Bob Woods + backup receivers for a good chunk of the year. That kind of production isn't as bad as you make it sound. And the coaches know this. Only casual fans who don't pay much attention to the details in football would automatically blame that production drop solely on the shoulders of the QB. I doubt you are a casual fan. So you must have some other reason for closing your eyes to what really happened there.

You might be right. I am sure there are teams who would be interested in him. I question how much they would be willing to pay for him based on two key factors - tight salary caps and the style of play Tyrod brings to an offense. You don't back up a Brinks truck when there is only one team willing to pay a lot for you. Houston can't afford to pay him. Maybe Arizona can, but if they aren't bidding against someone else who really wants him, how much will they pay? They would be in the driver's seat and be able to offer a shorter - prove it style contract for a lot less than the $85 million offer the Bills made him and less than $31 million guaranteed. If you honestly believe that Tyrod is going to make double the $85 million or double the $31 million in guaranteed money in free agency, then I can see why you would think he wouldn't be worried. If Tyrod thought that he was going to make double away from Buffalo, then he should be saying he doesn't care to play here so that it helps force the decision to move away from him.