transplantbillsfan
-
Posts
10,899 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by transplantbillsfan
-
-
Oh, so Gillman, a coach 70 years ago, divided the field up into five? Wow, well when you have to go that far out of relevancy to find an example, that says a lot about your argument right there. But what says more is that you don't know how Gillman's results turned out in terms of dividing up the field in threes. Gillman was doing exactly what I'm saying everyone should do, spread things out and challenge every area across the field. Which Tyrod doesn't do.
As for more recent examples, yet again, Brady and Rivers spread their deep and intermediate attempts evenly across the thirds. Tyrod doesn't.
As for your hashmarks thing there you're yet again looking under the streetlights because it's easier to look rather than where you lost the keys. Yet again, Tyrod throws very well and very often across the middle in the first ten yards. And between the hashes would also include behind the line of scrimmage, things like shovel passes or middle screens ... Nobody says Tyrod doesn't throw well in the middle in the short area, because he does. And you're including those stats here, yet again throwing in areas of strength and prolific throwing with his areas of weakness. Which does indeed cover up the problems in the deep and intermediate middle third, but doesn't do a single thing to prove they don't exist.
It's like a guy who wants to examine screen passes and can only find stats that combine screen passes and go routes together and so he thinks he's proven that that team's screen passes have a surprisingly high YPA.
The problem is isolated in one area. When you throw stats from other areas in with the problem areas, sure, you can make things look much better. But you're missing the problem because it's over in the dark area a few blocks over while you yet again look under the streetlight.
Yeah, it's a thing. That's why Roman talked about needing him to throw more and better to middle and the QB coach also talked about the same problem. But it's not a thing that you can find if you look in the wrong place, and that's what you're doing, looking at stat tables that don't isolate the problem but instead lump it in with areas of strength.
Wow You're living in your own world aren't you? Coach mentions middle of the field and clearly he's talking about the deep portion of the field but clearly he's not talking about the short portion of the field because that's where Taylor is good?
Are you making this up as you go along? That sure is what it seems like.
Gilman was considered the father of the passing offense. The West Coast offense and other offenses have come down from that. Where is there a reference to dividing the field in three? These are conclusions your drawing in your own fantasy land. You have it right there, essentially saying that the father of the modern passing game divided the field horizontally and five, and yet you are so arrogantly saying that obviously the offensive masterminds who followed figured out that they needed to narrow that down to three, rather than five. The problem is, you don't have any evidence. and if the field were divided in three, don't you think coaches would be wiser to use the landmarks like numbers and sidelines rather than subjective vision?
Thurm, You've been very entertaining with your snide street light remarks and the arrogance of your posts directed at me, but maybe for once you should just admit that an argument you're making is your own, and one you made up, and not something that clearly and obviously shared by everyone in the NFL.
-
Why would I care whether the coaches specifically mention the middle third?
Coaches avoid talking about what specific problems are for millions of reasons, spin, wanting to keep being positive, not wanting to point out weaknesses ... a million reasons. Have the coaches ever admitted that the players didn't understand the defense last year, have they ever said those words? Nope. But one of the biggest problems on the defense appears to have been that ... well, they didn't fully understand the defense.
The idea that something isn't real unless the coaches specifically admit it to the world is flat-out stupid.
It's plenty that they said he had problems in the middle. When you look, though, you see it's the middle third. That's the point. As you know, I analyzed every single pass of the 2015 season and discovered that the problem was the deep ... and intermediate ... middle third of the field. You look at the dot chart and it stood out like a twenty-foot great white shark in a thirty-foot wide goldfish pond. That's where the problem has been. The deep and intermediate middle third.
Which is why, by the way, everyone knows the Bills have a problem going there and you can't find any trace of the problem using the stats that don't just cover the area that he doesn't throw to but also throws in a ton of passes in an area of strength. You're looking where the light is better, not where the problem is.
So the coaches talk about the middle of the field and we are required to believe that it's not just the middle, but it has to be the middle one third rather than the middle area that coaches can easily and clearly see in game film and on the field, all those passes between the numbers or between the hashmarks?
Apparently you think coaches care about geometry? And remember, you're the one saying the coaches made the statements about the middle of the field. There has never been anything said about the deep middle. There has never been anything said about the middle one third. You're just arbitrarily choosing something based on watching film of one player who you are clearly biased against, which is fine because we are all biased in someway as human beings. However, it would've been relatively easy to show that you have some level of credibility when it comes to this by looking comparatively at the other quarterbacks across the NFL.
Instead, you refuse to do this and continue to latch onto what you witnessed in a vacuum with your own biased eyes. And what's funny here is that I've never said after 2015 that Taylor didn't need to work on the intermediate middle portion of the field. This whole discussion continues because your absolute an incredible obsession with the deep portion of the field. And you've been proven wrong, time and time and time and time again. Apparently your latching onto two passing charts by two of the best quarterbacks in the NFL, one of them being probably the greatest quarterback in NFL history, and that was only one chart from one year, and somehow you think that's definitive proof that all QBs spread the ball exactly evenly or even close to it to the deep portion of the field.
It's ridiculous.
Middle third is not a thing, Thurm. no one uses it other than you, which is why I suspect you've come back here trying to give the runaround.
Couldn't find a single quote from a coach or NFL GM or anyone regarding the middle third of the field, could you?
Now, as far as the 2016 season goes, Taylor has clearly improved as far as effectiveness when throwing across the middle of the field. Middle third. Middle fifth. Middle middle. Whatever the hell you want to call it.
