transplantbillsfan

It's funny because I agree with pretty much every single word you say here other than the use of the word "or", which I'd replace with "and", yet you know what I think... Tell me more about what I think, please... Oh... okay. Pretty simple really, a lot can happen in one year, can't it? Do you think when the Raiders drafted JaMarcuss Russell they drafted him thinking he wasn't going to be a great QB? Why is it people think these things are mutually exclusive? McDermott spent almost 4 full months up until now evaluating tape on previous seasons from Taylor, meeting and knowing the person, and seeing his work ethic, and has formed an opinion it seems after those 4 months that Taylor is the franchise's answer at QB for the future, his words, not mine. BUT That doesn't mean that Taylor's play on the field in 2017 isn't the most important evaluation tool for McDermott on Taylor's longterm prospects at the position in Buffalo. So if Taylor plays poorly, of course McDermott moves on. And he was smart in hedging his bets by keeping Taylor while also getting an extra 1st round draft pick next year. So if Taylor is the answer, the Bills use those 2 1sts to build around Taylor. If he's not, those 2 1sts are there to help draft the QB of the future. Does that make sense? Except his exact words when asked if the Quarterback of the future is on the roster in Buffalo right now, McDermott's exact and immediate words were: "He is, in Tyrod Taylor." And I'm the one who's blinded by bias...?

Ummm... I did post the entire quote... maybe not in that post, but I did post it a few posts earlier. And McDermott doesn't say at any point in that initial response if he didn't know if the QB of the future was on the roster. He said that after Beane's response, and I've already given my interpretation of it. And as disgusted as you and Teeflebees is with my interpretation, it's a reasonable, even probable interpretation. You guys are too funny. No accident... I provided the link and the quote already. Keep twisting and twisting in the wind though... I don't know why you let a poster on a message board get under your skin so much... Can you direct me to a personal insult I made?

Yeah... the same people on two different message boards have pointed it out. You have a real funny way of twisting things. You can believe what you want to believe regarding what I think. I don't care. You're wrong on many of your assumptions about me. But you seem to enjoy being an antagonist, and I'm a grown man and I can take it on a message board when it's not personal.

Are you trolling or you genuinely don't get this?

No, it's so sad that this is what you resort to. What you said about me regarding the whole "fairly intelligent person" with the "bias" qualifier applies completely to you, as well. I'm going to give you a hint, you're wrong about your perception of me, I'm MUCH more in the middle than you think I am, but because you're seemingly so far in left field with Crusher and Old School and their ilk, you take anyone who's in the middle who says something that has potentially positive connotations about Taylor as a Taylor homer. McDermott is telling the truth in both of those situations, to a degree. It's an open competition in the sense that he's open to starting one of the other QBs if they really WOW him and/or Taylor struggles mightily BUT McDermott, having studied the tape on Taylor from the previous 2 seasons and watched and interacted with Taylor so far, believes Taylor is the QB of the future, which is why that was his immediate response in the MMQB interview. Both. Are. True. Read above...

Oh boy...

Not that Taylor is but that McDermott believes he is... Tell me... which of those 2 statements do you think are more true? If you think I believe if Taylor struggles a lot this summer he's still penciled in as the starter, I don't. Others have provided very good explanations for what kind of a competition this will likely be, and it's not as a truly "open" one the way it was between EJ, Tyrod, and Cassel. That I agree with. I'm human. I'm biased. You clearly are, too. That doesn't mean it blinds me.

Of course things aren't what they seem to be...? Here's the exact question AND McDermott's immediate response. MMQB: Is Buffalos quarterback of the future on the roster now? McDermott: He is, in Tyrod Taylor. What kind of twisting am I doing there? But keep finding a way to personally insult me. You're really showing how much of a winner you are

I'm sorry... that's an unreasonable interpretation? Did you click the link and read that part of the interview? You explain how you interpreted Beane's inter

Doesn't seem like coach speak to me... if anything it seems like Beane almost made him walk back his enthusiasm right after that response and McDermott's response right after that was the diplomatic one. Sure seemed like genuine enthusiasm as his initial response. But to each his own. I absolutely do not think McDermott will hesitate moving on from Taylor if he's disappointed in his 2017 season. But it sure doesn't seem like this is the open competition some believed was being advertised.

Yeah, McDermott really sounds like Tyrod just isn't his guy... http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/05/15/buffalo-bills-sean-mcdermott-brandon-beane-nfl-peter-king MMQB: Is Buffalos quarterback of the future on the roster now? McDermott: He is, in Tyrod Taylor. And then when you look at the competition we have behind him. Weve drafted Nathan Peterman, weve added T.J. Yates, and then Cardale Jones in the draft a year ago. Im not sure there is a team out there that has the depth that we do at the quarterback position. So we feel good about that. Were anxious to see how Tyrod develops in his third year as a starter in a new system, a system that he has some familiarity with in terms of [new Buffalo offensive coordinator] Rick Dennisons system in Baltimore a few years back with Gary Kubiak.

