Rochesterfan
-
Posts
4,688 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Rochesterfan
-
-
I understand, but actually think those timing routes are the very routes Roman should have focused on with Taylor. Lynn incorporated them more and he was pretty good when he ran those plays.
Think about it: read the coverages before the ball is snapped, have a plan when it's snapped, 3-step drop and deliver. Less time to think. Maybe less responsibility post snap in terms of how many reads at that point, but isn't that a large part of the WCO? Know where the ball's going when the ball is snapped. Not much time for the second guessing or doubting that seems to get him into the most trouble.
2 examples just off the top of my head are both of his TD passes in the last Miami game last year. Ball out pretty quick on both plays. Little time to think about the congestion with defenders around. 2 TDs, including one that should have been the game winner with less than 90 seconds remaining.
Lots of other throws like that that Lynn sprinkled into the offense and Taylor delivered starting in week 3. Not as many as there probably will be in a WCO, but certainly more than in Roman's offense.
Lynn's offense was definitely more of the WCO than Roman's in terms of play calling.
I know transplant- you are trying hard - but even you stated by the end of the Pittsburgh game you were essentially ready to move on - so everything you say may be true, but with 3 games left in the season you had readily admitted that TT was not good enough. Then he played 2 terrible defenses in Cleveland and Miami and look slightly above average and now you talk that he was fine all year.
TT was not the reason the Bills were average, but he also was not the solution. With a change to the running game - I expect it is going to come back toward the field and I expect we have seen from TT what he can do - I think he will be fine with combo routes to the outside - much like the comeback routes - throws he can see the guy is open. I anticipate he will struggle with throws to moving targets moving between the hash marks because that is what he has struggled with - both vision and anticipation throws. I anticipate that the Bills will be rolling TT out a lot and where we see other QBs throw to 1 of 2 receivers - I think TT will run more than throwing in those situations because he trusts his athletic ability more than his throwing ability.
I think the article provide some nice best case scenarios, but it was interesting how many times they attached routes the Bills used over the last 2 years to illustrate the routes - that means some of these concepts were already used and he struggled at times and in this offense they will limit what TT was best at - the deep go route along the sideline - that is what opened up everything and that will be cut down in the new scheme and I think the short timing routes will bring defenses closer to the LOS - again hurting our running game.
We will see how it goes.
-
Good play calling by the OC is critical to the success of the West Coast O in my humble opinion.
I feel just the opposite about how well Taylor will operate under the new system because Lynn and T T began to click towards the end of last season operating out of much the same style O. The TE /Clay was getting used more effectively and the Offense as a unit was on the same page IMO. From a development standpoint If you compared Taylor in the passing game to most second season starting QB's the amount of reps/pass attempts he has been given to gel with his play makers is extremely low.
I agree, Tyrod Taylor has allot to prove, as does most 3rd year starters.
I'm a Billiever...
Yeah and at the end of 2015 - Roman and TT were supposedly clicking as the NYJ game and that passing attack was going to be what we saw in 2017 until TT regressed and Roman was fired. Clay was getting passes deep and down the middle of the field, but it never translated to anything.
I think play calling is huge, but the player has to be able to handle that and until TT shows he can do it consistently- I am not ready to believe the passing attack will improve significantly.
I would be less surprised to see an improvement in the defense and the offense regressing toward middle of the pact - than seeing the offense actually improve. But that is just my opinion on the issue.
-
Admittedly in 2001 I did versus the Rams because they were the underdogs. I regret it now.
1985/86 season versus the Bears - they were so cocky and arrogant- I was hoping somehow for an upset.
For the recent run - not really - I liked Drew Bledsoe as QB, but once Brady took over - I have hoped for utter failure ever since.
-
He was found not guilty and is apparently not guilty of all the crimes according to mass law. So I'd say no
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Two things:
1). OJ was found Innocent and yet lost the civil case - they are very different and guilty or innocent does not necessarily mean anything in the civil case.
2). I think the lawsuit is about money the Pats owe to Hernandez as much as anything else and this lawsuit gives them grounds to collect money before it gets to the Hernandez estate.
I have no issues with this suit, but it depends upon the final interpretation.
As much as I despise Kraft and his patriots*, trying to get money from them for Hernadez' crimes would be like the Goldman's suing the Bills because of OJ.
