BuffaloHokie13 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 In Rex's presser he spoke of how he thinks EJ will be a good QB in the league and how EJ keeps ascending. I didn't correlate the two QBs like that, Rex did. As far as "just letting Tyrod go", that would be plain stupid. If EJ continues to "ascend" to the QB Rex thinks he will become, how will the organization be able to afford all of those multi million dollar contracts? Taylor would demand a king's ransom. Trading him will garnish multiple high end picks. That's all I'm saying. Just business. When he gave the present and future statement it was in response to how getting a 2017 pick doesn't help the team now. His response was that the best GM's don't only help the team in the present, they also consider the future. We got rid of our veteran backup because we believe the QB's on our roster help us in the present and the future. You can try to spin it how you want, but your interpretation is way off. You might want to listen to the presser in its entirety instead of just piecing together the quotes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 i admit I read it for the laughs. And I got them. I actually feel bad for him because he is so incompetent. While the humor value is always there, giving Jerry the "clicks" will keep him employed. If you want to partake in the fun, check out the newsprint version (preferably someone else's used copy).... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solomon Grundy Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) When he gave the present and future statement it was in response to how getting a 2017 pick doesn't help the team now. His response was that the best GM's don't only help the team in the present, they also consider the future. We got rid of our veteran backup because we believe the QB's on our roster help us in the present and the future. You can try to spin it how you want, but your interpretation is way off. You might want to listen to the presser in its entirety instead of just piecing together the quotes. Well, I'm not the only one interpreting his quote this way. That's why there's a 6 page thread on the subject. Edited September 24, 2015 by the skycap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloHokie13 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Well, I'm not the only one interpreting his quote this way. That's why there's a 6 page thread on the subject. Yet you are not refuting that your interpretation comes from using a partial quote out of context (which the media loves to do for headlines) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Yet you are not refuting that your interpretation comes from using a partial quote out of context (which the media loves to do for headlines) isn't it funny how one statement garnishes multiple interpretations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted September 24, 2015 Author Share Posted September 24, 2015 While the humor value is always there, giving Jerry the "clicks" will keep him employed. If you want to partake in the fun, check out the newsprint version (preferably someone else's used copy).... i don't know about how much clicks keep him employed, but he's a joke like Skip Bayless and woody Paige on a national level. No one takes him seriously unless they know nothing about the team, how the league works, other teams, etc. I assume he is here for our amusement and it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloHokie13 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 isn't it funny how one statement garnishes multiple interpretations Whats funny is how desperate some are to get rid of our current starter as long as he 'lights it up' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) I stated in another I think they see the gaping hole emerging in TTs game, not being able to throw over the middle or even see pressure coming up the middle. In preparation for maybe having go sit him in favor of EJ (these guys love mobile, and EJ is 2nd behind TT, and far more mobile than cassell), they moved MC. Not only to get EJ more time in a uni, but if TT does get benched they'd certainly keep him as #2 over cassel. Oddly enoigh Cassel was the first casualty of TTs shaky performance on Sunday. Edited September 24, 2015 by JTSP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted September 24, 2015 Author Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) I stated in another I think they see the gaping hole emerging in TTs game, not being able to throw over the middle or even see pressure coming up the middle. In preparation for maybe having go sit him in favor of EJ (these guys love mobile, and EJ is 2nd to behind TT, and far more mobile than cassell), they moved. Not only to get EJ more time in a uni, but if TT does get benched they'd certainly keep him as #2 over cassel. Oddly enoigh Cassel was the first casualty of TTs shaky performance on Sunday.im pretty sure they expected Taylor to need additional coaching in order to progress once he started playing. Edited September 24, 2015 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Whats funny is how desperate some are to get rid of our current starter as long as he 'lights it up' just so we are clear... Who wants to get rid of TT if he "lights it up"?? Are you sure you are not misinterpreting their point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 im pretty sure they expected Taylor to need additional coaching in order to progress once he started playing.When you have a smallish QB who's problem is seeing over the line and over throwing WRs from the pocket, gotta question if its correctable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 (edited) Re: Sullivan, one thing I'll never understand is when people express outrage over something they freely admit is beyond their comprehension. He kept saying "I don't understand why" Well, okay, Jerry, then !@#$ing take a beat and try and figure it out. It's really not that !@#$ing difficult. Why was Cassel the backup in the first two weeks? 1.) Insurance. 2.) It gave EJ two extra weeks to prove they saw what they saw during TC and PS and 3.) !@#$ING HELLO: it increased his trade value. Jesus, TWO inconsequential weeks to determine they're comfortable with what they had in EJ and drove Cassel's value up in the meantime, while OH BY THE WAY, getting him back at a bargain discount. Cassel was ALWAYS an insurance plan. Will Sullivan lay on his death bed and say "We'll somebody please help me understand why I spent all those years on flood insurance when there was never any floods!?" Jerry Sullivan is annoying when he's needlessly contrarian. He's even worse when he's just plainly dense. Edited September 24, 2015 by The Big Cat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloHokie13 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 just so we are clear... Who wants to get rid of TT if he "lights it up"?? Are you sure you are not misinterpreting their point? Reality bites!! The organization knows that if Tyrod plays lights out they will not be able to afford him when his contract is up. They will be able to re-sign Manuel at a modest salary and possibly trade Tyrod for his value will be enticing to another team. Again, if our current starter lights it up he isn't going anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Again, if our current starter lights it up he isn't going anywhere. He's identified a worst-case scenario. And it's a pretty damn good one. But it's not the plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloHokie13 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 He's identified a worst-case scenario. And it's a pretty damn good one. But it's not the plan. It's not even feasible. We can't afford him at the end of his contract, but we can trade him even though he isn't under contract? Or are we trading him 1 year into his contract? Or are we trading out starter who's lighting it up mid season in 2016? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 It's not even feasible. We can't afford him at the end of his contract, but we can trade him even though he isn't under contract? Or are we trading him 1 year into his contract? Or are we trading out starter who's lighting it up mid season in 2016? Well, no a trade is out of the question, unless Whaley (has he's proven capable of) can find a serious sucker to give up the farm for TT. But LOSING TT when he becomes unaffordable is PERFECTLY within the realm of possibility, making EJ the latest insurance policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Again, if our current starter lights it up he isn't going anywhere. Again. Who is saying that and in what context? Arguing cap issues is an whole different topic here. When it comes to CAP reasons all bets are off. I'm not making any such proclamations but what if they feel the other guy can "light it up" too and a much cheaper price? see MC cut/signing/trade Do you think Colts fans loved it when Peyton got the axe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloHokie13 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Again. Who is saying that and in what context? I quoted the exact post... Arguing cap issues is an whole different topic here. When it comes to CAP reasons all bets are off. I'm not making any such proclamations but what if they feel the other guy can "light it up" too and a much cheaper price? see MC cut/signing/trade No team is going to give up a QB who's proven they can light it up for one they feel may be able to. Do you think Colts fans loved it when Peyton got the axe? So now we're comparing a 26 year old QB to a 35 year old one coming off season ending neck surgery? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Well, no a trade is out of the question, unless Whaley (has he's proven capable of) can find a serious sucker to give up the farm for TT. But LOSING TT when he becomes unaffordable is PERFECTLY within the realm of possibility, making EJ the latest insurance policy. We won't lose TT if he plays well enough to get a franchise contract. We'd cut every player on the roster first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 I cannot believe how much of a discussion this is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts