transplantbillsfan

So I think all this stuff is worth a look. It's pretty darn interesting. So the Bills had 46 sacks, but Taylor was sacked 42 times. EJ was sacked 3 times and Jones was sacked once. The offense converted one of those sacks on EJ for a 1st down. So, Taylor's offense was 12/42 (still 28.6%) in converting 1st downs for a sack. But 16 of his 42 sacks were on 3rd down, which are plays I think it'd be hard to call "drive-killers" in the manner some people use that phrase.

Hap, we're nubes so I understand the hesitation for making a new thread for something like this, but I actually think this link and the 2 articles in the "study" it references actually deserves it's own thread. There are going to be a couple of the (*ahem*) usual suspects who criticize the Tyrod homers for coming out in full force, but I don't think this is a study anyone has really seen or discussed. I'm still digesting some of it myself. I'll come back here to comment on it if you haven't started a separate thread. Thanks! Intriguing stuff

Yes. Calling someone a tightwad is bashing him. It's an inflammatory statement. If you really can't see that, I think the next logical question would be: have you graduated High School, yet? There were plenty of other ways to say what you said. Instead, you chose to go the middle-school route throwing out playground insults.

Dude... look at your 2nd and especially your 3rd posts in your own thread from page 1: You're calling yourself one of the worst posters on the board

Yeah, and that's a big part of the problem here. Taylor was missing his top WRs in his not-so-deep WR corps more than most teams. Woods and Sammy missed a combined 11 games in 2016. Only the Jets and Chargers had their #1 and #2 WRs miss more games than Sammy and Woods. 2 other teams missed their #1 and #2 WRs 11 games like Buffalo: Tampa Bay and Chicago. None of those teams made the playoffs. By contrast, the 8 teams with the fewest games missed by their WRs all made the playoffs: Detroit (1) NYG (2) Houston (2) New England (4) 5 if you take Edleman, Amendola, and Hogan as a group Atlanta (4) Green Bay (4) Dallas (4) Kansas City (4)​

You're giving a single example that isn't representative of most of his scrambles. QBs passing for 7.9 YPA are passing with great efficiency... you get that, right? 14 scrambles by Taylor were actually on 3rd down. 7 were converted. 50% conversion rate for a QB is pretty darn good. Taylor also scored 4 TDs scrambling on passing plays. These plays aren't the throwaway plays you insist they are. This just wreaks of someone who's ill-informed. Also... You and a couple other posters are being just flat out mean and rotten. You're directly insulting people who are bringing in different sides to the argument. Did you start this thread to discuss the topic or insult people?

Good idea to consider special teams here. I know Thurm mentioned Buffalo's average starting position vs the opponent average field position. http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/returning/sort/puntReturnYards/position/defense Looks like Buffalo's kick return special teams coverage was particularly horrible... 3rd worst in the league Again... nicely stated. Special teams has really been let off the hook in a lot of ways.

Why do people care about this so much? Yards are yards. Points are points. Taylor scrambled for more yards per scramble (7.9) than the vast majority of NFL QBs passed per attempt.

Nice reality check on the whole picture of the passing game. The Bills actually had about 35 passing plays called per game with Taylor at QB. But just under 3 of those plays per game he was sacked for about 4.6 yards per sack and just over 3 of those plays per game he scrambled for 7.9 yards per scramble.

I think it's more about balance of blame between the two than pinning it all on one side, though some posters seem to want to do that. Our defense was record breakingly bad by allowing Ajayi two 200 yard rushing games and Bell another one. 3 losses out of the 5 that really mattered since the last game was a throwaway game. No excuses for that. The D was about as close as almost entirely responsible as you can get in the NFL for the Bengals win. Might have caught a break with one of the best WRs getting injured early. And they were good in the Patriots game against a 3rd stringer, other than that, they were decent to below average to horrid. Yeah, our passing offense needs to get better, but it'd be great to have a D opponents (especially RBs) don't salivate facing.

What? Do you have anything at all to back this up? I actually think he'd thrive in play action; Roman/Lynn just didn't use it often in their system.