All I can say is that I'm sorry but my numbers are gone. Hundreds of people saw them, as I published them on buffalobills.com. There were 2015 dot charts for Rivers, Brady and Tyrod. And I went back and watched every single pass in the 2015 season, and put up game by game compilations with every single pass that came anywhere close to being in the deep and intermediate middle third, and my comments.
And not a single person challenged me on my interpretation of a single play, on where the ball was being caught. Not a single person, including Transplant himself.
That site disappeared, without warning. The numbers are gone.
And again, the reason why those numbers are important are simple. Deep and intermediate throws matter. They're where you get chunk plays, they're a way to pressure the defense to cover the whole length of the field instead of being able to step up, fill up the box and make your run game and short pass game more difficult. And if you're throwing about a third of your deep passes to the left third, a third to the right third and a third to the middle, third, you're unpredictable and you make the defense's job tougher. Which is what Brady and Rivers were both doing. But if you throw roughly 40% of your deep passes to the left third, 40% to the right third and below 20% to the middle third, you're saying to the defense, "don't worry about that area, we rarely use it, go ahead and put more pressure on the areas we use more." Which is what Tyrod did.
And I didn't take the QB figures and divide by three. There were dot charts showing where every pass went. Brady and Rivers had a relatively even distribution. Tyrod had an extremely visible gap in the deep and intermediate middle third. I then went and checked pass by pass and confirmed that it really was a distribution problem for the Bills passing game and that that was where the problem was.
Again, with whatever two charts you use for Brady and rivers, there were at least a dozen more from other quarterbacks and even Brady and Rivers from different years that blatantly demonstrate that quarterbacks simply don't go to the deep middle that much. By percentage, deep middle throws are the smallest percentage that a QB makes.
For whatever amount of work you put into watching Taylor make every throw and charting all of those middle thirds to the deep and intermediate sections of the field, your conclusions are questionable at best, simply because you didn't put the rest of the necessary work and to draw those conclusions. You even said when you presented this initially that the problem with Taylor throwing to the deep middle portion of the field had more to do with frequency than anything else because frequency was what made him predictable. I don't think that anyone really would've disputed that Taylor needed to be better throwing to the deep middle portion of the field when he threw there. The big issue that you hold so strongly to is the fact that frequency was the issue, when it's clearly not.
-
Taylor finishes with 4000 yards passing and 30 passing touchdowns.
The bills win a playoff game.
You said bold, right?
Bold predictions are bold because they're likely to be wrong.
I'm interested in trying to be right. I don't generally have bold predictions. Instead, I expect what's likely.
But have fun, folks. It's an interesting idea. I'll come back and read, but I don't expect to have anything to contribute.
Ever the buzzkill aren't we Thurm?
-
With respect to the bolded, I disagree. Players will follow the money because they have a very short window to do so and they sacrifice a lot to do it.
The rest of your post only enforces this. If Tyrod could have gotten a better deal, with a better situation, elsewhere, he would have taken it. He doesn't have any roots here with respect to family, and he is definitely the type of guy to want to prove his mettle.
But the fact remains that he is still hovering around the bottom of the league in terms of passing. We know it. The coaches know it. And Tyrod and his agent know it.
I really like Tyrod and his overall performance in Buffalo, but a quarterback will never be able to break the bank unless he has proven he can win big games.
The people who say, "Tyrod isn't a real NFL QB," are short-sighted in my opinion, but they have a very valid point when it comes to compensation. Although, one could argue that the reason McCoy wasn't ranked a top-10 player and the reason he doesn't get the respect he deserves is because he has benefited immensely from the presence that Tyrod brings in every. single. play.
Phew! That was too long and probably didn't get my point across very well, but as they say "nothing good happens after 2am"
And this is why we will never know.
You said Taylor not having any family roots makes it so that it's more likely he would leave. I say it makes it so his family becomes more of his team. These are the guys he's grown close to and become friends with over the last two years. And like I said before, in the end will never know, but I remember how I was when I was single and I stayed in my job not for money but for lifestyle. Lack of a family makes settled lot easier to be persuaded by friends and teammates. You think going somewhere else is the way he would prove his mettle. I say staying in Buffalo, finishing what he started and trying to end his career as a successful QB with one team would be the best thing for him, I think leaving Buffalo would have been like tucking his tail between his legs and realizing he failed even if he made more money elsewhere.
-
It would be hard to go backwards.
Hey... welcome back
-
You have NFL game pass? I feel like those of us who post here this much might find it worth itMaybe but I haven't gone back to watch the last 2 seasons to know for myself.
Though I'm lucky if I make one game a year, so anyone who forks out the cash to go to several games a year, it's understandable if not
-
Which article? The one in your original post? I saw that one but wasn't sure if you posted any others since I haven't been too involved in this thread.
Yeah that's the one. Those shallow crosses and the timing routes were incorporated more under Lynn than Roman. You can rewatch a bunch of the passes to Powell and Tate in particular and Clay more as the year ended after Lynn took over as examples.
-
Wow Thurm... streetlight, huh?t
Are they a small handful of plays for every QB? Yeah. Deep passes are a small handful of passes. But they're extremely important. I get why you're trying to ignore that, after all it hurts your argument. Nonetheless, it has the logical problem for your contention that it's, you know, true. Deep passes are where most chunk plays come from, and effective deep passing games make short and intermediate pass games more effective, as small as their actual numbers are.
