Mikie2times

We are at 22 turnovers on offense this year in 10 games. We had 16 all season in 2017. We are trending toward 1 takeaway less than last season. The entire reason we made the playoffs last year was taking advantage of teams similar to this years Bills squad. We would end up +3 and with a guy who never turns it over and we won. Edge in the turnover battle and elite defense will get you ahead of most of the teams trying to break in a pretender/not ready franchise QB. Our offense would have sucked. It would have been one and done if it happened.

We have almost a carbon copy of last years team in an even weaker playoff battle. With Tyrod I think it would have been back to back playoff years. Give him two turnovers in a game and he wins more often than not. No, I don't think he's good. But what he does do is protect the ball, enhance the running game, and to some extent mask poor offensive line play. Whats even more silly about the whole thing is he gets traded to the exact same situation he would have faced here. Perhaps he would have had the same fate in Buffalo he has in Cleveland if he was retained. I know Taylor has been talked to nauseous levels. I just find the thought process on this interesting and I'm curious what others think. Is this a playoff team with Taylor?

It was always going to be Allen. https://www.newyorkupstate.com/buffalo-bills/index.ssf/2017/07/buffalo_bills_gm_brandon_beane_describes_what_he_looks_for_in_franchise_quarterb.html

Could be another nobody like Kyle Williams

Rosen has been horrific thus far.

Not as much as I like but enough. 75% of the league is separated by 1 or 2 plays, only a couple teams have consistency enough to avoid that statement. For as awful as the roster gut and offense have been, I'm just as impressed with what we have done with our defense. Some NFL fans have been crying about how they can't help but allow 30 points a week. I would find that to be a much greater frustration and negative stain on our team and coach than our current situation of being offensively challenged. We seem void of talent on both sides in effort to rebuild but again we are playing top 5 defense (6th according to DVOA).

Yup. Deep in two bills drive archives is my summary of his first preseason game. Caught my eye with his leverage and motor. Never would I have thought he would have one of the most distinguished careers in Bills history. In saying that, in all areas. Great leader of men. Never gave up. Really an inspiration which you don’t tend to say a lot about modern athletes.

I agree with this. I'm 36, became a fan in 1990, joined this forum when it had a different name..... Those 90's Bills don't feel old to me. But 1990 was 28 years ago, so if you did the same exercise in 1990 you would be reflecting back to 1962.....1962 certainly sounds old to somebody my age. It's all relative.

An article was posted on what Beane looked for in a QB awhile back. I found it intriguing because it was well prior to the hype involved in this years draft but it ended up being spot on to the player selected. Beane talked a lot about physical traits like size, arm strength. It sounded very Cam like in what he wanted. I don't know where Allen's ceiling is. I didn't like the pick, but even with Allen's struggles I'm much happier we have him vs Rosen. Out of the two we didn't get, they probably look the best, but not exactly lights out. Allen has the most raw talent and we likely don't end this year being able to declare any of them franchise guys. So........

Anybody in a leadership role has had immensely talented people that don’t fall in line and eventually bring down the overall level of success. So yes, culture is critical. I would also say anybody worth a salt in a leadership role manages to save the majority of talent and or get a buy in, because ultimately not enough talent exists to just make everybody buy into what your selling. I’m indifferent to this quote. This is our regime and will be for some time and if you think this is bad try taking this roster and what few pieces we have added and convert it to a 3-4 or a new system. AKA the last 20 years of Bills football that cycles every 3 seasons.

You see it all around the league. The modern day blue print for building a Super Bowl contender. It starts at QB but does so in different ways. You either have substantial resources invested in the QB position which likely means you have one of the elite or you position yourself to get the "future" on a rookie contract. First approach forces you to draft well at every position because you likely aren't bringing in a lot of top dollar FA's. Second approach (what we are doing, what most teams are doing), go after your guy, once you got him, maximize FA buying power and create a 3-4 year window to make a run. You see several teams at different progressions in this process. Rams are an example of a team that is executing this perfectly. Bears are an example of a team that is trying to execute this but still question marks at QB. This approach hinges on the guy who you thought was the guy at QB in fact being the guy. I think we shape up in between the Rams and the Bears as far as our outlook but that is short sighted. We need more information. At the least Allen, in my opinion is viable to now max the cap in FA talent. Then you just hope you make the right moves. That is the process and the Bills are clearly executing it this year. Goal this year is to keep seeing progression from Allen and our more coveted draftees . In the interim I expect we will be all over the map with results.

3K on Buffalo with the points. I’m doing the same thing but for better reasons ?

You should be extremely worried. Teams that start off 0-2 against the spread cover at about a 60% clip the last 5 years in the 3rd game. This is a huge spread. Backdoor covers in play. Minnesota just got off a very hard fought divisional game. Wouldn't shock me a bit if the start slow. For as bad as the Chargers game went they would have covered against these odds. Public all over Minnesota. I made great money Week 1 and 2 off the Bills. It's either play on or play off them this week. At absolute best this is a 50/50 outcome. Most are, but anybody serious about handicapping knows when to pick spots on larger wagers. I just don't see any variables to justify this being one of them. It's like buying Bitcoin when it was at 20,000. Unlike weeks 1 and 2, everybody has caught on at this point. You don't want to be late with sports betting or investments.