Weird logic... so the key to fixing all of our woes is simply passing more? Does it matter if we're significantly less efficient in the run game? Or if we turn the ball over significantly more? Or, for that matter, end up with a defense that gets worse rather than better? You really believe it's possible that the fact that we didn't pass more was what kept us out of the playoffs... despite the fact that we averaged 1 less pass per game than the #1 seed in the NFC? I was hoping when reading this OP that it'd be more about offensive philosophy, instead it's just a vastly generalized anTy thread...

That Cross on your back must be insanely heavy! I feel like you block things out from your vision when you read it. I'm not guilt free and never said I was. I just don't strike first. You were posting in this thread for several pages. I never once responded to you or mentioned your name. Then you post: Case and point. You can leave or you can talk about the topic at hand rather than constantly derail it. Up to you

It's Dr. Jekyll you're talking to right now. Mr Hyde will inevitably be around. Unfortunately, Dr Jekyll doesn't have a clue about what he does as Mr Hyde... I said those things after you had just insulted me. That's what you always do Sweet!!! Starting when?

Do you feel left out? GROUP HUUUUG!!!!!

I A week away from this thread and not even a remotely recent dialogue between the two of us and, without any prompting from me or even a post by me, you go with this. One example of how you haven't really changed... Maybe you're the one who's got it hard for someone... Is that it? Bang and i professed our love, you feel left out? Oh Crusher, don't worry, I'm not a one man kinda guy

80% on the QB? Not a chance. Someone earlier mentioned making this fun and wagering. Wanna bet the Bills have more than 1 win by the 5th game?

Can I be Larry?

It's not about TD throws, it's about what he does (and does not do) on those TD throws (which are readily available and easily found samples of his 2016 passes) that completely contradict the central premise of the post I originally responded to from you. 8 out of his 10 TD passes under pressure were from the pocket. Even if that ends up a little high, it's a pretty good indication of what he did under pressure in 2016. Really not a good look...

Dude, I won't pretend to be innocent, but you pretty clearly like to start $H!+ and use much more vitriol ("clowns and fools," "transplant's got it hard for Taylor," etc) than almost anyone else. Stop pretending you should be viewed as a martyr

You've put time in for research? Doubtful. Crusher, you started a single thread on BBMB that contained some pretty solid research to discuss. I defended you when that thread closed down because I thought it was unfair and ridiculous. That's the kind of Crusher I hoped to see over here with a brand new fresh start. Unfortunately, that thread was an outlier for you. I don't need to go figure out the throws because nothing is going to convince you to acknowledge any level of promise from Taylor in terms of the QB position as you want it played. You believe that you're somehow showing objectivity when you acknowledge strengths like "a great deep ball" or "elite athleticism" or "a great runner," except you aren't because you choose pretty much inarguably his universal strengths. But you get those 17 throws to look at (did you even bother going and watching the throws you?) and pretty much acknowledge that he does what you think he doesn't do well on those throws and now need to see the rest of the throws and get numbers for how many were outside of the pocket rather than in the pocket...? Crusher, you must be desperate.

Bang... you and I just had a discussion about what you called something "petty" by me yesterday. Here you're being dismissive of Shaw for pointing something out that actually seems like a natural thought: You're asking how Taylor would have done with Fitz's WRs, so it sure seems like a point of at least questionable comparison. I'm really not trying to pick a fight here... and maybe you're just having some Internet fun... but just be wary of the way you point your finger... I heart you so much

Very. Solid. Post.

Hooray for 300 yard games as the measure to end all measures!!! Let's all just hope Taylor doesn't come out with another "We're ready" video the night before our week 1 game against the Jets I don't need to do that at all. Nice try, though. The TD passes and interceptions themselves, for that matter, demonstrate that these numbers are incorporating passes in the pocket as well as outside the pocket from Taylor. And just from watching his TDs and INTs alone, you can see that Taylor's tendency was actually to stay in the pocket and deliver the ball even with pressure coming. There were absolutely passes and plays where he evaded pressure and left the pocket and then delivered the ball, like his 2nd TD pass in the Jets game, but then there were those passes where he stood tall in the pocket with a defender (often) barreling directly at him in full sight and he delivered, like his TD pass to Goodwin in the 1st 'Phins game. And you just watch the TDs and INTs he threw and you can see that Taylor had no problems in the pocket in the midst of pressure. You're just in extreme denial if you're calling for every single pass at this point.

I think Foxx has been having a little fun to some degree taking on this Persona... I hope at least...