Tyrod stat time

[26CornerBlitz]

Not sure if the original intent was to troll -- or if the OP as simply ill-informed. The fact is that over half of Tyrod's yardage came on the 2 long TD passes. The first was on the very first possession, and the 2nd was on the first drive of the 2nd half. The first one put the Bills ahead 7-3, and the second one brought them to within a score. Oh, and the Jets turned it over on their very next drive -- and the TD return put the Bills back in the lead. Hardly garbage time.

 

Look, the offense really struggled against the Ravens. Against the Jets, they struggled to sustain drives; however, they did make good on those big plays, which should have been enough to win the game if the defense show up.

 

Despite all of the wailing, think about this: if Darby doesn't drop a pick six, and Tyrod doesn't underthrow a wide open Watkins (and instead tosses an INT), the Bills are probably 2-0.

 

 

I agree with you on the Dabry dropped INT at Baltimore, but while the underthrow to Sammy in the Jets' game hurt the defense couldn't stop Fitz and their WR corp all game long.

[NoSaint]

That's fair as long as it ends in a TD. I'd say a 50 yard TD is the same as an 80 yard TD but a 60 yard TD is better than a 75 yard play that doesn't result in a TD (if that makes sense). Finishing the play is important.

Certainly

[CountDorkula]

Not sure if the original intent was to troll -- or if the OP as simply ill-informed. The fact is that over half of Tyrod's yardage came on the 2 long TD passes. The first was on the very first possession, and the 2nd was on the first drive of the 2nd half. The first one put the Bills ahead 7-3, and the second one brought them to within a score. Oh, and the Jets turned it over on their very next drive -- and the TD return put the Bills back in the lead. Hardly garbage time.

 

Look, the offense really struggled against the Ravens. Against the Jets, they struggled to sustain drives; however, they did make good on those big plays, which should have been enough to win the game if the defense show up.

 

Despite all of the wailing, think about this: if Darby doesn't drop a pick six, and Tyrod doesn't underthrow a wide open Watkins (and instead tosses an INT), the Bills are probably 2-0.

Think about this if my aunt had.........

[Augie]

It's a big part of what we do and why our team was built this way, so I'm pretty sure it counts. A 3 point shooting BBall team is less likely to shoot a high percentage, but the points still count. It's somewhere between there and counting on the Lottery in your retirement planning. It may not be the best plan, but when it hits it certainly counts.

[PolishDave]

Against the jets 230 of tyrods 297 came from bombs or garbage time

 

Because they were lucky shots. Not sustainable, not going to win games week in and week out.

 

Only a Bills fan could hate their quarterback for scoring too fast on too few of plays.....

 

I thought the goal on offense was to score every play if possible?

 

If they score on the 3rd play in a drive, how in the hell is that not a good thing?

 

Tryod has is faults for sure. But his greatest strength is his ability to make those homerun plays happen, whether they are broken plays or not. The Bills should be exploiting that strength more often in my opinion by finding ways to put him in the position to score like that more often without them needing to be broken plays.

[The Wiz]

 

 

Only a Bills fan could hate their quarterback for scoring too fast on too few of plays.....

 

I thought the goal on offense was to score every play if possible?

 

If they score on the 3rd play in a drive, how in the hell is that not a good thing?

 

Tryod has is faults for sure. But his greatest strength is his ability to make those homerun plays happen, whether they are broken plays or not. The Bills should be exploiting that strength more often in my opinion by finding ways to put him in the position to score like that more often without them needing to be broken plays.

Every fan likes the big plays and Taylor is obviously capable of making them. The point about scoring to fast is actually a valid one if his only ability is to make big plays and not be able to create long sustaining drives (not all on him I know).

 

Someone can probably find the stat somewhere, I'm too lazy, but I would be curious to see what the bills average time per drive is compared to league. I feel like we probably have one of the quicker ones in the league.

 

Apparently not that hard to find. http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/team-time-of-possession-per-drive/2016/

Edited September 20, 2016 by The Wiz

[PolishDave]

Every fan likes the big plays and Taylor is obviously capable of making them. The point about scoring to fast is actually a valid one if his only ability is to make big plays and not be able to create long sustaining drives (not all on him I know).

 

Someone can probably find the stat somewhere, I'm too lazy, but I would be curious to see what the bills average time per drive is compared to league. I feel like we probably have one of the quicker ones in the league.

 

 

 

The point about scoring too fast is not a valid one.

