transplantbillsfan

Why the hell would you think that?

I said somewhere in there, yes. I said exactly "By whatever measurements or metrics or I tests you want to use, you could put Taylor anywhere from 7 to 15 reasonably, I think." To which you reply... With this... as though he was definitively 7. Just some strange interpretation there.

How did I know 7 would be the number someone like you would believe I was saying Taylor belonged. That isn't where I think he was, btw... read what I said... C'mon man!!! Can we all try to stop selectively reading posts?

So, you really just don't want to address the point? I'm really interested and legitimate discussion here. You were the one that told me 50 guys met the criteria that I sent forth. You said that. And that's the criteria that you're now saying you don't care about? If you really just don't want to discuss because you're incapable of ever being wrong and admitting it, that's fine. I was legitimately intrigued and kind of hoping you could actually find 10 guys out of your list of 50 Who met the criteria that I gave you and you said at least 50 guys easily made it. Some real communication issues here. I certainly can't say I'm guilt free, but it's hard to talk to someone seriously about an issue when they're on the other side of the road searching for keys under the streetlight while you're sitting in their running car because they told you to go unlock and start the car while you paid the bill. Such a shame...

See, what you can easily find or 50 to 100 guys who sat on the bench for most of the rookie contract like I said and then maybe got some kind of a chance to start after that. What does not happen is that those QBs end up winning starting jobs and then playing at starting QB level once they get their opportunity. Why are you including Gannon on this list? He started 14 games in his fourth year. So, basically, you apparently can't think of a single QB who meets the criteria that you actually said 50 or so QBs met. You say the odds are against him. Guess what, he already broke those odds. There isn't a single NFL QB (apparently, i'm relying partly on your own trustworthy mind) has done what Taylor has already done. And so your arbitrary rules don't really seem to apply here since those rules have already been broken. Taylor is already doing what "couldn't be done" so saying the odds are against him to keep it up, seems kind of weird.

Certainly not 20th. That's just ludicrous. It's ludicrous in the same way it would be if you were to say that Taylor was a top three quarterback in 2015. By whatever measurements or metrics or I tests you want to use, you could put Taylor anywhere from 7 to 15 reasonably, I think.

If you're saying Taylor was the 20th best QB by production in the NFL in 2015, you're being ridiculous You and I are generally on the same side with Taylor, but now you're backtracking regarding something we don't agree on. You essentially guaranteed the Bills would take a QB in the 1st round next year... now you're saying only if the "prospect they have identified" is still there...? Which is it? Not a clue how many QBs match the criteria. I can't think of a single one off the top of my head. I'm still waiting for someone to give me names. Thurm said that he could come up with 50 names. I'm still waiting on his list of 10. Do you even have 5? Maybe I'm getting you mixed up with other posters. It's late. I could be mistaken. Did you not insinuate that I would be very unlikely for Taylor to improve and/or become a franchise QB given that he's going into his seventh here at this point? If you did not, I apologize. If you did, that was the point of the post. Taylor is already the exception to the rule. Saying he won't do this because no other QBs ever do this is shortsighted considering that Taylor has already done things that QBs never do. And that's not me saying he will, that's me saying this is still up in the air and anyone defining him one way or the other concretely is misguided.

Pointless post.

I'm sorry dude but it's not all that specific. TONS of NFL QBs were on the bench throughout almost all of their rookie contracts. It's the next 2 criteria that separates Taylor. I know you aren't seeing it, but you might want to reconsider the notion that Taylor can't improve just because of years of service

No, you don't just draft a QB in the first "no matter what." I can't believe anyone actually thinks this is a smart or even reasonable approach What Tyrod did in his 5th and 6th years after riding the pine for 4 years was the unlikely thing. Given that Taylor's already the exception rather than the rule we can throw any ridiculous rules like "NO WAY HE IMRPOVES IN YEAR 7!!!!" out the window

So your answer is no, then. You would no longer feel "bleh." Okay, now I'm going to ask you to do something I asked another poster to do because both of you share the same belief that what we've seen is what we've got simply because of age and number of years on an NFL roster. Throughout history, name me 10 QBs who going into year 7 in the NFL: -Rode the bench almost exclusively for the entirety of their rookie contract (4 years) -Given the opportunity to start in year five after earning the starting job -After earning the starting job, plays years 5 & 6 at "NFL starting QB" level That was the criteria I originally set forth. And I set it forward because of the arbitrary "sixth year" as some kind of watermark. My point was simply to establish how unique Taylor's case is. But if you can find me a number of QBs who meet that criteria, maybe you're on the right track, after all.

This is such an excellent point. Quarterbacking in the NFL might just be at a really high level right now. And if that's the case, even the 20th best QB in that type of year would still be perceived as a good QB in many other years. Seriously? Draft a QB in the first no matter what?!?! Absolutely not! Wow... this is ridiculous... It absolutely can easily be much worse.

That wasn't a "yes" or a "no." Ever heard of "sophomore slump?" It happens. Plus, 2015 will not be an easy year to match in terms of production and efficiency, anyway.

First of all, it's not about questioning him as a QB, it's about defining him. I still have questions about him, which is why I'm glad he has another year to try to define himself. I'm glad you acknowledge our low passing attempts was essentially because of an elite running game. I agree. As to the end of your post I just want you to answer a very simple "yes" or "no" to the following question: If 2015-2016 were Taylor's rookie and sophomore years and he played as he did, would you still feel "bleh" about him?