But again, you keep arguing about the middle of the field ... but again, the only numbers we know from the middle third of the field show the exact opposite of what you're saying, that Brady and Rivers did just the opposite of ignoring the deep middle. That they in fact threw about a third of their deep passes to the deep middle. Unlike Tyrod who didn't. Making Brady and Rivers hard to predict and defense and Tyrod easier.
I see, so you're saying that the only facts we have on the middle third of the field, the Brady, Rivers and Tyrod Taylor 2015 stats, are anomalous. Fine. Start counting and prove it. But we both know you're not going to do that. The only facts we have on the exact area in question show a problem for Tyrod. You can't just assume those facts are anomalous for no better reason than that you don't like what they show. The only way to prove your contention here is to start counting individual plays. Neither of us are willing to spend the time to do that. So we're left with only the facts that we have. Which support my argument and completely undermine yours.
As we both know, I've already googled your charts. And for the thousandth time, the charts you're talking about are the wrong charts. The word around the league on Tyrod is that he can't and doesn't throw to the middle of the field. The reason people think that is because when you watch the games you see he doesn't throw to the middle third. Even the coaches last offseason talked about wanting to get Tyrod throwing to the middle of the field. This isn't made up. This is a thing.
There are no charts for that because it takes a ton of effort to look at it. Infinitely easier to look at visual markers on the field, hashes and numbers. That's why people divide the field up that way, not because it makes sense but because it's easy to count. But looking at those charts ignores Tyrod's issues.
Looking at those charts to try to understand Tyrod's problems is like the old joke about the cop who sees a drunk at night crawling around looking at the ground under a streetlight. The cop says "What are you doing?" and the drunk says, "I'm looking for my keys." The cop says, "Oh, you dropped them here?" and the drunk says "No, I dropped them a couple of blocks over." The cop says, "Why are you looking here then? Why don't you look where you dropped them?" And the drunk says, "The light's better here."
You keep trying to find Tyrod's problem under the streetlight (your charts) because the light's better. But the problem's over where the light is worse. You'll never see the problem, and not because there isn't one but because you refuse to look in the right place.
Tyrod's problem is with the ... middle ... third ... of the field. None of your charts address that area. In fact, they cover up the stats for those areas with completions from Tyrod's strength, the outside thirds.
Yup, keep looking under that streetlight. Don't be surprised if you don't find anything, though.
And I don't know what YPA charts you're referring to, but Tyrod's YPA last year was 6.9. Which is simply bad. 25th in the league. Don't know how you figure bad YPA like that proves he's throwing well deep to any area whatsoever.
Glad I can just laugh this off and not view it as a petty, offensive, arrogant and pretentious post.
To your last question, look at those numbers to "the middle" according to ESPN's splits. Taylor's YPA between the hashmarks is 8.7, not 6.9. Try retracing your steps... your keys are out there.
Let's pick this up after you've found all those references to the "middle third" that must just be so incredibly plentiful since, as you point out, it's a thing.
So find those quotes that are clearly out there... just one with a coach talking about a QBs passes to...
"the....
middle...
third...
of the field."
Here's something from an article about the modern passing game:
In footballs earliest days, the forward pass was primarily about surprising the defense or attacking a single, isolated defender locked in man coverage. As defenses got more sophisticated, offenses evolved too, with the largest contribution coming from former San Diego Chargers head coach Sid Gillman, the Father of the Passing Game. Gillman refined passing into a calibrated, organized attack. His insights inform every throw youll see this fall.
Realizing that a football field is nothing more than a 53⅓-yard-wide geometric plane, Gillman designed his pass patterns to stretch defenses past their breaking points. His favorite method was to divide the field into five passing lanes and then allocate five receivers horizontally in each one. Against most zones, at least one receiver would be open. Below is an image from one of Gillmans final playbooks with the Philadelphia Eagles.
Field division in 5 here... not 3
-
Thurm, find me a single time an NFL coach has ever referred to the "middle third" of the field and I'll concede.
I've seen "between the hash marks" and "inside" or "outside the numbers," all of which we have numbers for to various degrees.
You say:
As we both know, I've already googled your charts. And for the thousandth time, the charts you're talking about are the wrong charts. The word around the league on Tyrod is that he can't and doesn't throw to the middle of the field. The reason people think that is because when you watch the games you see he doesn't throw to the middle third. Even the coaches last offseason talked about wanting to get Tyrod throwing to the middle of the field. This isn't made up. This is a thing.
and then you go on to lump "deep" and "middle third" into this whole thing as though it's clearly implicit in what the coaches say when it's not.
So go find a coach talking about "middle third" since, apparently, as you say, this is a thing.
-
Serious questions here and not trying to be a dick:
1-You think Tyrod Taylor is a QB who's shown that he belongs as the undisputed starter on an NFL team?
2-You think he looks like a guy whose been honing his skills for 5-6 years and has done the things you want to see out of an NFL starter?
3-Lastly - why do you think Tyrod Taylor took a paycut to stay with the Bills? My personal belief is that it was because he knew that Buffalo was the only place he knew he'd start, even if it was just as a bridge.
4-And somehow, you think that's how "someone who belongs," would normally handle that situation?
The only thing he's proven is he WAS where he belonged whilst in Baltimore - in my opinion, of course.