 

The point about not sustaining drives is valid on drives that do not end in 6. If they end in 6 - the time it takes is completely irrelevant. The faster the better.

 

The only time you can really argue a team scored too fast is at the end of a game if they leave enough time on the clock for the opponent to score game winning points. Otherwise, scoring too fast is a complete and total myth.

[The Wiz]

 

The point about scoring too fast is not a valid one.

 

The point about not sustaining drives is valid on drives that do not end in 6. If they end in 6 - the time it takes is completely irrelevant. The faster the better.

 

The only time you can really argue a team scored too fast is at the end of a game if they leave enough time on the clock for the opponent to score game winning points. Otherwise, scoring too fast is a complete and total myth.

So you think if the defense had to play 45 minutes of the game there would be no difference in their performance than if they only had to play 28 minutes of a game? Edited September 20, 2016 by The Wiz

[Kirby Jackson]

So you think if the defense had to play 45 minutes of the game there would be no difference than if they only had to play 28 minutes of a game?

I don't think that is what he is saying. I think that what Dave is saying is that if they have to play 45 minutes because the offense scored 28 quick points, that's fine. It's better to play 45 minutes with points on the board than 28 minutes without. Scoring trumps time of possession in any scenario. You never see a team complain after running a punt back for a TD because the defense has to go right back on the field.

[PolishDave]

So you think if the defense had to play 45 minutes of the game there would be no difference than if they only had to play 28 minutes of a game?

Defense is irrelevant when considering whether or not the offense should score on any given play.

 

The goal of the offense is to score. The more points they score the better. The goal of the offense is not to play defense by hanging onto the ball.

 

The only time that should ever be a factor is if you are blowing the other team out. Then I can see taking as much time as possible to eat clock. Otherwise, you score as early and as often as you can.

 

If you want to see the logic then think about this:

 

If you are on offense and you knew you could score on the next play - why in the hell would you ever choose not to? Regardless of whether it is the first play of the drive or the 10th or whatever? Unless like I said - you are blowing the other team out or if you are in a situation at the end of the game where the other team could outscore you with more time.

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

I don't think that is what he is saying. I think that what Dave is saying is that if they have to play 45 minutes because the offense scored 28 quick points, that's fine. It's better to play 45 minutes with points on the board than 28 minutes without. Scoring trumps time of possession in any scenario. You never see a team complain after running a punt back for a TD because the defense has to go right back on the field.

 

I'll agree with this. If you catch revis napping - hammer it home. The D had plenty of chances to make plays. They didn't. Its on rex, rob, and every guy playing to make a play on 3rd down.

[PolishDave]

I don't think that is what he is saying. I think that what Dave is saying is that if they have to play 45 minutes because the offense scored 28 quick points, that's fine. It's better to play 45 minutes with points on the board than 28 minutes without. Scoring trumps time of possession in any scenario. You never see a team complain after running a punt back for a TD because the defense has to go right back on the field.

 

Perfect wording thank you. Scoring trumps time of possession.

 

Only Dick Jauron would argue otherwise. He would rather keep a game close and exciting than to just go win the game by outscoring the opponent. Okay... i'm exaggerating.

[Boatdrinks]

When you pull within 6 with over 2 minutes to go, there's no garbage time. Onside kicks have a 20 percent success rate.

Not for the Bills . More like 5% or less.

[The Wiz]

 

Perfect wording thank you. Scoring trumps time of possession.

 

Only Dick Jauron would argue otherwise. He would rather keep a game close and exciting than to just go win the game by outscoring the opponent. Okay... i'm exaggerating.

I don't disagree with any of what you have said. I'm referring more to the part of Taylor being able to create sustained drives. If he makes a big play and scores that's great. If he does it 1 out of every 8 times and goes 3 and out 4 of the other 7 times that's bad for the defense.

[Agent 91]

It's hardly his only skill set. He rarely turns the ball over, he's good at making plays outside the pocket, and he's a great runner. Denying this amounts to obtuseness.

Let's reserve judgement on the not turning the ball over. I want to see him take risks before we use that. He is safe right now but so was trent. Let's just hold off on that for a second

I definitely agree that he has limitations and weaknesses. His pluses and minuses add up to average NFL QB. There are a fair number of starters who are worse than him right now, and a bunch who are better.

Greatly agree

You do see the absurdity in it at least. The Goodwin play was 1,000% designed to do just what it did. I cannot for the life of me wrap my head around why it shouldn't count? The Salas play is a CREDIT to TT not "dumb luck." He did what he does well, escaped the pocket and hurt them down the field.

