transplantbillsfan

You act like it means nothing, but QBs like Matthew Stafford and Jameis Winston don't gain those extra 2 yards... they lose yards. I haven't even looked at their own designed runs vs. sacks vs. kneeldowns (which you'd have to do), but Winston netted -71 yards and Stafford netted -9 yards after considering their runs and their sacks, while Taylor netted +175 yards. You act like Taylor's the only one who has "crushing, drive killing sacks" in the NFL when in actuality it happens a lot to a lot of QBs.

What's wrong with you? Why do you resort to personal attacks? Don't worry... I just included it for you... see above

I'm with you here, but the other side of the argument actually thinks rushes don't count or matter. But since we're on the subject... if that other side wants to discount how much the Bills actually relied upon him in the passing game by saying "runs don't count," then we would need to look at drop backs that aren't designed runs. Taylor scrambled 47 times last year, or 3.1 times a game. And he was sacked 42 times last year, or 2.8 times a game. That's 5.9 times the ball didn't leave his hand, but the Bills were entrusting him in the passing game. Some of those were positive plays like the scrambles (which he gained 371 yards on) while some were negative plays like the sacks (which he lost 196 yards on). (So he netted 175 yards on those 6 extra attempts per game. So he was gaining 12 extra yards per game on those 6 added drop backs) Although I suspect I'll be accused of "cooking stats," that's the reality of what Taylor was asked to do and actually accomplished on those plays the Bills asked him to pass but he didn't.

Yes. Thanks for admitting you were wrong to do that ...even if you're doing it in a weasly way

Ryan? OMFG... is that the same Ryan who was on here who had Trubisky as his avatar? I was wondering where that guy went. Explains a lot

Cheap tactics. Cheap. Rhetorical. Tactics. If your point wouldn't have been invalidated by saying "28 times a game," then why didn't you do it? In fact, if you were going closer to reality, which rounds to the nearest 10, you would have said "30ish."

All of the first paragraph is what a lot of you guys base your entire argument on: The Bills were going to release Taylor if he didn't take a pay cut! ​I respect your opinion, but I disagree. And it's an opinion, certainly not fact. And it's pure arrogance to call it fact. I've laid out my position on this before so I'm not going to type it again. You've heard it before. I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that your assumptions are anything more than speculation. Just remember... the Bills had ALL the control in that situation. All they had to do was exercise an option on a contract Taylor was already under to keep him.

What is? Whether Taylor plays well enough for the Bills to use the franchise tag on him or whether the Bills would use the franchise tag in that manner? The 'Skins did it twice with Cousins and it's not like he's an Elite QB or anything. Taylor averaged 29.1 passes per game in 2016 and 27.1 in 2015. I understand that saying "20ish times" gives you some license and makes your argument sound so much stronger than using numbers that are closer to his actual numbers, but it's the equivalent of me saying I resemble Brad Pitt because I have blonde hair and blue eyes. Thank you. That's just a cheap rhetorical tactic.

How are they risking losing him? Taylor is our's for the next 4 years if he's playing to the level where the Bills want to franchise him. This is the best contract the Bills could ask for. Shaw thinks this contract is a win for Taylor based on what his agent friend said. And while I respect his opinion and credibility and do think Taylor is "betting on himself" to a certain degree, I think Taylor wanted to stay with the Bills more than some folks are willing to accept (because pro athletes go where the most money is!) and he showed his hand the moment he opened himself to restructuring on clean out day. It's the whole art of the deal thing... once he showed any level of willingness, of course McDermott is going to try to get him to take less money if he can free up money at other positions of need. It's not like he's built a significant relationship with Taylor that can't be repaired. Sorry, but that's just what I think happened. And it's reasonable even if you disagree. Your opinion is reasonable, too, even though I disagree. What's irritating is when posters say that an opinion is unarguable when, in fact, it's merely speculation.

It's not just one line. There's more to this story than just one line. You're grossly over exaggerating here. Actions speak louder than words, huh? Fine, all indications were that Taylor was out. Buffalo wanted to move on at the position and someone would inevitably be starting at QB because the Bills weren't happy with him at QB. That's what was widely reported from multiple "credible" sources at the end of the year. Then we get a new Head Coach. And this new Head Coach comes from a team that recently made the Super Bowl with a similar QB in terms of general skill sets (NOT talking about level of play). And this new Head Coach hires the most recent OC his prospective QB has worked with outside of Buffalo. And this new Head Coach had only had glowing remarks on this new QB, including high praise of what he saw on tape and in person. And this Coach, despite clearly having pretty clear control to go out and bring in his own Guy as everyone professes a new HC prefers, HE KEEPS TAYLOR! And... you get the idea. If you think I looked at a single quote and formed an entire opinion on it, you're wrong. It just lends further credence to it.

And if you want my answer for number 2 it's because McDermott hasn't seen enough of Taylor up close to wager his future on him if he doesn't have to. What he did with the contract and the draft move is about the best possible QB scenario he could hope for. He's hedging his bets and now has options. Just because he's giving himself options doesn't mean he doesn't have opinions on which options are most likely. Why is this an either/or scenario for everyone? McDermott has set himself with who he believes (according to him) will be the team's long term answer at the position based on what he's seen so far but he's given himself an out and options to get a franchise QB after this season if he's wrong.