If OJ had still been under contract - they probably would have to prevent the money going someplace they can not access.
Even as it was OJ was found Not Guilty, but still lost the civil suit and was forced to pay a lot of money.
-
http://billswire.usatoday.com/2017/07/07/west-coast-offense-tyrod-taylor-buffalo-bills/
Looks into reasons the Bills passing game and Taylor could be significantly improved in 2017.
Talks a little about the changes in personnel, but the interesting stuff is when it dissects the passing concepts we're supposedly going to be executing this year: play-action passes, simple route concepts, the shallow cross, etc.
Closes with:
It is a nice article to show what the plan is - we will need to see if it fits TT or not. I think limiting his reads significantly will make some things easier, but I do not think TT excels at short to mid range passing to moving targets and I do not think TT excels at throwing quick timing routes on time and in stride.
I will hold my judgement on whether the passing attack makes any strides forward until he proves it or doesn't. There is really nothing in the article that makes me think things will get better and there are a lot of patterns - guys coming across the middle of the field - that we have seen the last 2 years and TT has for the most part refused to pull the trigger.
I expect a lot of running out of TT - probably even more than last year as they roll him out and actually a less productive passing attack. I think he will be exactly what we have seen a couple of above average games, a couple of average games, and a few stinkers and if the last 2 years are any indication - the average and bad will come early and when we sit on the brink or are eliminated - he will have his above average games and people will be - look he is getting better - like the Jets game 2 years ago and the Miami game at the end of last season. Those 2 games defined the off season expectations of a lot of fans that then got a dose of reality once the next season started.
-
Correct - so they would need to make other modifications to the agreement not just up the percentage.There are other things in there. $212M per team though is 51% of $13.3B. The salary cap is based on the shared revenue (which is why the number is smaller).
I don't see that happening.
Even with the change you get the same issue - the salaries for the top tier would go higher, but most would not be affected.
If the players union actually represented all the players and not just the stars - they could correct that and make things more balanced so everyone on the players side shared in the wealth, but it does not.
The majority of the players and their short careers will be the reason the players fold again in the next CBA. It will go into the season, but with only a 3 year life span for most players - the majority need the paychecks.
-
I understand what you are saying - I think your numbers are a bit off though. If the current cap is set let's say 48% and is at 167 another 3% is only raising the cap maybe 9-10 million. It is not going from 167 to 212 million per team. That would mean each 1% increase would be around 15 million in salary cap space - so 48 % would be close to a salary cap of 720 million rather than 167 million. Remember the Salary Cap is not based on all revenue only some of it.How is that not the point? Obviously that's an extreme example but Watkins point remains. They are getting a smaller piece of the pie than the NBA players are getting. If NFL players got 51% like the NBA that would be about $212M per team for the players. That's a lot higher than the $167M that the cap is at.
What the change from 48 to 51 would do in the NFL is exactly what it did in the NBA. 1 or 2 players on each team get the extra money - most likely the QB and DE. Steph Curry and Kevin Durant see huge salary bumps compared to other players on the team.
-
Let me be as succinct as possible so people don't think i'm arguing the wrong point:
1. Yes, I feel that contracts should be guaranteed in the NFL. Money has to go somewhere folks. And it's either going to go to the players, or stay with the owners. Players. Or owners. Again, players, or owners. Increase the salary cap per team, force the owners to spend more money. Or remove the hard salary cap and implement another formula that benefits the players a bit more.
2. Haynewworth is an absolute extreme example. He's highly regarded as the single worst FA signing in NFL history. But lets think about that for a second. The single worst FA signing in NFL history and the Redskins were only out what 35 million? The mets are still paying bobby bonilla millions.
3. And yes, Haynesworth deserved a payday. In any sport he would get a payday for being regarded as the best at his position when he hit FA. And what was his pay day in the end for being the best at his position? 35 million? If that is how an NFL player gets rewarded as compared to other professional sports, the system is broken. Again, I realize he was a bust, but Haynesworth is an extreme example of FA gone bad. At the end of the day, however, I'd rather the player benefit from FA going bad than the owners pocketing the revenue money as they sit in their nice suits in their luxury suites when it's -20 on a snowy day in Green Bay and player X dislocates his freaking knee cap.
