twoandfourteen

Looks like a backup QB with a winning record over an extended number of games. What's your point?

You asked, I answered. By the way, 3rd-stringer Case Keenum says "what's up?".

Three seasons full of games. 42 starts. This is the best you've got? Tyrod's "key throws" didn't win the Atlanta game. A "key" fumble recovery run back for a TD by the defense won that game. Tyrod did throw a 6 yard TD to Charles Clay in the 3rd Q against Denver, so full marks for that. It sure helped that the Bills defense came up with 2 INTs and 2 turnover-on-downs on Denver's last 4 offensive drives in the 2nd half, though. But Taylor did do his job. I'd also give him full credit for the TB game -- hitting Deonte Thompson for 44 to set up McCoy was a big play. One of the few clutch throws he's connected on in his career as a starter, but still a great toss. Those wins are exactly the type of wins you would want from an elite backup QB.

That's exactly where he fits. Can't bring a team back from any sort of deficit. Can't run a modern passing offense. Needs literally EVERYTHING to go right in the running game, on defense, and on special teams for his team to pull out a win. Doesn't turn the ball over. Can run for the occasional first down to extend a drive or get into FG range. Excellent in the locker room and in the film room. Sounds like the ideal backup QB. Or, 30-35th at the position in the NFL.

I don't really want Taylor in that "mentor" role -- as far as learning how to be a professional, film study, diligence, commitment, etc... he'd be perfect in that regard, there is no question about that. I really like Tyrod as an individual and as a pro. It doesn't get much better than him. The problem is that his overall game relies primarily on things that athletically only he is capable of, and his perspective on the passing game is severely limited by the fundamental things he can't do. I just don't think he'd be a very good candidate to teach a rookie how to run a high-powered passing attack.

I don't want him to start, or ever really see the field. But as a backup/mentor, maybe? I can't think of any other vet that I would like to see work with the new QBs.

Yes. Right now. Where do I sign?

This is just not true. At least, statistically speaking. Just looking at the three years Taylor has been a starter -- McCown has put up better passing numbers, and that was while playing in the with three-ring circuses known as the Cleveland Browns & NY Jets. This year, JMcC has 18 TD passes in 13 games. How about Tyrod? 13 TDs in 14 games. Must be all those weapons McCown has in NY, right? Passing yards? JMcC's lowest yds/gm is still better than Tyrod's best. Oh, and McCown has more rushing TDs this year.

I can't believe I'm actually going to suggest this, but after reading all of this crap and thinking about it.... Fitzy might be the best guy to bring in here to work with both Peterman and the new kid they draft in April. He's on a 1 year deal with Tampa Bay, so won't cost anything to sign him as a FA. The guy definitely has the football IQ down and had a bit of "gunslinger" in him. He just didn't have all of the physical tools to successfully execute what he was seeing. His numbers were actually ok for a backup, 1103 yards/7TDs/3INTs/86.0 QBR and averaged 183.8 yards per game in 6 games, 3 as the starter (2-1).

He is. Well, at least it starts there. The other stuff is a result of his inability to play QB in a modern passing offense. Go ask Marquise Goodwin or Robert Woods.

That's exactly why we are all arguing about this right now. ...And it's not exactly a ringing endorsement of Tyrod Taylor's abilities as a starting QB. Congratulations on being better than Brian McClure (rd12/1986), Matt Rodgers (rd12/1992), Todd Collins (rd2/1995), JP Losman (rd1/2004), Trent Edwards (rd3/2007), Levi Brown (rd7/2010), EJ Manuel (rd1/2013), and Cardale Jones (rd4/2016). Yikes. Looks even worse when you see it all in one place like that. "30 years of excellence", my friends.

Game will look really good.

A direct result of blocking for a QB that takes too long to recognize the defensive coverage and to get rid of the football. Taylor's reliance on his mobility is also detrimental to the offensive line, because they don't know where he will end up going throughout the play. But do continue to make excuses for the guy.

This is absolutely correct. I should have included that -- good point.

This is exactly the group Tyrod belongs in: career backups who become fringe starters out of desperation when there are no other options. However, no one defends these guys or proclaims them to be "elite" by any measure. They are punchlines, just as you have intended to use them here. I watched one game with Osweiler this year. The guy was not good. However, even he was making certain throws that Taylor has NEVER shown any acumen for. Taylor is just smarter with the football and understands how to work within his own limitations overall better than the group of clowns you listed. I don't know much about the "intangible" side of things with that group, but I would imagine that Taylor is far and away superior on that front as far as that is concerned.

Since the QB position is by far the most important on the field, you are correct -- Taylor has been an important part, but only by default. His main contribution has been defined by not doing things: not throwing INTs and not scoring TDs. For example, the offense hasn't had a meaningful 2nd half TD since October. His running ability is one of the most overrated things in sports. If I'm a defensive coordinator, I'll gladly concede 50-60 rushing yards to the QB if it means he'll only throw for 140 or 160. Much better to give up 180-200 total yards than face the prospect of allowing 275-300+ to an actual "decent" QB. His rushing is just a more inefficient way to move the ball downfield. It's great if you've got a guy who can throw -- but when it's your QB's main weapon, it's a recipe for lots of punts and FGs, as we've seen.

Excellent post -- well done.

This is actually what I am arguing. Taylor is not a 15-25 QB. He's actually more of a 30-35 QB: a barely functional starter, but would be an absolutely invaluable asset as a #2 for a contender with an actual QB. If you need someone to hold down the fort for 2-4 games, then Taylor is THE guy. But for 16 games? Forget it. The Bills are in this position 100% despite the play of Tyrod Taylor. With an even marginally competent passing offense, they would most likely already have a playoff spot locked up.

Well color me "surprised". Totally had you pegged as a Jauron-Ball kind of guy. You're being deliberately obtuse here. I, along with the other anti-Taylor's, would be ecstatic if the guy would consistently hit a receiver in stride or maybe had the passing offense ranked somewhere in the mid-teens rather than dead last. It's not exactly a high bar for performance around here, and Taylor has somehow managed to lower those expectations even further by making Kyle Orton look like Peyton Manning.

1. He's not the worst to ever play the game. Just one of the worst currently playing the game. 2. Can't think of one game. Maybe the Dolphins game a week ago? Care to elaborate? 3. That's why he took a pay cut to come back to Buffalo, right? So many options out there!

Maybe they play like that due to an inability of the QB to consistently generate any sort of offense, so the only option is to try and run out the clock. Ever consider that?

That's fair, I agree that the Patriots can be a bit of a tough bar to clear. How about the Chiefs, then? Well.... they've punted the ball away 15 times less than the Bills have. Steelers? Same thing, 15 less than the Bills. Rams? 58 punts to the Bills 75. Maybe the Falcons? They actually lead the league in fewest punts at only 48. The point is that there is WAY too much focus on how rarely Tyrod has thrown INTs as a starter. How about looking at how rarely the offense scores a TD with him as the QB? That to me is a much more important statistic.

You are a big "need to run and stop the run" kind of guy, I'd imagine. Field position! Three yards and a cloud of dust! Not turning the ball over is great -- except when you punt the ball away 25 times more throughout the year than a team like the Patriots. Let's say it again for the kids in the back: The Bills have given the ball away to their opponent 25 times more than the Patriots. A punt is just a less dramatic turnover. The end result is the same, the other team has the ball and you don't.