transplantbillsfan

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/

No... they've said "here's a contract we'd like to give you because we think we can win with you as our QB but want to make sure before investing long term." If TT wins the job and he plays well and the team is successful, we aren't drafting a QB in the 1st. Exactly... You keep posting this crap over and over and over and over again... link? And how about more than just one play So it upsets you when people use "excuses" of things that actually happened with Taylor to "defend" him but you're perfectly fine fabricating stats for Aaron Rodgers to defend him? Okay then...

It takes hours to click on a link to read a pretty simple premise... ? I'm sorry, but if you're going to bother with what you've posted over the last few posts in terms of inflammatory posts questioning my credibility and spiking the football, so to speak, then... YES!!! ​FIGURE OUT THE ARGUMENT!!!

Did the Packers trail in the 4th quarter to the Texans? Why is this so friggin difficult...?

Wow... just wow. First game I looked up was Texans in 2016. I see you're just fabricating stats to make a nonexistent point. What'd you say about credibility?

First of all, it's Scott Kacsmar's and Footballoutsiders credibility. I provided the link. Second, READ WHAT IT SAYS!!! How many of those games won were games where the Packers were down by more than 1 in the 4th? At the point the Packers played those teams did they have winning records? This wasn't my study, it was a pretty highly respectable stats guy. I think it's sad that we're on a message board and so many people have reading comprehension issues. Whatever... not even bothering with you here since you don't read...

I posted this link earlier... check it out http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/green-bay-packers-aaron-rodgers-clutch-nfc-championship-stat-012217 No, it's not. Packers didn't trail in the 4th quarter against the Cowboys... I assume that's the game you're referring to? Read what's said before you respond with snarky comments like that.

If it's misinterpretation Crusher, then you do a poor job communicating what you actually want to say. For example, in post 355 when responding to the discussion about Taylor's contract you say "The difference is that Shaw's guy was apparently absolutely certain that this was the deal he wanted." And then in post 382 just a page later Shaw accused you of misquoting him, and you say "I said you almost make it seem as if he got the deal he wanted. No misquoting here." I don't misrepresent you. And frankly, what you're doing with the mental aspect thing is a bit of a copout. Wow... just pathetic... I think I could use a collection of your posts to teach Ad hominem pretty solidly.

Why are you putting words in my mouth? You like to assume things when they are never said. I brought that up to make a point, not as a statement of who I'd rather have. Figured you'd understand that. And it's not my statistical analysis, it's Scott Kacsmar's over at Footballoutsiders.

Yes, volume... and it seems like Taylor wasn't the only one (or even the main one... ?) complaining about volume. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/09/22/lesean-mccoy-bills-offense-simplified-under-anthony-lynn/ McCoy said the team would go into games with 80-90 potential plays when Roman was the coordinator and that number has been pared down to 30-40 plays under Lynn.

No, I want Joe Montana handling the ball, but he's long retired... Fun fact... did you know that Aaron Rodgers is 0-35 in his career in precisely your scenario? Diown by more than 1 point in the 4th quarter to a winning team, Aaron Rodgers hasn't won a single game in his career.

How do you know Kaepernick isn't a genius? So you're saying Tyrod is dumber than Kaep? You're really making blanket insulting statements with little or no proof because of this seemingly very personal vendetta.

Crusher said exactly that, actually...

https://www.google.com/amp/profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/09/22/lesean-mccoy-bills-offense-simplified-under-anthony-lynn/amp/https://www.google.com/amp/billswire.usatoday.com/2016/09/22/buffalo-bills-anthony-lynn-tyrod-taylor/amp/ I think you're seriously misrepresenting what actually happened. This was less about Taylor not having the mental capacity to grasp an NFL offense than about Roman putting too many plays in every week and issues with communication. If you read those, the Bills were going into the first couple games with 60-80 plays in the game plan. Lynn cut that to 40-50 and streamlined communication with a wristband for Taylor. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8192b29f/article/producing-a-game-plan-takes-into-account-months-of-work%3FnetworkId%3D4595%26site%3D.news%26zone%3Dstory%26zoneUrl%3Durl%253Dstory%26zoneKeys%3Ds1%253Dstory%26env%3D%26pageKeyValues%3Dteam%253Dmin%253Bconf%253Dnfc%253Bdvsn%253Dncn%253Bplyr%253Dbrett_favre%253Bplyr%253Dwilliam_harvin%26sr%3Damp You'll see here that 40-50 plays is about the typical playbook of NFL teams on a weekly basis. Actually 35-40 is more the number so it's above average. This wasn't really about dumbing things down for Taylor, it was about simplifying game plans for an entire offense and improving communication.

fair enough.