The Money does go someplace - roughly just under 50% goes to the players for salary. Just over 50% to the owners to cover all of the administrative staff, coaching staff, food, training equipment, upgrades, practice facilities, uniforms, medications, and everything else the players need to be ready. I will not whine for the owners because they make a lot of money as an individual person, but after they cover all of the business costs and salary.
The breakdown seems about right as every league with a cap puts the annual average players salary at close to 50% of the leagues revenue. The difference is guaranteed money and that is based on the sport. We do not need to use Fat Albert for the point - go around the league - if the NFL paid guaranteed money and gave a WR a 5 year contract and that guy sucks or is hurt - he would get paid just like Bonilla in you example - that is great for that player, but then every other player will get less because money is tied up in guys that are not playing or producing.
The NFL is a production league - you produce - you get paid. Your production drops - you get cut and can lose your big pay day. When that happens - what happens to that money. It is almost immediately spent on other players on the team. TT takes a pay cut and the Bills sign additional players with that money.
I have no issues with having more guarantees for the players, but it will come with something they will not like lower salaries because more money will be tied up in non producing players.
Exactly.
Lmao. Imagine the body count if these guys played 84 games. Youd need a roster of 500 guys.
I know - it is not possible, but even the NBA is seeing issues with teams resting players - do we will see things turn out shortly.
-
I think you are proving his point not your own.He was the defensive player of the year in 2008 before he signed that contract. He was one of the best defensive players in the league for a couple of years. That merits a payday. And my point is that his payday wasnt $100m (as it would be in nba or mlb), but more like $40m guaranteed. So no it wasnt better for everyone. The player performed at the top of his game in his sport and got compensated $40m basically which is peanuts in baseball for example. I think the redskins actually ended up paying him something like $35m and were able to get rid of him.
He ended up being a bust so for the team not having to pay a guaranteed contract was certainly a win but not for the player.
Im not saying that we need to go to the other extreme (which to me is baseball), but we need to be honest in this discussion: NFL players are getting the raw end of the deal when it comes to paydays in professional sports. Its undeniable.
He was given a 100 million contract for what he did in Tennessee when he came to the Redskins, but as soon as he did not live up to that level of play - they were able to get out of the contract and give that money to people that deserved it.
Hockey, Baseball, and Basketball- all have it wrong, but can survive because of the games and the players. How many albatross contracts do you hear about in those leagues . Guys that got paid for 1 years work as they hit FA and then fell back. Guys like Koby in LA that basically had a contract destroy the team when he could no longer play to that level. Baseball is the worse - they give out massive contracts to guys mid 30's and then try to figure out how to get rid of them when after 1 or 2 years they start to decline.
Football allows teams to get out of contracts and redistribute that money to guys that are more worthy right now. It stinks for the players that want the big payday without the work, but a guy like Brady, JJ Watt, or Von Miller seem to keep getting paid through injuries and age. I think the system works - you just have to keep putting in the effort.
-
Per game, a player making 11 mil a season makes 200k per game more than Steph curry so? You want to make more money, let's add in more games.
Steph doesnt deserve that money. Neither does Kyle Lowry but the fact of the matter. Per game NFL is beating NBA in salary. Factor in more time spent practicing traveling. This is what happens
Exactly - I guarantee if Sammy Watkins and the NFL players are willing to play 84 regular season games (or 162 with baseball) and then 30 playoff games - his annual salary would dwarf Steph Currys, but they are balking at adding 17 or 18 - so I have no sympathy.
-
What about Miami's ranking in TOP at 27? And the Bills were 7-8. That last game they quit.
Re-read what he said.
He felt the TOP had some effect on the defense. How good was Miami's defense with the TOP?
Overall the Bills were 7-8 going into the last game as a team. The offense, the defense, the special teams, and coaching all shoulder the blame.
Each unit throughout the year had games they could of won for the team and games they lost for the team. At the end of the year all three units were part of the failure - the only part that was pretty consistent was the running game. The passing attack, the defense, and the kicking game all needed to be better to win.
Was TT the sole reason they did not make the playoffs- of course not, but he is also not Scott free in the reason. He shoulders his own part of the action by leading the 30th rated passing attack and averaging only 1 TD throw a game. The coaches shoulder a lot of the burden for throwing out an ill prepared team the lacked discipline game in and game out. The defense shoulder a fair amount for not getting stops and turnovers when needed. The special teams had terrible play from both kicking units and missed kicks at critical times throughout the year.