I'd love that just as much as I'd love Taylor playing really well this year and demonstrating he can be the long term answer and having those 2 firsts for other needs, as well. There are some who seem genuinely opposed to Taylor being the answer no matter how well he plays, though.

I'm a grown man. I can take tone. I assume we're all grown ups. Once you insult me in my profession, which I've wanted to do since I was in 9th grade and still love doing after 13 years you're crossing a line. I don't talk about your parenting skills. Stay the !@#$ out of my personal life like that. I thought Old School was better than that regardless of our differences of opinion. And you just decided to jump on his back and continue.

Where the hell did I say that? Now you're making this personal... don't know what the CoC exactly is over here, but being an intentional dick like this is usually not a good idea on a message board. Hmmm... sounds like someone you see in the mirror every day

How many of those plays did Taylor have the opportunity to get those players the football due to factors like pressure, POV, or whether Taylor even looks the direction of that player because of where he is in his reads as was the case in the 1st pass play of the season he was so criticized for when Woods got wide open left but Taylor's 1st or 2nd read was clearly McCoy to the right who got open? And then did you watch All-22s of every other NFL QB in the NFL for a meaningful comparison? If not, your statement here (which, by the way, is incredibly vague) means very little... Well, you should stop stating opinion as fact yourself if you're going to say stuff like this. You talk about Taylor missing wide open WRs on a consistent basis (so consistent that I think you said there were very very few plays he didn't have WRs running wide open that he should have and could have thrown to) as though it's a clear problem for Taylor that would need to be resolved before he could ever be considered the long term answer. Yet, you haven't bothered really examining how frequently or infrequently other better QBs have WRs doing the same...

Wow... what an absolute joke disguised as a reasonable post, which is typically you. I'm sorry but is the pinky part of the hand? Better yet, would you call that a play where Clay was tracking the ball well at all? Was the ball placed so that Clay could have caught it without diving or slowing down if he had his hands in the right position? Thurm I don't care about these posts anymore from you because it's clear you're unable to engage in conversations where the strongest argument conflicts with your own rigid beliefs as you just end up running away when proven wrong, But... Anyone else I'll challenge to watch that play and tell me it's not a great throw by a QB and a missed catch that NFL players make consistently...

Unless it does Bills had their #1 and #2 WRs missing more games than all but a few teams in the NFL, none of whom made the playoffs, either... so.... there's that...

Seriously? You can't see how both can be accurate? Tell ya what... Fahey ranks Taylor as having the 4th most "failed receptions" (meaning the WR should have caught the ball but didn't. Since you assume drops are apparently 100% accurate, go watch the 2nd Patriots game again. 8:15 in the 2nd quarter Taylor throws probably a 50 yard bomb to Charles Clay who's covered fairly well but the ball is so accurate it literally hits Clay's right hand, but because Clay doesn't have very good deep ball tracking skills, the fact that the ball hit his right hand was almost incidental because Clay never even tries to grab it with his right. It happened exactly that way. They even replayed it in slow motion. I have stills on my computer and could post them for you if I knew how on this message board. In NFL's official breakdown of that play, it was called an overthrow. It wasn't. Drops aren't very meticulously tracked. More names... Just sad. Pity you can't partake in some legitimate football discussion. Russell Wilson was a legitimate 1st round prospect if not for his height. Peterman... not so much...

Agreed... Old School needs to stop with his stupid "but WRs were always open" crusade

Wah wah wah wah wah... More of the same from you, which is just a shame. I give you the opportunity to provide me with proof that's so absolutely incredibly abundant that you shouldn't even have to do much legwork and you cop out calling me names and saying it's just so obvious everyone knows it. Whatever. Every single QB in the NFL misses throws. Every one. From missing wide open WRs because of an inaccurate pass to just not throwing it to them. My guess (has to be a guess since I haven't watched the All-22 for every single NFL QB in the NFL) is that Taylor misses more WRs running routes than the top 10-15 guys in the NFL, but how many more is the question... And whether those (very few or very many) more missed throws outweighed the unique benefits Taylor brings to the game (like protecting the football and escape ability) is another question. Call my arguments weak and call me names if you choose to resort to that, but I challenge you to try bother actually making an argument for once.

It's an "if..." I think Taylor winning the starting job is inevitable, so it's just if he can improve upon his 2016 campaign and look more like or better than 2015. Possible. Not a long shot and not highly likely, but possible. Not a 5% chance and not a 95% chance. As always, reality lies in the middle.

That's cool... where'd you get that?

How do you know what bothers me? Here's a better question... I'm assuming it bothers you when posters like me who you've pre-labeled as an undying Tyrod homer argue with any logic, reasoning, or stats like those posted in the articles against your principle that Tyrod will ABSOLUTELY NOT be the answer: Why do you bother posting responses to someone who will undoubtedly not change your mind and will instead just bother you with all these articles, logic, reasoning and stats you disagree with?

You're the one in the shadows... Shady as can be just making things up... Awesome!!! I'd be super excited!!! But that's not happening

According to Fahey: FAILED RECEPTION- 4th most by % More stats here if anyone's interested: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/193755-qb-comparative-data-for-tyrod-from-cian-fahey-to-discuss/