I reformatted your post numerically for me to answer:
1- I think there are very, very few QBs like you refer to. There was a lot of buzz in Seattle this offseason that they were considering drafting a QB early to "light a fire" under Wilson. But regardless, the answer to your question is yes because that's what he is. Taylor survived a coaching and regime change and was kept as the starter despite new coach and GM who often want to bring in "their guy." And say what you want about a weak draft class, but at least 2 NFL teams (including a pretty highly respected Andy Reid) thought 2 QBs were good enough to not just draft in the first round, but pay a hefty price to trade up for them.
So I guess yes, because he is.
2- Again, yes. He's looked like an NFL QB the last couple years when out of college he wasn't nearly this NFL ready.
3- I've been through my thoughts on this a number of times here, but I think Taylor wanted to be in Buffalo to "finish what he started" because he's an uber competitive guy. He made that publicly known in a way on locker clean out day that took away some of his negotiating leverage. Taylor told his agent to see what was out there but unless team and offer absolutely WOWed him he wanted to be back in Buffalo.
You seriously think Cleveland or the Jets wouldn't have offered Taylor more and given him the starter job? I'd throw Houston and maybe SF in there, too, given their QB situation at that time.
But play for the Jets or Browns for more money...?
I don't think Taylor wanted that.
Everyone says players always follow the money and don't care where they play. I think that's crap. Taylor is a single guy with no family, which I think plays a role here. He's got his parents to help support, but by the end of this year Taylor will have made over $25 million in the span of his career thus far; plenty for him and his parents. If he had a wife and kids I could have seen him being more likely to follow the money.
So ultimately, I think he wanted to be in Buffalo.
4- Given what I said above and the situation: yes.
Well it was only mutual once he agreed to the pay cut. If Tyrod had refused the pay cut and contract slashing my gut instinct (though this is opinion, obviously) is that he wouldn't be in Buffalo.
Glad you said it's your opinion.
I disagree.
But we're never going to know for sure.
-
Round and round and round we go Thurm. The argument you're making to the deep portion of the field is getting ridiculous. Google PFF's passing charts for different QBs and you're trying to bicker about a very tiny handful of passes... because that's all they are.I do tend to ignore the stuff you bring up on this particular issue. I read it every time but you consistently don't directly address my specific objections. So yeah, I often don't bother to answer. Because you tend to be repeating the same things you've already said, and ignoring the problem rather than dealing with it. As you did here. I pointed out that the ESPN stats were combining areas of the field where Tyrod throws well with areas where he throws little, and thus masking his weaknesses. In response you compare other QBs stats to Tyrod's artificially elevated stats whose weaknesses at diagnosing his problems I just pointed out. So yeah, I do tend to ignore that, and other cases where points are missed. But you say here that you want to "save posters here some of your misinformation," so I'll do the same for yours.
I explained that those stats miss the point, examine the wrong areas of the field and bury the information about the area he has trouble with in data from areas he's good in. And you use the exact same stats and compare them to other QBs ... thereby missing the exact same point yet again..
You argue that since guys don't go deep middle that often it's not important, again missing the point which is that the reason they didn't go deep middle all that often is that they didn't go deep all that often. QBs don't throw half of their balls deep. Nonetheless those deep balls are some of the most important they throw as they have much higher chances for being chunk plays and they force the defense to respect the deep ball which then opens up the shorter areas for more efficiency. Why are those 5% - or whatever - of passes important? That's why. They're an extremely important part of the plans for the passing game and if they're not functioning well in one area or being predictable as to where they will go, it's important.
You ask if I charted all those other QBs in that area. Did you? If you didn't, your argument has the same weakness you're accusing mine of having.
But in fact as you're aware from our arguments on the old site, I don't need to do that, because a guy did it for us, He produced the dot charts for Brady and Rivers. And so I did at that time indeed go through those dot charts and count out the results and to the surprise of nobody they showed that both Rivers and Brady, unlike Tyrod, distributed their deep and intermediate balls pretty close to evenly across the field. They threw close to a third of their passes to the left third, close to a third of their passes to the center third and close to a third of their passes to the right third. Which made them far more difficult to predict and therefore depend than Tyrod who threw about 40% of his passes to the left third, 40% of his passes to the right third and slightly below 20% of his passes to the middle third. Making him predictable and handicapping the receivers.
I so wish those posts and 2015 dot charts were still available. They're not, but a ton of people saw the argument and none at the time disputed those charts. Those two distributed balls evenly across the field and weren't less successful in any area either. Whereas Tyrod distributed the ball unevenly and did poorly when he did throw it there. This was in 2015, and I can't claim to know what happened in 2016. But in 2015 the results were an estremely telling contrast.
And again, in 2015 nearly half of Tyrod's INTs came from that extremely small number of passes he threw to the deep and intermediate middle third. So in 2015 he threw little and poorly to the deep and intermediate middle third.
Which makes the defense's job easier and may well have been part of the adjustments that defenses made this last year that reduced his efficiency.
You do touch on the key point in your post here, which is this ... "So what?" Jeez. So a lot.
Guys who struggle to use a large area of the field - in this case the deep and intermediate middle third - make things a ton easier on the defense. The safeties can take a step or two away from the area that he doesn't use towards the area he uses well. The CBs can give less respect to the WRs moves towards the center of the field which reduces WR efficiency in the areas Tyrod is better at.
Defenses with a lot of time to look at tape tend to find ways to take away strengths and attack weaknesses. Not exploiting a huge area of the field allows defenses not to defend those areas. It makes the job of the offensive passing game harder. That's so what.