Nice contrarian view point.

I was very negative towards the pick at first but completely turned around. It might be preseason but you can get a decent feel for some things. Allen throws a hell of a jump ball when the defender has his back turned. We haven't had that in a long time. Somebody with the guts and talent to put the ball where your guy catches or it's incomplete. These are chunk gains so seeing this is fantastic. Allen's delivery and arm strength allow him to be slower as far as reading defenses. He trusts his arm and he can see things and deliver the ball where others would surely be picked. It will bite him at times as he develops but he will always be able to react to what he sees faster than most QB's based on his release and arm strength. Allen is pretty nimble and likely not fun to tackle. You will have to spy this kid. That is crazy to think. You have to spy a guy who probably has the strongest arm in the NFL and when you tackle him he falls forward. Improvisation skills are certainly well developed. He can escape the pocket and throw it to virtually any place on the field. Also very solid throwing from odd angles. Guy is dynamic in the red zone. Run/Pass/Broken play. Another thing that might bite him a bit early just as far as risk taking in the RZ but he has generated some incredible TD's that very few QB's could execute. Some things I want to see improve is staying in the pocket. He bailed a lot in Wyoming even when he had a pocket. He's doing some similar things so far in the preseason. We have seen some glimpses of him standing tall and stepping up. He's a natural with playaction and steps up in that situation. Just not as often from the shotgun. Curious if they could redraft based on the first two preseason games if Allen goes #1. He's been impressive.

They can try and play protect the football, football. That said they are competing against one of the best of all time in that area. Crazy as that sounds. Taylor was historic in how rare he turned the ball over. I have a hard time seeing what the identity of the offense is this year. I would rather take risks and see young players develop, trading the short term for long term on offense than play turnover/risk free styles similar to what we have seen before. If the goal was protect the football they should have kept Taylor as the bridge. Our goal should be score points. Get a playoff caliber NFL offense before 2020. Partner that with this defense and it's a Super Bowl contender.

I don’t disagree but just as much as our defense and it’s turnovers were a big reason we won last year our offense not turning the ball over was as well. You could see a much improved defense and an offense that is still bad and more turnover prone. That is likely a 6-10 type team which is how I see it. This year will involve a lot of exploration on offense. We will be more aggressive. It very well could be a better offense but it will generate way more turnovers than TT and the 3 and outs.

It amazes me how redundant posts like this have become opposed to just not responding. Moths to a flame.

Peerless

I based my conclusions on Tyrod be prolific in his ability to not turn the ball over. He has the 2nd lowest INT% of any QB to throw more than 100 passes since 2000. Against that standard I expect we will see more turnovers. Then I looked at AJ's sack % in the time he did play in 2015 and he had a 9.2% sack %. That would put him in the bottom two or three in the league last year (Ironically right by Taylor). In Taylor that sack% gets more offset by runs and the typical improve yards Taylor would give us extending plays. AJ won't do that as effectively. He's more of what we wanted which is a downfield passer. He just has no options to throw the ball downfield. So while I don't pine for Tyrod, I think with the current roster he would have given us a better chance at winning next year. As is, it looks rebuild to me. Neither of our quarterbacks are going to be able to turn these lemons into lemonade.

This place is so sensitive lately. Not stuck in the past guys. It's an internet message board, isn't it the point to debate our beloved teams decision making process on the forum? I get Taylor discussions have been going on for months. All this thread is about is if you have no talent on offense who gives you the best chance at winning now? I think that's an interesting topic. I guess it angers people to even discuss it? Yeesh. Thank you for those that added something to the conversation.

After seeing how little we added to the offense, unless we add some major production prior to start of the year we are poised to have one of the most talent depleted offenses in football. If you asked me my preference between AJ and Tyrod I would say AJ, but that's only if he has play makers around him. Tyrod can't take advantage of play makers as much AJ can, but the reality is, we have nobody outside of McCoy. AJ holds the ball like Taylor, high sack rates, little mobility, much more turnover prone. What Tyrod can do is generate yards on his own. He helped mask the offensive line issues. He didn't commit turnovers. I'm certainly not arguing at all that an upgrade was required over Taylor. I just just think with this current roster Taylor would have given us a better chance to win games.

Perfect fit for this system. Both sides of the ball are void of talent and have huge need. I see this kid getting substantial playing time. I want offense too, but if they don't like who they see on offense I would rather land a contributor on defense.

I have way too many high level business meetings lately. You could almost call them 2nd high level. Just short of 3rd which is almost as high as it can get.

I think I still have the data. I did that on my old work laptop and I'm pretty sure I copied it all over. If not it was quick to do, I can maybe do it over. Criteria was simple, 64 starts or more or an overwhelming probability of 64 starts defined if it was a bust or not. I used 64 starts because teams try and give these players chances, but it rarely extends past 3 years, generally a max of 4 and I felt defining bad was easier than defining good. While still subjective, I would say most people would feel a high round QB not making 64 starts or more as a fail. If they make more than 64 it doesn't necessarily mean it's a huge win either, but few even make it that far along, so some success is likely at that point. Some gaps in data is how I tiered it. You could adjust the thresholds a decent amount and get similar data. I get what your saying though.