 

The fact that we are pretending that those 2 plays shouldn't count when evaluating performance is beyond madness. Should we exclude all completions and just evaluate him on the incompletions? Where's the line as to "what counts" in terms of evaluating performance? I'm okay excluding the garbage time but the rest is foolish.

I dont think OP was necessarily omitting them on the grounds that they dont count. i think he was more so saying that the majority of Taylor's day.about half of the yards gained on 30 passes came on 2 plays. Nevermind the garbage time because I agree... there was not MUCH garbage time. But I think he is really looking for more production between those two key plays. The goodwin play was exactly what they wanted. Salas... not so much. But I am in line with you in the sense the plays happened and do in fact count

[Socal-805]

He's not the answer. D coordinators have film on him, and he just doesn't enough things well.

 

He runs around well, and throws a nice deep ball... that's about it.

 

Doug Whaley put this team together, missed on 2 QBs and 2 HCs.

 

Not getting into the Watkins trade up thing...

[PolishDave]

I don't disagree with any of what you have said. I'm referring more to the part of Taylor being able to create sustained drives. If he makes a big play and scores that's great. If he does it 1 out of every 8 times and goes 3 and out 4 of the other 7 times that's bad for the defense.

Yes. I agree. The offense should be able to move the chains. If you can't, then you won't be a dominant team. But move the chains in chunks and don't focus too much on moving the chains when you have just as good of chance at scoring 6.

 

Often times, especially in today's NFL, I feel like so many teams (too many teams) are more focused on first downs instead of touchdowns. They aren't aggressive enough on offense. I think this includes the Bills.

 

I don't want to use 3 downs to get a first down unless it is the fourth quarter and we are up by 21. And I sure as hell don't want to try to put together a 24 play 80 yard drive that leads to 6 points if I can get those 6 points in 5 or 6 plays instead. Because I believe, if you have the homerun talent on the team, then you actually have a higher likelihood of scoring a touchdown if you try to go for the homerun every 6 plays or so rather than trying to take 24 plays to get there.

 

I think it is downright stupid for offensive coordinators to expect their offense to execute 15 plays or more in a series in order to score a touchdown. After all, a touchdown only takes one play from anywhere on the field. It is a shortcoming of today's offensive philosophies.

 

If it is third down, it is because your first and second down plays either sucked by design or were poorly executed or (even less commonly) the defense made 2 great plays in a row.

 

I get so sick of watching the Bills struggle to get first downs when the goal is to get a touchdown. At times it seems like all they care about is getting that first down. Why are you trying to sell yourself short if you honestly have the capability of making huge plays? Quit this dink and dunk crap. Go get yards in chunks like the 90's Bills did. Quit effing around. You have the talent. Friggen use it. And I blame that (mostly) on coaching. It is a mentality. Its a mindset.

 

This team has the potential to be getting yards in large chunks in the passing game and running game. And it should be. So I am not surprised when they get 6 on a play. I am just wondering why they aren't moving the ball in 10 and 15 yard chunks at a time with confidence on many series during the game. They should be.

 

Right now it seems the only thing they are getting done is those homerun plays. That proves the talent is there. Its undeniable in my opinion.

[CountryCletus]

Against the jets 230 of tyrods 297 came from bombs or garbage time

Cherry picker in the house... Let's go back and subtract Peyton's garbage time and bombs....

[Kirby Jackson]

Cherry picker in the house... Let's go back and subtract Peyton's garbage time and bombs....

Ha ha, "if you subtract the 3 possessions that ended in a TD they had a rough game." If you subtract the 37 points the defense gave up, they were great too.

[PolishDave]

Ya know what...One thing comes to mind that does bother me about Tyrod....

 

He should grab this team (well at least the offense) by the balls and make it his team and dictate what is going to happen.

 

He seems more like a follower to me than a leader..,, and maybe that is his biggest shortcoming.

 

With his talent, if he was a great leader (maybe he will become one) he should have been taking the offense into his hands and doing whatever it is he knows needs to be done to get the production. I can fault him for not doing that.

 

At times he could have almost literally given Roman the finger (if that really is the problem) and just gone and played quarterback as Baltimore challenged him to do and gone and made the plays that had to be made.

 

I liken Tyrod's physical talent to that of Doug Flutie except I see Tyrod as having a better arm. But he lack's Flutie's leadership and decisiveness and ability to find a way to get it done. Of course he is younger with less experience too. He might really become a better version of Flutie? Am I smoking crack?