You're right, QBs rarely go deep. And safeties are typically in the middle of the field. That's why, by percentage, the deep middle is the most avoided zone by the vast majority of NFL QBs.
Oh sure, there might be random years where a Tom Brady or a Phillip Rivers throws more than normal there by percentage. But that equates to no more than a handful of passes.
Google the passing charts I mentioned from PFF, you're going to see Taylor going to the deep middle by percentage more than Brady or Wilson (on at least the ones I found). But even that doesn't matter because it's literally a few passes we're talking about.
And if you still so desperately want to argue the ineptitude of Taylor to the deep middle in comparison to his peers, well, be my guest.
As for those ESPN splits I included, the Bills were dead last in the NFL in YAC and 30th in the NFL in terms of YAC/reception. Pretty simple logic that the fact that Taylor has the 3rd highest YPA on that list is a damn good sign that he's throwing the ball quite a bit to the deep and intermediate middle in comparison to his peers and pretty darn effectively, as well:flirt:
-
I know transplant- you are trying hard - but even you stated by the end of the Pittsburgh game you were essentially ready to move on - so everything you say may be true, but with 3 games left in the season you had readily admitted that TT was not good enough. Then he played 2 terrible defenses in Cleveland and Miami and look slightly above average and now you talk that he was fine all year.
TT was not the reason the Bills were average, but he also was not the solution. With a change to the running game - I expect it is going to come back toward the field and I expect we have seen from TT what he can do - I think he will be fine with combo routes to the outside - much like the comeback routes - throws he can see the guy is open. I anticipate he will struggle with throws to moving targets moving between the hash marks because that is what he has struggled with - both vision and anticipation throws. I anticipate that the Bills will be rolling TT out a lot and where we see other QBs throw to 1 of 2 receivers - I think TT will run more than throwing in those situations because he trusts his athletic ability more than his throwing ability.
I think the article provide some nice best case scenarios, but it was interesting how many times they attached routes the Bills used over the last 2 years to illustrate the routes - that means some of these concepts were already used and he struggled at times and in this offense they will limit what TT was best at - the deep go route along the sideline - that is what opened up everything and that will be cut down in the new scheme and I think the short timing routes will bring defenses closer to the LOS - again hurting our running game.
We will see how it goes.
I'm not going to backtrack anything because that's how I felt after the Pittsburgh game, but I chose my words very particularly (and I remember this) as "Taylor's not good enough for us." I said (and felt) that because I just wanted a flat out Elite QB who could elevate everyone around him and Taylor wasn't that guy and I still don't think he ever will be. Again, I still don't think that. But after that emotional moment and the last couple games of the season and thinking about the crap this team dealt with last year, I think Taylor deserves another year of true evaluation because of all the stuff (particularly coaches and injuries) that visibly affected both his success and the team's success last year.
I'm super happy we have those 2 firsts next year... because if Taylor falls on his face, we have some bank to get our guy, finally.
You're right. We're going to see. But just taking a step back after an emotional season, last season, to some degree, was a bit of a mulligan for Taylor.
How so?
Can you refer to the article and my previous posts in the thread on this subject, please? Don't feel like typing it out again.
-
The answer to your first question about how many QBs rode the bench for four years yadda yadda yadda is ... plenty. Probably somewhere close to 50. But you're also missing the point of your own question.
How many guys rode the bench for four years ...? Exactly. The good QBs, the ones who have a good chance to become franchise QBs, don't do that. They beat out the guy ahead of them in the first three or four years. And if they don't for some reason, like Aaron Rodgers, then the three or four years on the bench has put them in position to succeed and they quickly show they belong.
What doesn't happen is they sit on the bench for a long time, have a good year and then regress. There are virtually no cases of this happening and it resulting in a franchise QB ... because that's not how guys like that behave.
This post is baffling.
First of all... 50?!
Name 10... and be sure you include all the "yadda yadda" you probably just glossed over.
Second of all... ummm... quickly showed they belong...? While it might not be to Aaron Rodgers's level, I think that's what he's done...
-
Just got out of the box now.
At least you received an explanation...I requested to know why, but was given no response.
We just all need to be more civil bud. Me included.
-
It is a nice article to show what the plan is - we will need to see if it fits TT or not. I think limiting his reads significantly will make some things easier, but I do not think TT excels at short to mid range passing to moving targets and I do not think TT excels at throwing quick timing routes on time and in stride.
I will hold my judgement on whether the passing attack makes any strides forward until he proves it or doesn't. There is really nothing in the article that makes me think things will get better and there are a lot of patterns - guys coming across the middle of the field - that we have seen the last 2 years and TT has for the most part refused to pull the trigger.
I expect a lot of running out of TT - probably even more than last year as they roll him out and actually a less productive passing attack. I think he will be exactly what we have seen a couple of above average games, a couple of average games, and a few stinkers and if the last 2 years are any indication - the average and bad will come early and when we sit on the brink or are eliminated - he will have his above average games and people will be - look he is getting better - like the Jets game 2 years ago and the Miami game at the end of last season. Those 2 games defined the off season expectations of a lot of fans that then got a dose of reality once the next season started.
I understand, but actually think those timing routes are the very routes Roman should have focused on with Taylor. Lynn incorporated them more and he was pretty good when he ran those plays.
Think about it: read the coverages before the ball is snapped, have a plan when it's snapped, 3-step drop and deliver. Less time to think. Maybe less responsibility post snap in terms of how many reads at that point, but isn't that a large part of the WCO? Know where the ball's going when the ball is snapped. Not much time for the second guessing or doubting that seems to get him into the most trouble.