The bills called 35 passing please per game with Tyrod Taylor at the helm and 2016. 29.1 attempts per game 42 sacks (192 yards) 47 scrambles (371 yards) He lost 4.6 yards per play on every sack. He gained 7.9 yards per playing on every scramble. He also scored four of his six touchdowns on scrambles. Since last off-season I have been a proponent of a new stat: YPD (Yards Per Dropback) I haven't done this for any QBs in 2016, but I did look at Newton compared to Wilson compared to Taylor in 2015. And their numbers looked like this: Tyrod Taylor 6.9 YPD 33.1 DPG 52.1% passing plays for the offense Cam Newton 6.8 YPD 34.5 DPG 51.8% passing plays for the offense Russel Wilson 7.1 YPD 36.3 DPG 56.5% passing plays for the offense Hope that helps to quantify had a bed for you

You included sacks in your discussion as a negative without also (and fairly) including the positive alternative, which are the scrambles. That's what I'd call cherry picking. If we get the Tyrod from 2015 and he passes for 30 times a game rather than 27 and maintains the same efficiency on every play as he did in 2015, it's good enough. At that point, the rest of the team needs to hold up their end of the bargain and the bills are a playoff team for sure.

Wait. If you want to include sacks in this discussion, that's fine. Those were passing plays, you're right. Let's include the other passing plays: the scrambles. The plays where the QB is pressured, escapes pressure, and gains positive yardage instead of negative yardage. Happydays recently posted a football outsiders study that examined all passing plays. Including sacks and scrambles. On such plays, the bills had of the second highest DVOA in the NFL, behind only Aaron Rodgers and the Green Bay Packers. I can tell you from having done my own scrupulous research, Taylor gained 8 yards per scramble in 2016. Those are passing plays. I agree. Just like sacks are. The problem is that people want to talk about sacks as the negative without talking about scrambles as the positive. And when Taylor scrambles, he gained more yards per scramble and all but the top five QBs in the NFL in the category of YPA. What you're doing here is cherry picking.

Is "Tyrod" the 2015 or 2016 "Tyrod"?

If his play changes in what way? The bills were at the bottom of the NFL and "passing offense" essentially because they pass the ball less than anyone else. And I know above you guys were pointing to examples like the Falcons and chargers and Steelers having a "balanced" attack, but the bills were absolutely an incredibly dominant as a run offense in 2016. The head coach was a ground and pound head coach. The approach was clearly to stick to the ground. There is only one football. The team was an incredibly effective running offense last year. That was a reflection of the offensive approach. The 2016 Falcons were a rarity and having an elite passing and rushing offense. I don't know where Teeflebees was getting his numbers above but the Chargers and Steelers certainly weren't really high in the ranks in terms of both passing and rushing offenses. The Chargers were at the bottom of the league is rushing, actually. There is only one football. There are only so many snaps in a game. What you want is much more passing. Shady is one of the best backs in the NFL. It's kind a hard not to give him the ball, isn't it? I think Taylor is going to get more passes this year and we are going to see what he does with 30 to 35 passing attempts per game. But it's really just in the offensive approach.

I think you've missed my point.

I bumped it for Thurm so he doesn't lose track of something that seems so easily found

Just so you don't forget, since I know you're in a unique time zone, i'll do you a favor and bump this post so you are sure to see it. Remember, you said 50, just give me 10 names that fit that criteria should be easy, right?

Are you really feigning ignorance now? I know that you read the post. But since you need a reminder: -Rode the bench almost exclusively for the entirety of their rookie contract (4 years) -Given the opportunity to start in year five after earning the starting job -After earning the starting job, plays a significant number of games at "NFL starting QB" level Almost everyone of those guys on your "list" got a significant number of snaps by year five. And very few of them even ever played at "starting QB level" for an extended period of time the way that Taylor did over the span of 29 games. That was the criteria I originally set forth. And I set it forward because of your arbitrary "hasn't proven self as franchise QB by sixth year" rather than fifth, or fourth, etc. My point was simply to establish how unique Taylor's case is. That was the criteria you responded that there were at least 50 other guys in the NFL who met it. So I ask again, name 10...

What a joke! Steve Young started zero games and his fifth year and threw 92 total passes. That year established him as a franchise QB?!?! Are you nuts? You're being stubbornly ridiculous.

Wow... this might be the biggest pile of crap I have ever read from you. Not even going to try to put some lipstick on this pig? You can't separate his running from the whole QB thing because it's obviously part of it, much like it was/is for Fran Tarkenton, Steve Young, Randall Cunningham, Michael Vick, Cam Newton, Russell Wilson, Aaron Rodgers, Andrew Luck, Marcus Mariota, etc. The escapability and scrambling and running are all part of the whole QB thing for Taylor. It factors in. You don't separate it as you just did. And, I'm sorry, full stop? What you say here is speculative at best. The fact of the matter is that McDermott not only decided to keep Taylor but also passed up opportunities to address the QB position all the way until the team's 2nd 5th round pick. Say there weren't feasible options if you like, but you're reaching and creating your own narrative because it suits you... or because you lost your keys Go back to dressing the pigs up a little... makes it more presentable Since you brought this up, do you remember that question I asked you recently about quarterbacks that fit certain criteria that Taylor fits? Remember how you said there were about 50 guys? I asked you to come back with a list of 10. I'm still waiting... And don't try to make up some new criteria. Find the post, it was in one of our recent interactions; you likely ignored it because you knew you were actually mistaken but find it impossible to admit fault. Find the criteria that you yourself said about 50 other quarterbacks fall into. Name 10 of them...