-
With this new rule that teams can keep all 387 players til the single cutdown day, I wonder what -if anything we'll actually see in preseason games. With an entirely new coaching staff with new schemes on O & D, why show anybody anything. Spring who we are on the Jets in the Opener and let the League try to figure it out then. I sure hope no starters play the final PS game..
I would only agree to this if as a team they are actually ready to play in game one.
Rex didn't play the guys last year and game #1 instead of teams not knowing what was going on - they were grossly unprepared to play in game 1.
I am guessing McDermott plays the guys more early to build the teamwork and make sure they are ready. He does not seem like an underprepared type of coach.
-
I think its a very logical assessment of where Taylor is at this point.
I think TT is very hard to judge across the board because he is what each person sees in his mind.
Unlike someone like Brady or Rodgers or even Big Ben, that you can rank because of their sheer numbers and what they have accomplished - TT is not that way. His numbers are all over the board and the things he has done are all over the place - so therefore he creates a lot of controversy and divided opinions. He doesn't throw ints, but his passing totals are so much lower than everyone else and what he was asked to do was not the same caliber as a true elite QB.
It is really all about what you see. Where I see him and where some others see him may be close or may be far apart, but they are only our own opinions. He has time to change all of our opinions and become a Big Ben or even a Flacco or he can become the next Fitzpatrick and just be a 3rd tier starter filling in while we wait for the next guy.
Until either of those days come everything else is just opinion.
-
He was added, but after John had made the quote.Think you left out Bortles.
You may be right - he was pretty shot his last year and yet won the Super Bowl and beat Brady in the playoffs.Your list is pretty fair if you ask me. One thing I couldn't over look on that list is Peyton Manning. That dude can barely throw 5 yards now. No way would I take him over TT at this point. I don't care how good his mind is.
Yes he had the best defense, but he still made plays in the playoffs to help them win and I think with a great running attack - he could play action more and make some plays or maybe he would crap the bed.
Maybe - I move him to the hesitate a bit group, but I still think I would start him over TT at this point if I could get either one.
-
While I agree that there were very few options for the Bills that would have been better than TT this offseason - there are many QB's I would rather see under center for the Bills than TT if I had my choices.
For me without a doubt or a second of hesitation I would take:
Brees
Ryan
Brady
Rodgers
Luck
Wilson
Roethlisberger
Carr
Both Manning Brothers
Newton
Rivers
Stafford
Guys I would take, but with slight hesitation:
Palmer The guy that almost retired this year?
Cousins
Flacco
Dalton no way
Winston interception machine
Prescott perfect situation
Mariota
Romo The guy that DID retire this year?
Guys on par - I could go either way:
Wentz
Tannehill
Bradford
Cutler
Garoppolo
Lynch
Smith
Moore
Guys I would not even look at - having TT as my QB:
McCown
Fitzpatrick
RGIII
Goff
Kapernick
Siemian
Hoyer
Kessler
Barkley
Osweiler
I have TT in a third tier with a group of other QBs right around where most of his rankings come out around 20th in the league. He is starter caliber, but he is not what I view as a long term answer. I hated the idea of Mahomes in the draft, but that was probably the one chance for a potential upgrade this offseason was in the draft.
Once that passed by TT is really the only option we have and I will root for him every Sunday he starts just as I have the last 2 years as he has been the best option, but I just do not expect much out of him. He will make some plays and limit mistakes and puts us in the middle of the NFL pack one of 12-15 teams that with the right breaks makes the playoffs and the wrong breaks ends up 6-10.
Yes to all those questions - if I could get Palmer or Romo or Manning to come here I would start them all over TT. I understand they left or have almost left the game and I still think they are better QBs than 1/2 the league - not for a lot longer, but a for the coming year - I would take them.
I think both Prescott and Winston are significantly better NFL QBs than TT - they have fewer years in the league and I would much rather have either one as my QB.
Guys like Dalton and Newton are guys not much better than TT, but both have lead their team to the playoffs multiple times - so yes - I would take both of those guys over TT straight up.
Those are my opinions - they may not match yours, but my guess is many are close - you may slide some guys up or down, but probably have TT around the middle rather than top 10 like the guy I responded to.