2 examples just off the top of my head are both of his TD passes in the last Miami game last year. Ball out pretty quick on both plays. Little time to think about the congestion with defenders around. 2 TDs, including one that should have been the game winner with less than 90 seconds remaining.
Lots of other throws like that that Lynn sprinkled into the offense and Taylor delivered starting in week 3. Not as many as there probably will be in a WCO, but certainly more than in Roman's offense.
Was it actually the same style offense though? Tyrod had his moments but his really good performances seemed to be sporadic more than anything.
Lynn's offense was definitely more of the WCO than Roman's in terms of play calling.
-
How many QBs rode the bench for 4 years with no opportunity to start before going to another team, winning the starting QB job, and demonstrating from game 1 he belongs as an NFL starting QB?Yup, I'd take Siemian over Tyrod.
Not if they were both third year guys. But Tyrod is going into his seventh. And seventh year guys who aren't franchise guys make the big leap up to the franchise level almost never.
It's fine. We know you don't think Taylor's any good. But this argument you're making isn't very strong simply because what I just said above almost never happens, but it did with Tyrod.
So, one thing that almost never happens (and I challenge you to go find all those instances where it did happen if I'm wrong) happened with our own starting QB. Maybe the thing you think has little chance of happening has a decent chance of happening considering he's already doing the unexpected.
-
I don't know much about Lynch, really, but I think you're underestimating Siemian.
Siemian went into his first NFL action, in his second year, and came up with an 84.9 passer rating. And it was behind an OL that wasn't doing him any favors. He could be a good one. Still too early to say, but he did well for what a young inexperienced guy he is, a guy who wasn't exactly a first-rounder either.
I think they're gonna be pretty good. But I'm no Nostradamus. We'll see.
Passer Rating, huh?
89.6 > 84.9
So does this mean Taylor "could be a good one" even more than Siemian?
Both teams are going to continue to run the same schemes under the new coordinators.
Both teams have better talent than the Bills IMO.
I don't want the Bills to lose these games but think they will.
Friendly bet Buffalo wins one of them?
-
Didn't know that transplant
I thought maybe you were on vacation.
A forced one, yes.
The mods basically said they were enforcing martial law here to try to get this place completely civil before TC and the season starts.
It's okay, though. I deserved it as much as they did. I may not have started it, but I certainly could have taken the high road and not retaliated, but I didn't.
I hope I've learned my lesson, at least to some degree
-
Your input is greatly appreciated, but the topic of this thread has nothing to do with former Bills QBs; it's about the near future/how the passing game will be this coming season.
Personally, I think that the pretty stats of the past will not be duplicated this year. A baseball team can have a player hit 55 HR in a season; if they were all solo shots with the team either up or down by 5+ runs, it becomes a meaningless - albeit very pretty - statistic.
I want to see more effective 2-minute drills. I want to see a pass play over the middle of the field executed on a crucial 3rd and long. I want to feel confident in the offense when they take the field down by 4 late in the game.
I think the new coaching staff has no choice but to call big boy plays in big boy situations. Those situations will define TT and determine his future, IMO.
Good thing we started seeing those things happen in Taylor's last couple games.
From the Cleveland game:
3-22-BUF 44(3:14) (Shotgun) 5-T.Taylor pass deep middle to 88-M.Goodwin to CLE 33 for 23 yards (58-C.Kirksey). Caught at CLE 36, slanting from left.
From the Miami game:
4-7-MIA 7(1:25) (Shotgun) 5-T.Taylor pass short right to 85-C.Clay for 7 yards, TOUCHDOWN. Caught 2 yds. into end zone. The Replay Official reviewed the pass completion ruling, and the play was Upheld. The ruling on the field was confirmed.
Let's hope it keeps up
There are a lot of BB message board people that can confirm what "team you joined." Are you saying that you DID NOT want EJ to win the job going into 2015? I supported Tyrod in that competition but mostly because I thought Cassel and EJ were terrible (I was right). I would have supported any unknown in that same situation.
Dude, no need to antagonize people. Your premise that all people who supported EJ or were "EJ homers" are now "Tyrod haters" is wrong.
I supported and wanted EJ to win that QB competition in 2015. I was also what some considered an "EJ homer," though I think those terms are ridiculous and thrown around too loosely.
But now, clearly, I'm a Tyrod supporter or a "Tyrod homer" as some would say.
So the premise that all people who supported EJ hate Tyrod is just plain wrong.
I'm in the camp of
Rex less = 2 additional wins - even if TT has the same exact stats as 2016.
Lets go Ginger Hammer (McD)
I know JeffsMagic is in the penalty box. did Crusher join him there?
Crusher and Mary Baulstein or Ryan or whatever postername he was under were in the penalty box with me. If they were in it as long as I was (2 weeks), they should be out by now.
Took me 10 years of posting on a Bills message board, but I finally got my first ban and I still feel a little dirty
-
Whoa whoa whoa... I fully admit to being a former EJ guy who's now a Tyrod guy, and you can ask the former BBMBers because I was still that during that 3 way competition, so I don't buy into whoever had the notion that if you liked EJ, you don't like Tyrod. But you're showing some serious bias here and it's a little revealing.If you disagree, you didn't watch the games. Throughout the "competition," Tyrod was outplayed in literally every aspect. Does that mean EJ was good? No. It means they both sucked, but Rex had his mind made up before the bullschit competition. Like I said, if you disagree, that proves you didn't watch and you're just being a sheep. I'll leave it at that.
