twoandfourteen

His inability to score points and move an offense definitely loses lots of games for the Bills. Just because there isn't a "C'Mon MAN!" Blake Bortles highlight attached to it, doesn't mean that it's any less fatal. Guys like Fitz or Bortles kill you in a instant with a crushing INT. However, they will also make plays in the passing game and those INTs are just the result of that. Taylor is the opposite. It's a slow, agonizing, and painful to watch. It's the "death by 1000 paper cuts" approach. Either way, you're done for.

So do I, and yesterday is exactly why Taylor needs to hit the road. Actually, being scared of what else is out there and holding on for dear life to one of the worst starting QBs in football is. Compared to Taylor, yes it is.

Orton threw for more yards in 12 games than Taylor has in his full seasons, averaging 251 yds/gm. He had 18 TDs, which is also comparable to TT (20,17,14). This was also done in a season where he was just cashing checks until retirement. Fitz & Orton are both debatable, but I give them the edge simply on their ability to run a much more effective passing offense than Taylor. If you knew that the defense would hold your opponent to 10, which 2 of the 3 would you have the most confidence in to get you to 13? Because I can't watch that guy take another snap for this team. I've had it with feeling that the game is over whenever they are down by a TD. We know what he is and what the offense is capable of with him -- practically nothing. So give me literally anyone other than TT at this point.

Technically, you are correct. But the number of failed drives was a far more important statistic in yesterday's game. The turnovers were irrelevant for the most part. 2016 Scoring: 11th (399 points, 520 led the league & 16th was 365) Passing: 30th (3036 yards, 5074 led the league) Passing TDs: 27th (17, 40 led the league) Rushing: 1st (2630 yards, 1205 was worst in the league) Rushing TDs: 29 (1st, 6 was worst in the league) Doesn't really look like Taylor really had much to do with that not-quite-top 10 "high scoring" offense. I would imagine having an all-world RB helps. 2015 Scoring: 12th (379, 500 led the league & 16th was 367) Passing: 28th (3343, 4970 led the league) Passing TDs: 21st (23, 36 led the league) Rushing: 1st (2432, 1335 was worst in the league) Rushing TDs: 1st (19, 4 was the worst in the league) Weird, pretty much the same thing. "High Scoring" generally doesn't mean "slightly better than the middle of the league, yet nowhere near the top 5". Yes! Yes to all of this!

Bledsoe > Taylor Fitz > Taylor Orton > Taylor

This too.

He also came into the game cold in the last minute of the 4th quarter. I'll cut the guy some slack for not firing 105mph fastballs right out of the gate.

Lots to unpack here. 1. Again, this is the hyperbole I was referring to. No one KNOWS anything for certain. You might be right, or you might be wrong. You are basing your opinion on 1 half of football. I am basing mine on years and years of watching countless rookies develop. Some do, some don't. Won't know for a while. It's kind of a basic human characteristic that people are not as good at doing a thing when they first start, but then after a while they learn more about that thing and then are better at it. 2. Considering that in his first season NP has already shown the ability to make certain throws that Taylor can't or won't in his 7th, it's not unreasonable to think that given time, he COULD (not WILL) possibly become a better QB simply by being able to potentially run a better passing offense. 3. Two games under 100 passing yards (could have been 3, he had 74 going into the last minute of the CAR game). 11 of 17 under 200 passing yards. 4 games where he managed only a single FG. 3 years of a bottom-ranked passing offense. So, to answer your question -- yes, absolutely. Anyone could be better than Taylor. The only thing worse than Tyrod this season was a rookie who threw 5 INTs in his first start. 4. It is true. The Bills passing offense under Tyrod Taylor was only 14 yards better than rookie Mitch Trubisky's Chicago offense. 5. Because he is a rookie playing in a dysfunctional offense. 6. I'm on board with this 100%. I'm not attached to Peterman by any stretch, I'm just saying you can't write him off after only this year. Draft 3 QBs. Draft all of them until you find one. 7. It's not so much what we have seen from him, it's what we haven't seen from Taylor. Again, if TT can be a QB in the NFL, then it stands to reason that NP could carve out a career in the league, too. 8. True. But he is still a rookie, and he doesn't "keep getting chances"... he's had two chances to start and was terrible in one and very good in the other under extreme circumstances. The Peyton and Roethlisberger points are only to keep things in perspective. If what happened to Peterman can happen to those guys it isn't all that unprecedented -- and that point is even more poignant specifically BECAUSE he is not the same player or prospect they are. Anything else? I agree with this. It's the "the guy doesn't belong on a roster" take that I think is ridiculous. The guy took his lumps in his first season. See what he does next year. If he responds and eventually becomes a quality reliable backup QB, then it was a great pickup in the 5th round. If he doesn't, then he joins that distinguished list of Bills punchlines at QB.