-
While I agree that there were very few options for the Bills that would have been better than TT this offseason - there are many QB's I would rather see under center for the Bills than TT if I had my choices.He's an outstanding athlete. I just noticed that Mariota was rated in the top 50, and his stats are marginally better than Tyrod....and Tyrod is a much better runner. He's had some bad moments, but for several games he was throwing to our 5th stringer and 3 street free agents. If we have a healthy core group of targets for him, I believe he'll be fine.
Why did he take a pay cut, or rephrased, why did the Bills cut his pay? Because they agreed to. This will be his year, and I expect him to play excellent football. Besides the obvious top 8 guys, who else in this league would you rather have taking snaps for our team?
For me without a doubt or a second of hesitation I would take:
Brees
Ryan
Brady
Rodgers
Luck
Wilson
Roethlisberger
Carr
Both Manning Brothers
Newton
Rivers
Stafford
Guys I would take, but with slight hesitation:
Palmer
Cousins
Flacco
Dalton
Winston
Prescott
Mariota
Romo
Guys on par - I could go either way:
Wentz
Tannehill
Bradford
Cutler
Garoppolo
Lynch
Smith
Moore
Guys I would not even look at - having TT as my QB:
McCown
Fitzpatrick
RGIII
Goff
Kapernick
Siemian
Hoyer
Kessler
Barkley
Osweiler
Bortles
I have TT in a third tier with a group of other QBs right around where most of his rankings come out around 20th in the league. He is starter caliber, but he is not what I view as a long term answer. I hated the idea of Mahomes in the draft, but that was probably the one chance for a potential upgrade this offseason was in the draft.
Once that passed by TT is really the only option we have and I will root for him every Sunday he starts just as I have the last 2 years as he has been the best option, but I just do not expect much out of him. He will make some plays and limit mistakes and puts us in the middle of the NFL pack one of 12-15 teams that with the right breaks makes the playoffs and the wrong breaks ends up 6-10.
-
I don't think anyone is debating the strengths and weaknesses as much as the role that perception plays in all of this. If the defense didn't allow those 30.5 points a loss and it resulted in a couple more wins the narrative would be different. We would be talking about a 27 year-old (or whatever he is) QB with 47 TDs and 12 INTs in 29 starts and one or two playoff appearances. Would he be a better or different player? Nope, but the perception and narrative would certainly be different. The strengths and weaknesses wouldn't change though. The data says that the Bills offense had to do more than other offenses because of Rex's failings.
I agree with this - I also think that if TT performed better in several late game drives and looked better in the fast paced 2 minute offense and we won a few games because of last drive throws the narrative would change also. His best games - Miami and Seattle he did just that - he moved them down the field with chances to win. Seattle he did not make a play at the end - I don't think that was all on him - the Refs gave him no help. Miami he made enough plays and special teams missed the kick.
The problem is there were other games that he had that chances against Baltimore, NYJs, Miami, Pittsburgh, heck even Oakland to lead drives to change the game. Yes the defense was an issue, but other playoff teams overcame that. A tighter and better defense helps, but there were still issues that TT needs to improve significantly to change that narrative.
-
Roch - thanks for the detailed response.
What I copied and pasted from your post is really a misinterpretation of the data. Tyrod is absolutely not "better" when under pressure. Our offense's DVOA, like every offense except for the Packers, was negative when Tyrod was under pressure.
Tyrod is really great under pressure relative to every other QB in the league but he still isn't playing at his best. Tyrod is at his best, like all QBs, when he has time in the pocket to evaluate the field and throw the ball. A defense that gets pressure on Tyrod should still expect on average to have a positive play.
If our pass protection improves in 2017, our offense should be better overall. How much better also depends on if the rest of our offense can keep their other measures where they were. If for example our run game declines we will need the pass protection and/or Tyrod to be that much better.
I don't have anything to add but thank you for running this data. It is very illuminating.
Happy - we will have to disagree about that. If you look at absolute numbers of course being under pressure makes a DVOA go way down. The DVOA is affected by negative plays and it is very hard to take a sack when you are not under pressure. So the biggest negative play with no pressure is an Int and these are professionals the number of Ints should go up with pressure.
The number of positive plays should also go down under pressure, but for TT they did not. His TD % per attempt goes up when he is under pressure. He threw more TDs under pressure in fewer attempts than when not under pressure.