So come back with some examples instead of a bunch of punctuation marks. You like to throw the label "troll" around, but the only thing you've contributed is !@#$ing baseless name-calling and punctuation.
Bring more or go home. You're not in Kansas anymore, Toto.
You talk about the preseason games as if that's all the QB competition consisted of, which it didn't. Yes, EJ looked good from our perspective because of all those "wow plays" we all so yearned for in his first couple years. We wanted him to let it loose and he did and it resulted in serious chunk yards and a handful of TDs. We love that as fans, but I doubt those are the plays that win a QB the starting job.
Taylor was good in those games too, but in executing more of the NFL passes that are the bread and butter of an NFL offense. Less gaudy numbers, but I doubt the coaches cared about numbers in the preseason.
And there's your entire neglect of practice, where coaches do most of their evaluation. Lots of accounts about Taylor playing really well and turning heads that summer. As for EJ...
This was the summer of the hospitality tent incident, remember?
Good GodI honestly don't think so. I think EJ is a great kid with a great work ethic (like Tyrod), but he just lacked "it," (like Tyrod). BUT ... he did get a raw deal from day one. There is no doubt about that. I think, had he remained the starter, that the Bills still would have been around .500 for the past two years. They're simply not that far apart, as far as overall effectiveness is concerned. I think Tyrod's got more athletic ability. But I think EJ is smarter. But Fitz proved that being smart is only one piece to the puzzle. There's a reason there aren't that many great QBs in the league at any given time. It's not easy.
-
It's far from a statistical fact that "he stays in the pocket for about 1 second." That might not be malicious on your part. But it's a pretty wildly hyperbolic statement and might be viewed as trolling.How the hell is what I said trolling? I called a career backup, who has been wildly unsuccessful in his two years as a starter, a future backup. I cited how he holds the ball too long. Statistically, that is a fact - he holds it the longest in the league.
So tell me, friend, other than the fact that you clearly disagree (whilst offering no substance), how do you feel I am trolling you?
-
Re: Vick - he took the league by storm and was also twice the athlete anyone who came after him was. But once teams figured out how to stop him and to make him try to be a real QB, career over.
Re: Cam Newton - I will respectfully disagree with your assessment. I think Newton passes the ball just about as well as he runs. I think he's the real deal and will be around for a long time.
Re: Taylor - I will also respectfully disagree with your statement that he's a pocket passer. He's anything but. He stays in the pocket for about 1 second, then bails and holds the ball for another 6 seconds before he either takes a dumb sack, throws a bad pass or runs. I think, after Buffalo, his future will be as a backup, where many teams would love to have him.
Sorry, but go look at Vick's career. His career was over because of age. You act like his best years were his first couple years except they were his first couple years and they weren't. If you're saying that by the time teams saw about 100 games worth of film on tape that was what ended his career because by then he was figured out, that's a stretch. Vick played at a very high level in 2010 with the Eagles. Vick was pretty special. Taylor's not there, but he's definitely closer to the athlete Vick was than pretty much anyone I can think of at QB before or since.
Fine, we can disagree about Cam because we clearly do. If Cam didn't have his dual threat ability, he'd be a below average QB. He's just not consistently accurate enough as a passer. All my opinion, of course.
And I'm sorry, but I just think your assessment of Taylor is extreme hyperbole.
-
I think the problem may be in comprehension.
My point that was that history has clearly shown that - in the NFL - Quarterbacks who run significantly better than they pass never last long and they're never part of winning teams. Never.
I'm not buying that Tyrod !@#$ing Taylor is going to break that cycle based on a bunch of fluff stats that have helped keep the Bills mired in mediocrity.
Those QBs don't last as long, I agree. But they're never part of winning teams? Never?
Mike Vick would disagree. And Vick was definitely more of a runner than Tyrod is. Yet, he made the playoffs a few times over the span of his career, which was a 10+ year career, mind you.
Vick was a lethal weapon. And if anyone watched the NFL Network special on him, you'd know that his coach actually told him when he'd drop back to pass, if he saw a certain coverage, take off and run.
I know there are people who hate to talk about the value of something like that, but that was lethal with Vick. Taylor's not quite the athlete Vick is. But he's probably about as close to the athlete as a runner as anyone in the NFL at QB in a very long time and he's a better passer than Vick is. No, he doesn't have a stronger arm, but Taylor's certainly more of a pocket QB than Vick was.
Cam Newton really falls into this category, too. He's certainly a QB who runs better than he passes and he just made the Super Bowl and was the league MVP a couple years ago.
I don't expect Taylor to play into his 40s, but if he can improve and become a long term answer, if he's playing when he's 35 at a fairly high level (aka: standard NFL starting QB level) I don't think it'd be reasonable to be too upset to have him as the Bills QB.
-
Agreed that the dot plots show that he went to the outside thirds of the field more. But as I extensively documented on the old site, in 2015 his success in the deep and intermediate middle thirds was awful, including a much larger than expected number of his INTs considering he threw very few passes there.
I didn't go through every pass this last year in 2016 so I can't say, and would be willing to believe he improved.
