transplantbillsfan

You really didn't dismiss anything. You completely missed the points he made and tried to negate them with marginal tangents that barely touched the issue. You should do yourself a favor and stop posting for a day or two. Options were limited? You sure about that?

Crusher, you're on a whole new level when you do it...

You're letting an important fact just slip past you: McDermott (who it's now very clear has had GM like authority since he arrived) had 2 months once he arrived to evaluate Taylor and the QB position and chose to hire Taylor's former OC and keep him. Really only 2 conclusions based on what's transpired: 1) McDermott is planning on tanking after keeping a QB who was already on the team who he believed would help the Bills get a high draft pick in 2018. OR 2) McDermott believes this team can win NOW with Taylor and in the process will further evaluate his long term prospects, but doesn't have any intention of committing to him if we can't. I'm sorry, but option 1 seems far-fetched, especially with the Dennison hire.

It's a subjective ranking by one guy. Is Taylor 13th or 11th? I used to have a subscription that expired a couple months ago. I thought he was 11th when I last checked. Mighta been 13th, though. Yeah... we all know where you rank Taylor... Isn't it funny the hypocrisy of it all? That's not PFF, that's one guy's subjective measure who works for PFF. Oh, 10th I guess. Thought it was 11th. It just says a lot of sad things about your biased perception of Taylor when you say you'd take Tannehill over Taylor any day... and that you call Taylor a gimmick QB is even dumber. No... I'm sure the Bills want Taylor to show he can be the franchise QB this team has been looking for so we can use BOTH those 1st rounders next year to load up on talent. Even someone biased like you should realize that's the ideal outcome. But no, you're still blinded by your disgusting desire to be right (which you don't seem to be very often) to gloat about it and snidely point out everyone who was wrong. It's just sad...

Taylor was 11th in terms of PFF QB grades. Steve Palazzolo does his own subjective rankings and ranks him 20th.

Shaw, I'm with you here, but people seem incapable of actually understanding that hypothetical argument and lean toward being derisive when arguments like it are brought up. I've said it before and I'll say it again, if Taylor is able to get back to 2015 form in terms of his production and stay healthy on a consistent basis, he's simply not going anywhere.

Yet you're the one bringing wins into the discussion. Maybe you shouldn't have drawn attention to the Vikings finishing 8-8 and 3rd in their division, then. That sure sounded like you trying to insinuate that Passer Rating doesn't correlate with winning (which I'd generally agree with) and yet you follow that up with what you present as more examples like him, even though not a single QB on your list, including Bradford, ended their seasons losing more than they won as starters. Plus 2 NFC champions. I'm not trying to do anything except piece together what you actually mean.

In fact, there's not a single losing record among any of the QBs you selected. I don't agree with equating QBs and wins anyway, but it's odd and contradictory the way that you do and then there's not a single losing record in any of your examples...

Before Bradford and Taylor in that list, all the QBs you listed made the playoffs. 3 made the NFC championship game. 2 were NFC champions.

Fahey's highly regarded by a lot of NFL experts. And we've covered this... every single NFL expert whiffs badly on occasion.

Well said and quite plausible

Well, Passer Rating is the most objective way there is to measure QB play. It accounts for Completion %, YPA, TDs, and INTs. If you're looking for something completely objective to QB play, go by that. Regarding sacks, many would argue (and not unreasonably) that isn't entirely or even mostly a QB stat.

Then why not just use Passer Rating? It's the ultimate objective measure of a QB.

Hence the "and round and round we go" duh...

"He puts forth good stuff because it's what I completely agree with." That's the standard... and round and round we go...

You're doing a facepalm and posting a link to standard ESPN stats...? Okay dude... if you say so

You should tell me more about what I think... you do such a great job with that

Wow... swing and a miss. Crusher, every single sentence you just wrote is just plain wrong.

So Rodgers must be terrible, dude's 0-35 when trailing teams by more than 1 point with winning records in the 4th quarter.http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/green-bay-packers-aaron-rodgers-clutch-nfc-championship-stat-012217 CUT THAT GUY!!!!

Well, according to Fahey, Taylor's ADOT (Average Depth Of Throw) is 9.27 yards, or 7th in the league. Even disregarding that number, though, I don't think folks would say pushing the ball down the field is a problem for Taylor. I do agree. Neither do good QBs.

Yes. That's what he is. He's a QB who was in the NFL learning the game for 4 years before earning a starting job in year 5 when he began seeing any real regular season action. Oh, are you a teacher, too?

It's not that he's only going into his 3rd year. It's that he's going into his 3rd year as a starter. No, you don't look at him in comparison with other 3rd year starters like Mariota and Winston. He clearly has more NFL experience. BUT You also don't look at him in comparison with any 7th year starters drafted in the same draft like Newton. He clearly has less NFL experience. It's aggravating that people don't just talk about that reality.

Read it again. Let's see... Taylor's around 20. I said consistently a QB BETTER THAN TAYLOR would be CONSISTENTLY top 15. 20 does not equal 15, therefore, I did not say Taylor was a franchise QB. Unreal... and yes, I still point to reading comprehension issues.

I don't really know how to respond to this because it really doesn't have anything to do with what I posted...

Posts like this are just stupidly antagonistic and ultimately the reason all these Taylor arguments drag on. If Peterman is better than Taylor, who is good in the sense that, unlike QBs we've had in a very long time, he's an NFL starting QB, at worst. A QB who is "better than Taylor" would be likely at least a top 15 NFL QB since Taylor's, at worst, somewhere around 20. Consistently top 15 QBs are franchise QBs in my book. I don't know what your definition is.