This goes for countless posts by a number of posters on both sides of the aisle

Thanks. I don't like arguing, but I'll admit a fault I have is that I either rise or fall to the level of discussion. I greet antagonism with antagonism. It's a fault. One I believe I share with many on this message board. Okay, if you really want me to answer those questions simply I need to start out with this: I don't know anything at all about what people's motives were. What I don't like is that some people think they do know lyll​and present what is opinion as fact. As to your questions: #1 - We don't know what would have happened if the deadline approached and the Bills had to make a decision. I realize some are going to chime in that Taylor would have been cut, but as much as some people in previous posts were talking about how "logic dictates that..." there are different forms of logic. There's a lot I could type here, but Shaw has actually explained some of this in the past. What I'll say is that Taylor sorta dug his own grave in terms of negotiations with Buffalo when he said he'd be open to restructuring his contract on clean out day. Whether Taylor made a mistake or legitimately was open to restructuring for the reasons he claimed eventually that he restructured in order to help the team free up some money to strengthen itself at some positions, I don't know for sure. I can't read minds. It's funny to me because sometimes people say actions speak louder than words and other times people quote what people say as though it's biblical. To me, it's pretty logical from a business perspective that the moment Taylor said that, Buffalo had an obligation to do anything it could to make it happen. And stories and experts came out with all of these stories that never made reference to any single source... probably because the team was trying to leverage Taylor to take a pay cut if he was unwilling (and again, I don't know what his position was). And then McDermott came in and he brought Dennison in. The Dennison hire, to me, was a clear sign that he wanted to roll with Taylor, especially considering McDermott's up close and personal experiences with Cam Newton's successes in Carolina. Whaley was still with the team and maybe Taylor still felt like he had power and sway to get rid of him but wanted to stay in Buffalo. I actually think Taylor wanted to stay in Buffalo and gave them a hometown discount where he could have gone to Cleveland or the Jets or maybe the 49ers for more money but less stable teams in what would be a brand new environment. Not everyone likes change. I can already anticipate these responses that have to do with "what people do" and "what people think" in certain situations and, to me, that's just irritating to talk about people's tendencies as fact because not everyone thinks the same or reacts the same in different situations. Including pro athletes. That's just a bit for #1. Gotta go, but be back for #2 probably later.

If you're content with posters living in this supposed "fantasy world" why do you follow that statement immediately clearly trying to convince them they're wrong?

That's a tantrum? You're really sensitive. And no, that's not simple logic... or I should say it's not definitive logic as you seem to think it is. It's just one interpretation of why he said what he said. It's a reasonable interpretation, just like believing he said what he meant is.

No, it's because you're stating something is inarguable that isn't...

Whatever you say, Boss Okay then. I guess it's just inarguable as you guys profess. McDermott lied. He must have brought up Taylor's name without being prompted to even mention a QBs name on the roster as part of a grand master plan having to do with finding a way to find a Franchise QB not named Tyord Taylor. God it. Thanks for clearing that up

Ummm... and... ? Are you trying to use that statement to say that not some, but ALL statements out of a coach's mouth are 100% false? Are you using that statement somehow as proof that McDermott means the opposite of what he says?

I can agree with all of this. But if Taylor is more the 2015 Taylor in terms of production than 2016, I doubt we draft a QB in round 1. It's inarguable to say that the Bills don't view Tyrod Taylor as the QB of the future even though McDermott, when asked directly if the QB of the future is on the roster currently, his immediate response was "He is. In Tyrod Taylor." ...? And yes, I was being sarcastic before

Yeah, it's about this simple...

Got it, Boss

They also only played 19 games combined with Taylor... and both were hobbled for multiple games in ways very unlike the normal wear and tear of an NFL WR, particularly Sammy.

Yep... but #1 and that "good" to "great" definition is what seems to be the issue and question...

To answer your questions in order: - I don't know, maybe he really likes what he's seen from Taylor on tape in the past and from what he's seen in person and what he's saying is projection based on that. - I really can't believe you're seriously asking this question. Because the NFL is a "what have you done for me lately" league. I think it's pretty clear that McDermott expects Taylor to be pretty successful this year and, based off of those expectations, it seems he would be projecting his QB of the future as Taylor right now. Obviously, if he sucks, McDermott's feelings would change. Coaches opinions on players change, ya know... And if Carr sucks this year, his coach's opinion on him will change on him depending on factors involved. - Taylor has a unique contract to allow for this. It's a unique situation. But in the same way that from 2012-2015 we heard praise heaped upon the new upcoming QBs who would inevitably be Elite QBs like RG3, Kaepernick, Tannehill, and Bortles and now everyone has rightfully turned almost a full 180 degrees on those opinions, McDermott can do the same thing. Smart and good coaches and GMs in the NFL do what's frowned upon in Internet message boards: They change their opinions based on what they see.