In addition - as we already knew his athletic nature allowed him to avoid sacks and escape the pocket and scramble for first downs - one of his major positives as a QB. Therefore we know he avoided a number of sacks and his unique athletic ability allowed him to convert first downs that his QB ability would not have converted.
If Tyrod is left alone in the pocket and allowed to scan the field his DVOA is higher only because you eliminate the sack. His overall play as how he compares to other QBs in that situation drops from nearly the best to middle of the pack. It is why teams like Baltimore and the Jets talk about keeping him in the pocket and making him beat you as a QB.
They are not afraid of how he plays as a QB throwing the ball from the pocket because in those situations he is average and much less likely to make a big play - either a long scramble or a TD pass than he is when you get pressure and he escapes the pocket and throws on the run or takes off with your DBs in man coverage.
My main point being that these numbers presented make sense in the context of what we already knew about TT. They do not make me think the offense was better - they confirm what we knew. We knew that under pressure TT does a nice job of escaping pressure and making a positive play - that is one of his best attributes.
What we need to see going forward is can he translate that playmaking ability to times he is not under pressure. Can he get his DVOA without pressure above the top 10 while still keeping his under pressure DVOA higher. Over 60% of the time there is not pressure on the QB and getting that DVOA up into the top 10 makes you a better QB and those are the areas he is average and why we as a fan base are split.
The takeaway that I have and why I am ready to move on is that if we had to face a TT lead team and he was not on the Bills - that is a game I am thinking I can win. It is the same reason fan bases in places like Miami are split- you can do worse that either of those guys, but neither are the answer. They are the placeholders until you find the answer and maybe they get hot and you make a playoff run, but long term they are not the answer you need to win consistently in this league.
-
I'm sure overthinking has something to do with it, but do you think that part of it is that he struggles to see open receivers over the LOS because he's relatively short? I'm interested in seeing if Dennison does any rolling pockets this year to open some passing lanes for TT.
I think it could, but watching more "highlights" and game action - I think similar to Brees he could see enough, but there were times he chose not to throw, but when there was pressure and he reacted - he hit Clay a couple of times between the hashes and down the field late.
We will see more this year in a different scheme.
-
Not really buying this much, Happy. Mostly I don't think these tell us anything we didn't already know. I'll try to be more specific.
ARGUMENT ONE:
Whether or not a sack destroys a drive is dependent on a lot of things that don't especially say much about a QB. A sack on first down, for instance is a lot less likely to destroy a drive than a sack on third down. Does it make a QB better that he got a sack on first down rather than third? A ten yard sack is more likely to destroy a drive than a one-yard sack. Does it say anything better about a QB that he gets sacked for one instead of ten yards? Or did he just have a more convenient escape route in that direction? I don't think that's even slightly clear.
This article is slightly interesting for it's own sake - in terms of what Klassen is saying about sacks and how they affect drives - but it doesn't say much that helps evaluate QBs or boosts Tyrod's evaluation upwards either.
I'm not a big Trapasso fan, honestly. But here's his conclusion to the whole article, "While Tyrod will probably always be near the top of the league in sacks, a proven track record of being able to rebound from those quarterback takedowns better than any team in the league is vital. Technically, it means a sack isn’t as damaging to the Bills as it is for other teams, which gives Buffalo’s offense a clear leg up on the rest of the NFL."
Hunh? So Tyrod gets sacked near the top of the league and probably always will be up there? So his 42 sacks are OK, but we're supposed to be happy that the Bills very small percentage of converting on sacks is three or four plays higher than the other NFL teams? That's the big conclusion?
What that is saying is that Tyrod gets sacked a lot more than other QBs but that the Bills do good things anyway on a larger percentage of those drives. And that gives us a leg up? That's very questionable.
First, these stats were team stats, not QB stats and Tyrod's sack percentage (8.8%) was quite a bit worse than the percentage for Bills QBs (7.09%, 4th-worst in the league) and around 10% worse than any total team (ARIZ was worst with 8.08%).
Put another way, Tyrod had 42 sacks while the 16th-rated QB had 33 and the 17th had 31. So Tyrod had about 9 more than average even though he didn't play all 16 games. Assuming the Bills had converted at a league average rate (16.01% according to the Klassen article) rather than our very fine rate, how many fewer conversions would we have had? Around nine. Not a lot positive there in terms of improvement of results.
