Bills757
-
Posts
295 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Bills757
-
-
2 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:
No right thinking coach would start a ROOKIE FIFTH ROUND PICK in a game with serious playoff implications...... That is what he did and it was absolutely wrong and the results speak for themselves.....
Of course if you drink the Koolaid you'll tell me it was part of his master plan that makes him so much smarter then everyone else and that it lit a fire under Tyrod..... Oops forgot the defense that was torched for 3 straight weeks and absolutely no repercussions for any defensive players......
How comical some of you are......
I'm not a kool-aid drinker, thank you and I don't think it was part of the master plan. Taylor is not someone who needs to be benched to make him hungrier. He's always been a consistently hard worker. If you go back to my post, I said I don't "necessarily" blame McD which means while I didn't agree with the decision, I can see what he was trying to do. But the real issue for me is two-fold......he basically blamed his starting QB for the previous games (which they were partly his fault for sure even though the D absolutely sucked) and he crushed the confidence of his rookie QB all in one half.
While Taylor isn't a top flight QB, he is tops in the league when it comes to being able to handle adversity without dividing the locker room. In an age when professional football players can be downright babies, TT stayed the course and kept grinding. McD should feel pretty darn lucky to have a guy with that kind of attitude.
-
1
-
-
Again, I don't necessarily blame McD for a poor decision to start Peterman. He was trying to see if NP could spark the offense after a couple of bumpy games. What I do blame him for is leaving the guy in the game after the second interception. THAT is my issue with the LAC game. It was very apparent LAC's pass rush was overwhelming our Oline so why leave your rookie in the game only to get beat up and humiliated (visa vi throwing 3 more picks)? Makes no sense to me.
-
Truly a team effort. Shady's a good choice. White as well. Hauschka definitely came through in some clutch times. For this team to face the adversity and rough patches (trading away the WR corps, key injuries, Dareus going to Jax amongst other things), they persevered and while some on this board don't care for Taylor, he was the consummate professional throughout the good times and the bad. IMO, he showed great patience and poise (not just on the field) that became infectious to the rest of the team.
-
Cowherd is a blow hard....that's it! He says provocative stuff to make himself relevant. In reality, he doesn't know his you-know-what from a hole in the ground. I still remember him talking about the CFP last year...."Ohio State is gonna boat race Clemson, I guarantee it". Of course, we all know, Clemson shutout mighty OSU 31-0. There are many more examples but that one was pretty hilarious. Who cares what this dude has to say about anything.
-
What I'd like to see is Dennison using Taylor's mobility as a weapon versus using it as a defense mechanism (ie. scrambling to avoid the rush). Roll him out, run him more....if he get's hurt, he get's hurt but why not use your players' abilities versus trying to make them into something they're not (a pocket passer). You don't see Brady trying to run....you see him in the pocket because that's what he's good at doing.
This is the playoffs. It's time to let it all hang out. For the record, I think Dennison is part of the problem with the way he goes into a shell in the second half of games. You don't have your QB throw for 160 yards only to finish with a little over 200 for the game. Say what you want about Taylor but this is true with regards to play calling.
-
3 minutes ago, buffalo2218 said:
What was Taylor's statline against the Saints? Believe it was something like 50 yards passing for a WHOLE game, I'm not reaching at all. I understand McDermott's reasoning after that dreadful performance. Taylor might not have thrown as many picks, but do you really believe he would have fared THAT much better?
Look....I get the hate you have for Taylor. I really do. Nothing I say will change it. What's more damaging, an ineffective passing game or giving the other team 5 turnovers and short fields to score?
-
2 minutes ago, Bad Things said:
Bollocks.
This is just hindsight being 20/20.
Hot-Rod was playing uninspired, crappy football at the time and the coaching staff wanted to see what their other QB could do. I had no problem with them doing that.
Starting Peterman I get. Letting him throw five picks in one half, I don't get. j
If they pull him after the second pick, Peterman could've shaken off the rough outing. One pick was a tip and the second one just wasn't a good pass. He could've recovered from his first start with only two picks. Letting him completely meltdown, throw five picks in one half and become a national joke? Not a good move at all. Peterman can say all he wants about getting past it, but you know it'll be on his mind for some time. IMO, it was completely unfair to NP.
-
2 minutes ago, SaviorPeterman said:
Yes and hopefully for many years to come.
A lot of folks obviously aren't going to be happy when he's the starter next year.....
Again...um, okay, yea right.
-
1 minute ago, buffalo2218 said:
As opposed to Taylor's performance against the Saints?
Of course they did if the Chargers let off the gas with a 30 point lead
So one of the worst halves in NFL history and Taylor would do worse? You're reaching....a lot.
In all seriousness, McD could've picked a different team to have Peterman start. The Chargers' pass rush was brutal and not a good matchup for Peterman.
-
19 minutes ago, buffalo2218 said:
Yeah starting Peterman really decresed the Bills chances of winning against a hot San Diego team on the road. Given how Taylor played against the Saints the week before, it's possible he could have been worse against the Chargers
A guy who rarely throws INT's could do worse than 5 picks in one half? Um...okay, yea, right. I'm not sure Taylor could've been worse if he tried.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, twoandfourteen said:
This is practically the definition of "splitting hairs", ladies & gentlemen.