But as I've pointed out again and again, the PFF stats and the ESPN stats both miss the point. Tyrod throws well not just outside the hashes but also for another two to three yards inside them. And he also goes there a lot. Both PFF and ESPN consider those passes to an area he went to often and well to be "the middle." Which it isn't. Tyrod throws often and well to the outside third of the field and not often and at least in 2015 not so well to the middle third of the field. Of course, dividing the passes that way is a ridiculous amount of work, as I discovered. So after I did it play by play in 2015 I I haven't found anyone else who has done it.
So yeah, his stats "to the middle" look good because the area of the outside that he throws to often and well is being considered "the middle" by these folks, so they throw all his good stats in with the far fewer balls he threw to the middle third and the stats from those just-inside-the-hashes passes overwhelm the stats for the balls actually thrown to the area Tyrod has trouble with.
Again, Tyrod has trouble with one area, the deep and intermediate middle third. Throw in stats from other areas he's better at, like the area just inside the hashes or the area in the middle but short, in the first ten yards, and yeah, those areas he's strong in cover up the tendencies in the areas he's weak in.
Thurm, we've been through this over at BBMB and you're going to completely ignore this because that's what you do, but in order to save some posters from some of your misinformation, I'm going to respond to this with a bunch of stuff I've brought up to you but you ignore. SInce that was on another message board, we wanna make sure we understand why your premise is incomplete and/or inconclusive, because you must analyze other QBs comparatively rather than just taking Taylor's numbers and arbitrarily saying they aren't good enough based on your own personal opinion rather than what other NFL QBs are doing.
First, stop with this deep middle obsession of yours. It doesn't matter because NFL QBs go there such a small percentage of the time that that area of the field (20+ yards to the middle) might be the most ignored by NFL QBs.
According to just a few of the PFF passing charts I could find, in terms of the deep middle of the field
Cam Newton went there 5.9% of the time
Tom Brady went there 3.8% of the time
Russell Wilson went there 2.5% of the time
Tyrod Taylor went there 4.4% of the time
QBs rarely throw to the deep middle. Period.
ESPN's stats are literally stats to the middle of the field because they're between the hashmarks. And in 2016, Taylor's numbers compared to a bunch of other QBs looked like this:
Rodgers: 9.3% of total attempts, 57.9 % completions, 7.5 YPA, 0 TDs, 2 INTs, 67.1 Passer Rating
Newton: 10.6% of total attempts, 59.3 % completions, 8.6 YPA, 3 TDs, 1 INTs, 98 Passer Rating
Mariota: 10.6% of total attempts, 66.7 % completions, 8.1 YPA, 3 TDs, 1 INTs, 103.6 Passer Rating
Carr: 12% of total attempts, 67.2 % completions, 8.6 YPA, 5 TDs, 3 INTs, 100.3 Passer Rating
Taylor: 7.3% of total attempts, 78.1 % completions, 8.7 YPA, 0 TDs, 0 INTs, 103 Passer Rating
Tannehill: 10.3% of total attempts, 70 % completions, 6.3 YPA, 0 TDs, 1 INTs, 76.3 Passer Rating
Wilson: 8.4% of total attempts, 65.2 % completions, 7.5 YPA, 0 TDs, 0 INTs, 83.9 Passer Rating
Cousins: 11.7% of total attempts, 74.6 % completions, 10.4 YPA, 4 TDs, 4 INTs, 102.8 Passer Rating
Stafford: 10.8% of total attempts, 70.3 % completions, 7.9 YPA, 0 TDs, 0 INTs, 93.8 Passer Rating
Luck: 15.8% of total attempts, 61.6 % completions, 7.4 YPA, 6 TDs, 0 INTs, 107.5 Passer Rating
Winston: 9.7% of total attempts, 72.7 % completions, 8.2 YPA, 2 TDs, 1 INTs, 101.5 Passer Rating
Ryan: 12.5% of total attempts, 71.6 % completions, 10.3 YPA, 7 TDs, 1 INTs, 133.3 Passer Rating
Yeah, those take all passes to the middle, but notice how high his YPA is compared to everyone else... so those aren't just little dumpoffs with a whole bunch of YAC, especially since we know Taylor's WR corps got some of the lowest YAC in the NFL.
So that's just over 6 yards worth of passes horizontally across the field in the middle. A football field is 160 feet or 53.333 yards. Your "middle third" obsession is 17.7 yards. We have data on 6.5 of those yards, so you're arguing that all those leftover numbers for Taylor that fall outside the hashmarks but between the numbers fall in the 3.7 yards immediately inside the numbers but not any closer to the hashmarks. You're saying he ignores and doesn't do well about 7 yards immediately outside the hashmarks on both sides, but does just fine inside those hashmarks, which is the most precise middle of the field you can get pretty much, and the rest of his good throws come in the just under 4 yards right before the numbers on both sides.
You're arguing that his good passing inside the hashmarks, or exactly to the middle of the field, and just inside the numbers for just under 4 yards (about 3.7 yards) end up skewing his numbers that he has for PFF for the "middle of the field" and that he's absolutely horrible and/or ignores those 7 yards just outside the hashmarks and before those 3.7 yards inside the numbers. 2 questions:
Did you chart other QBs to find out how they're doing in those same areas?
I hope so, because otherwise the numbers don't mean much.
AND
Let's say you're right (and we can't really say that until we have some numbers of other QBs for comparison's sake) and Taylor's great inside the hashmarks and just inside the numbers on both sides for about 4 yards but struggles more than other QBs for about the 7 yards inside that.
So what?
Article on why 2017 passing game can make giant leap forward
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
#gogetThurmunderthestreetlight