This is the stuff I'm talking about. Sorry the 5th round rookie didn't come off the bench cold and step into the final seconds of a playoff game with everything on the line and get it done for you. To make this kind of dismissal on any player after such limited exposure is ridiculous. I don't particularly feel great about NP's ceiling -- he's probably a journeyman/spot starter at best. I wouldn't be surprised if he develops into a better overall QB than Tyrod Taylor eventually. Of course, that's not saying very much. If you make the "Tyrod doesn't have WRs!" or "Rick Dennison SUCKS!" arguments, then wouldn't those arguments stand as defense for Peterman as well? Maybe give him a shot to develop another year under a new OC? It's ridiculous to be so hyperbolic about his status in the league at this point in time.

So a rookie playing in his first ever game has LESS of a margin for error than a future Hall of Fame guy. Got it. Maybe, instead of excusing BR and condemning NP -- look at it like, "Well, 5 INT games are really bad -- but they happen sometimes, even to the best guys to ever play the game. So, its entirely conceivable for a rookie to have a meltdown like that. Maybe we should slow down and wait a little bit longer to see how he does next year?" But no. There's no learning curve allowed, there's no such thing as "rookie mistakes" anymore. We'll still give Tyrod three full seasons to punt the ball away and maybe kick a FG if we're lucky all day long. All he needs are "more weapons" and a "better defense". I don't know what NP's going to be -- he could be out of the league in two years for all I care. I'm just blown away by the lack of any nuance when it comes to that guy.

"Meh" is worlds better than "Tyrod".

I'm saying the guy played well under extremely difficult circumstances in the Colts game. That's it. I'm not breaking down film, here. I couldn't care less. Did he go in and get the job done? The answer is yes. Talking about the big picture. Ben Roethlisberger threw 5 picks in a game this year, too. By your rationale, Pittsburgh probably should have cut him after that one then.

I agree with this -- probably the only really fair assessment of 2 after this circus season.

That somehow Peterman's appearances this season 'prove' that you can "win with" Tyrod and that McD was an idiot for making a change. The reality is that Tyrod is responsible for that decision being made. His inability to play at even a barely functional level forced Peterman into the discussion. Taylor, as a 7 year veteran and 3 year starter has been just as detrimental to the offense as Peterman had been. Punting all day long and only scoring 1 FG isn't that much of an improvement over a couple of INTs from your rookie. At least the rookie is trying to make something happen while your veteran is fixated on protecting the only statistic keeping him relevant. You could say that about the rookie seasons of lots of legitimately good starting QBs over the years. You're also wrong. Peterman's game against the Colts actually happened and was encouraging. I'll hold off on dismissing the guy until next year. He had some really bad moments, but also had a couple of good ones. All in all, he played like you would expect a late-round rookie QB to play.

That's fair. Maybe I had you mixed up with the guys who are absolutely adamant & convinced that Peterman is already finished and has no shot at an NFL career. I don't particularly care if he does or not -- I just have a problem with how the narrative for NP has been twisted.

That QB couldn't make that throw (along with many others) for 3 years. But now it's a problem -- when a 5th round rookie comes off the bench cold and is thrown into probably the most difficult situation possible for any QB. Got it.

Ding Ding Ding!

Yikes. If Smith is terrible... then what does that make Tyrod?

Or are more people realizing how virtuous and morally superior they can look to their friends by pointing out injustice, even when it's not really there? I hear that kind of social capital is big with the SJW crowd these days, amirite?

Because that is how all the really good teams approach their QBs in playoff games. I'm sure in New England, Bill is constantly trying to figure out how to not put Brady in position to make plays. Or in Pittsburgh, they really game plan to make sure they limit just how much is put on Roethlisberger's shoulders. Green Bay's coaches are keenly aware of the perils of relying on Aaron Rodgers in key moments of the game, and try to stay away from that. I am so glad I don't have to watch 5 take another snap in a Bills uniform.

The fact that he's only played roughly 4 1/2 non-consecutive quarters of professional football -- 2 of which were in a historic and never-before-seen blizzard, 2 were against an epic pass rush in his first start, and then a few minutes here and there, including going in cold to a potentially game-winning last-minute drive in the first Bills playoff game in 17 years. All in all, despite the limited playing time I'd say it was an eventful season for the rookie. However, none of that really allowed for any sort of real evaluation. If you have a chance, go take a look at some of the rookie year performances of some of big name QBs out there. You probably would have written off a young QB named Brett Favre, who only completed two passes in his rookie season for the Atlanta Falcons -- both of them to the Washington Redskins. Of course, Peterman is not the next Favre. But you can't pass a final judgement on NP's career after a handful of appearances in his rookie year. He did some good things, too. The Colts game was uncharted territory for everyone involved, and he played great -- especially considering it came after the Chargers mess. He could have easily packed it in after that, but came back and played very well in the snow. Well, your mans TT made a strong case that maybe he wasn't on multiple occasions this season.

Tell 'em! Taylor for the HOF because he's a 7 year veteran who has a slight advantage over a 5th round rookie.