It's an interesting article about how sacks kill drives. Doesn't make Tyrod look better at all.
ARGUMENT TWO:
This seems to me to show that Tyrod was very good at running the ball. And that that is also true when he's under pressure.
I would have guessed that.
The stat addresses the fact that if you include scrambles past the LOS, the DVOA (really a whole offense stat, not an individual player stat, as Football Outsiders not just admits but publicizes) improves. Yeah, I would have expected that. I've never ever been concerned about his scrambles once he gets past the LOS.
I'm worried about his pass game. Not Tyrod's run game. I know that's excellent, and I think we all do.
This also doesn't change anything for me.
ARGUMENT THREE:
Yeah, it's a new article but that stat has been around a while now and we've been arguing it for months.
It's great that he threw 10 TDs under pressure. But that means he only threw 7 when he wasn't. Seventeen total.
It's great that he (the offense, really, in the scheme, with the play calls, yadda yadda yadda) performed so well when under pressure. But that's only part of the game.
Agreed that RT was a real weakness, but these days very few teams have as many as four good OLs, as we do. I'm hoping that things improve at RT this year, however that happens.
I don't see how this puts any dent whatsoever in the criticisms that running isn't as important as passing.
Well thought out and well reasoned- I think I agree for the most part.
You read it the same way I did - nothing was unexpected because these articles play into what was already his known strength.
It also made me wonder about the rest of his game as he was so much better under pressure and he was under pressure % wise more than any QBs - so his overall QBing the rest of the time was even worse than the average numbers project.
We will see how he does in a new offense with a new staff, but he has to get better in the normal aspects of the game and maybe some of that is designed rolls with out a lot of thought - just get rid of the ball. Time and space is his enemy - he needs to be instinctive and just make plays and that is part of the reason his timing was off, he struggled with throws to the middle of the field, and throwing timing routes to moving receivers. I have stated I do not think a lot of that was coaching - I think a lot of that was TT overthinking.
-
Yes this is a Tyrod thread. I would love if all the name calling and petty arguments could stay out of this one.
I thought I was done analyzing the Bills offense in 2016, but these three articles that were published over the past couple days changed my mind:https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2017/6/19/15829060/buffalo-bills-tyrod-taylor-lesean-mccoy-highest-first-down-conversion-rate-after-sack-in-2016http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/quarterbacks-and-pressure-2016https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-hc-mcdermott-impressed-with-tyrod-taylors-leadership/
Taken together, these articles give us a lot of new information about how well Tyrod and the Bills offense fared when under pressure, or after taking a sack.
The conventional wisdom is that sacks are drive-killers. The first link is a study looking into how often a team was able to get a 1st down after taking a sack.
The average team was able to obtain a 1st down after a sack just 16.01% of the time. But the Bills converted for a 1st down 28.26% of the time after a sack. This was the highest percentage in the league (for comparison's sake, Miami was the worst in the league with a 3.33% 1st down rate).
We took 46 sacks total of which we converted 13. So in actuality we took 33 drive-killing sacks in 2016. This number needs to go down in 2017 but at least as an offense we were better able to recover after a sack than any other offense in the league.
The next two links are far more interesting to me. Football Outsiders published a study showing how often QBs were under defensive pressure on a passing play. They also calculated what the total offense's DVOA looked like when the QB was under pressure, whether the QB scrambled or threw the ball. This is really important because previously we only had good DVOA data on Tyrod's passing. Now we get a sense of how his passing and mobility can affect the entire offense's production.
The data:
-Tyrod was under pressure on 35.3% of his pass plays. Only Jared Goff was pressured more, out of 34 qualifying QBs. This obviously needs to get better, whoever you want to blame.
-Our offense's DVOA when Tyrod wasn't under pressure was 16th in the league - exactly average.
-Our offense's DVOA when Tyrod was under pressure was 2nd in the league. Only the Packers/Aaron Rodgers were better.
Finally, the last link tells us that Tyrod also had the 7th best passer rating (80.1) when under pressure. And he threw 10 TDs when under pressure which was 3rd best in the league (Luck and Rodgers were ahead of him).