This is true. Taylor was, in fact, the starting QB of the first Bills team to make the playoffs in nearly two decades. I give Taylor full credit for that.
It's also undeniable that Andy Dalton -- a legitimate starting QB -- actually threw the 49 yard TD pass that put the Bills in the playoffs.
So, it's not quite the same as a real starting QB "leading his team" to the playoffs... but I'll gladly take what I can get after all this time. Taylor did what he needed to do yesterday and everything worked out for us all. It's a nice change of pace, right?
Hahaha. You’re hilarious. So Andy Dalton is the reason the Bills made the playoffs? The same Andy Dalton whose team didn’t make the playoffs? Okay. Got it.
You can tell by your screen name how bitter you are that your prediction didn’t come through. So sad.
-
3 minutes ago, twoandfourteen said:
1. If by "tight windows" you mean "the receiver's shoes", then yes, you are correct.
2. Yes, he does "throw guys open" -- Taylor does consistently find the NFL Films camera men and/or team trainers standing out of bounds on deep throws, even when there are players from the other team nearby.
3. I agree, you can "win with him" -- as long as your own defense scores a TD in the game and doesn't allow the other team to score more than 21 points. You should really plan on not allowing more than 13, just to be on the safe side though. This approach, combined with Tyrod Taylor's ability to play QB should win you 1 out of every 2 games.
At this point, you’re just making stuff up to try and make a point. We get it....you don’t like Taylor. But one thing you can’t deny is the fact he’s the first Bills QB in the last 17 years to lead them to the playoffs. That’s undeniable.
-
30 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:
4thand 12. 59 second 1st down in flat 3 to tie and he nails a 49 yard TD. Still waiting for your video evidence of THAT throw
And the 300 yard games, right?
-
2 minutes ago, twoandfourteen said:
This is wrong.
The Bills line grades out pretty well actually. Tyrod Taylor's indecisiveness and mobility in the pocket make pass protection far more difficult for the linemen -- they have to hold off defenders longer and they never know where Tyrod is going to end up on a given play.
His mobility makes it harder? Hahahaha. Any other QB would've been smashed on quite a few drop backs from yesterday when the pocket collapsed so quickly. He's got his deficiencies for sure, but calling out his mobility as a negative is a stretch my friend.
-
1
-
-
Sean McD was a Scouting Administrator Coordinator for the Eagles.
Oh, and my avatar is about how old TT was then when he was playing youth football for the Tornados in Hampton VA.
-
Cincy just letting Flacco sit back there and pick them apart. The dude has no wheels. They’ve got to pressure him.
-
IMO, the NFL in general is becoming hard to watch from the officiating to the executives to the players' protests........I'm just tired of pro football in general. I'd much rather watch a college game any day of the week.
-
12 minutes ago, Bangarang said:
The decision to bench Tyrod has far greater meaning than Peterman’s performance.
And what McD found out is that his Oline blows. Not saying Taylor is the answer but it’s glaringly obvious the Oline needs to be addressed and addressed quickly.
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, gjv001 said:
If the Bills brain trust doesn't come up with a better scheme to protect their pocket QB, they probably will need to find at least 6 pocket QB's.
Amen.
Whatever happens with Taylor, in my opinion, you've got to replace Dennison. The turtle offense when in the lead is worrisome. Maybe that's on McD, I don't know. But if there's any year where you pull out the stops to step on teams' necks or simply gamble, it would be this year. It's a free year for him in so many ways. Take the Miami win.....great first half, play not-to-lose second half and sorta limp away with the victory. Zero momentum going into this week from that game and, in fact, the team probably feels a bit down after the W.
-
39 minutes ago, JohnC said:
Changing schemes has little to do with the running qb's struggle with accuracy, eading defenses and going through progressions. You either have an ability to do it or you don't. Blaming the multiple OCs he has played under to adjust to his limitations is a distraction and divergence from the real issue of inherit deficiencies that he has. Teams are adjusting to Taylor by doing their best to contain him and force him to play in a way that he is not comfortable with. The limited book on him is on full display. The running qb has had seven years to add another dimension to his game that would allow him to be a more complete qb. He has not been able to do it. What you now see is what you are going to get.
Whaley wanted to move on from Taylor. The new regime apparently wants to move on from him. The storyline is baked in: Taylor will not be on the Bills' roster next year. It will be because he simply isn't good enough for an organization that has higher aspirations other than being mediocre.
It’s funny that Taylor’s accuracy is better when on the move. What happened to Dennison rolling him out, taking advantage of his mobility? Let’s face it, they didn’t want him from the beginning.
-
13 hours ago, Lfod said:
I never once said a win was a loss. I was only saying that those wins could of been more dominant and that wasn't an attempt to discredit those wins, just an observation.
My point was that even though it was a bad move to start Nate Peterman I though that it was justified at the time at least in my opinion because the season was slipping away.
I also pointed out that the Bills beat KC and Colts in a similar fashion to back up my point that we beat two teams that also were struggling, in the same fashion with different quarterbacks so maybe the benching didn't make the kind of difference that would merit holding it over the HC head forever.
I wouldn't expect a rookie to be better then a guy that is established and had more reps and experience at professional football. Then again when I just compare the KC game and Colts game in a vacuum the games looked very similar to me. That's just how I look at it as a fan.
Just for the record I respect Tyrod Taylor a lot and can list all the things I admire about him instantly. I want him to take the Bills to the playoffs. I want the dudes dreams to come true. It just wasn't looking like it was a strong possibility going into L.A.
So you think it's a good idea, when your team is still in contention, to go to a rookie? He clearly wasn't ready yet McD thinks it'll work out? That's the scary part.....that McD thought he could spark the offense. Is McD that bad of a talent evaluator?
What you do is stay the course until the team is eliminated from playoff contention or the chances are so remote you decide to see what you have in a guy like Peterman. You don't flush it down the toilet so early in the playoff run. I'm not saying the Bills would've won that game with Taylor at the helm but I'd be willing to bet it would've been a much closer game and it wouldn't have been a shock if the Bills won.
-
16 hours ago, SaviorPeterman said:
I heard from a well placed source of mine that if not for the concussion Peterman would have remained the starter for the Dolphins game last week.
Same source also told me that there is serious consideration right now to start NP this week in Foxboro, but even if Taylor starts he'll be on a short leash if the offense doesn't do anything against the Pats in the 1st half and the game is still close in the 3rd quarter.
Regardess it doesn't take a genius to figure out the Bills have very little chance of winning this game no matter who starts at QB. Although the thinking man certainly realizes that NP is the better option and always has been.
So a "thinking man" believes a guy who completes less than 50% of his passes, has 2 TD's to 5 picks and a rating of 38.4 is the better option?! Hahahaha. Okay. "Thinking man" needs to put down the crack pipe.
I think it's hilarious how Taylor should be the one on the short leash and not a rookie. Even in the LAC game, if Taylor had thrown two picks right away in that game, he likely would've been pulled yet Peterman get's to throw five picks in one half. What McD needs to do is grow a pair and tell Dennison to use his QB's mobility to move the chains. Trying to make him a pocket passer isn't the goal....the goal is to move the football and win games. Whatever happened to Dennison and rolling out his QB, getting him into space to make the defense defend the whole field. All I see is five step drops for the most part when we should be seeing Taylor roll out, QB designed runs etc... If he get's hurt, he get's hurt. Another upside to letting Taylor be Taylor is showcasing him for other teams from a trade standpoint because it's been obvious since McD came to town he's not planning on keeping Taylor.
-
1 hour ago, Gordio said:
Exaggerate much??? No one has ever said that. What people have blamed the Bills for is not even trying to address the QB situation. You got to take a chance to win the lottery.
I think what he's saying is that too many on this board think drafting a franchise QB is like going down to Walmart to pick up an item. It just doesn't work that way. So many top QB draft picks have been busts in recent years. Drafting a great QB when you have a porous Oline is almost pointless (if Oline isn't being addressed as well) and a bad way to protect such a huge investment.
-
5 minutes ago, ddaryl said:
You give him a chance to dig his way out.. But a couple of those early picks were not on him
I don't think it had any real affect on him becuase he looked more poised in the snow game. if anything it opened his eyes.. If the kid has got a shot ant a long career shaking off games liek that is a good sign.. Still need to see more of him, but i was ok with the decisions then..
Not as long as you have been obvioulsy.. Keep up the yuks
but you had to try, and what happened after that QB swap.... were back in the playoff conversation... Call it what you will but TT wasn't looking so good and the you make the QB change.. Understood the decsion and I stil agree with it
So you decide to throw Peterman out there against a pass rush like LAC? Yea, okay. That's a smart move. As far as the interceptions, the first one was a bullet from close range...not completely his fault but a pick nonetheless. The second and third INT's were horribly thrown balls under pressure....looked like ducks floating in the air. The fourth one he stared down the receiver big time. Between the 4th and 5th pick he almost threw another one. And the last pick was so off-course, it wasn't even funny. So I don't know where you can say "a couple of those picks were not on him"......not sure what you were watching.
By the way, whatever happened to Dennison's offense being about rolling the pocket and getting the QB in space to have the ability to run or throw? At this point, you've got probably the most mobile QB in the league and you stay with the 5 step drops.....why not get Taylor out of the pocket and let him tuck and run more? Dennison's problem is he goes into the tank way too early. It's not hard to figure out that's his M.O.
This years team resembles 1998 a lot
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted · Edited by Bills757
Been saying this forever. Why not use his mobility as a weapon rather than just a means to escape pressure. Makes no sense to me. If he's not the long-term guy (which is fairly apparent), why is Dennison so averse to having him run the ball (designed) more? Roll outs and designed runs make the defense defend more of the field and make decisions (whether to cover their guy or defend a running QB). Again, makes no sense to me.