So there's a lot of really great data here. IMO the data shows Tyrod was better than people give him credit for. He was under pressure way too often. I know he has a tendency to hold the ball too long but I don't believe that tendency is enough to explain our extremely low 33/34 ranking. Hopefully Dawkins helps solve this problem in 2017.
Most of all, the data shows that when you factor in Tyrod's passing and scrambling, our offense performed anywhere from average (16th) to outstanding (2nd) on called passing plays. If one of your central criticisms of Tyrod is that his scrambling isn't as important as being a good passer, this data puts a pretty big dent in that criticism IMO. Especially when you consider how often Tyrod was under pressure and therefore how often we needed this special talent of his.
Interpret and argue away!
God - I try to stay out, but it just keeps coming back and I am sure like all of the other TT threads - we will have the exact same groups on both sides calling each other names and complaining about being insulted - such fun, but I digress.
Thanks Happy - I like the thought, but I am not sure what it really tells us. First - the best part of TT's game is his mobility - so none of the stats "surprise" me. What it tells me is that under pressure - where he can't think and plays on instinct - he plays better. When he has time and an open field to read and absorb - he wants to make the perfect play and therefore is much less effective.
What to me is truly scary is his TDs - well over half of his TD throws by this were under pressure - yet he was under pressure about 1/3 of the time. He needs to get much, much better in the flow of a game.
Overall the combination of articles tell me 2 things - 1 Tyrod's legs are a huge part of his game and really helps with his play under pressure to escape and both run and throw. 2 - if I am a team playing TT - I look to what Baltimore did and I want to force him to be a QB and force him to read the field and make decisions- I think that is where TT struggles and that is why teams talk about making him be a QB.
He is an improviser and his legs are a major part of his game, but the 2/3 of a time that teams did not pressure him and force him to make a play - his play tailed off. We will see what happens next - I will let you get back to insulting each other now.
-
Brian Moorman, Freddie Jackson? Were both bright spots in some otherwise forgettable years. Both had a lot of heart. Or is that a bit too much of a joke?
Nope - none as of right now. I would not put Fred up there - not a starter long enough and was not quite good enough to deserve it. Played with a ton of heart, but he was not an all time great in a Bills uniform.
Brian was a top level player at his position for several years and was here long enough to merit consideration, but I do not want to see a punter be placed on the Wall of Fame for an above average career. If he was an all time NFL great then maybe, but not because he was the best from a long run of below average talent.
Kyle Williams would also merit consideration as a multi-time Pro-Bowl player and I would not hate seeing him placed on the Wall, but he is still active - let's see if he can help lead the team over the hump. If not - then I would prefer to see fewer guys on the Wall and keep it with the truly All Time Greats.
I think you could go back to the 60's - 90's and find guys just as worthy or more so than anyone on this team since around 2000.
-
You dwell on the past too much... Who cares if we couda, shoulda, whoulda? It does nothing...
Agreed and he fixates on things not related to the posts - in this case Whaley for some awful reason.
Someone disagrees and it is suddenly something about either EJ or Whaley - having nothing to do with the discussion at hand.
-
His first point is definitely the most important, since it will mitigate Tyrod's biggest weakness (holding the ball too long), as well as his second biggest weakness (bailing the pocket too soon and in the wrong direction).
Regarding his final point, if Tyrod can get become more consistent in reading across the field (as opposed to just the High-Low concepts he's become efficient with) it'll really open up the playbook and limit opposing safeties' ability to roll coverage.
I think your first paragraph is spot on, but I do not think that leads to paragraph 2.
I think based on what we saw in Denver with Dennison - you are looking at flooding zones and really having TT make one or two simply reads. I do not think they will be asking him to read across the field - as much as roll and dump short, medium, or long depending on safety/LB coverage.
To math deficient Terrance Knighton/Sammie Watkins
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I think you are sort of right. I think there will be a prolonged stoppage at some point and the players will get some concessions like 50% of the revenue- Marijuana will depend upon whether the current President - rolls back a lot of the legality on it - if it becomes totally illegal again like the attorney general would like - I do not think they get that.
I think the owners will get the win and there will be 17 or 18 games, mandatory practice will increase, and they will look for ways to prevent future lawsuits from the players. The problem is the players fight for things like Marijuana and discipline that impact very few players and tend to cave on bigger things that impact the majority because they stock the PA with the stars that do not listen to the average player.