Tyrod Taylor's Highlights

[Figster]

Why can't I? Roman's offense got stale at the end of 2015 and remained that way in the beginning of 2016 then he got fired.

 

The offense under A Lynn started to perform better for a while until it then again fell flat.

 

Am I supposed to say : OK It's a Tyrod's fault? Or is it part Tyrod and part play calling part player talent? I choose the latter.

The inexperienced remark was because it was true.

 

As to whether A Lynn is good, we'll see in a year or 2.

we all saw that Rex was bad before 2 full seasons.

 

I'm not wishing A Lynn ill will, I just don't know how "good" he is.

lol, thought I was in agreement with you

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Taylors holding a clipboard in a purple jersey without Rex no ?

Not sure how to answer that.

 

Would another HC have stuck with Tryod, or moved on at the end of 2015? Quite possible.

 

The dilemma is there are not many QB prospects out there other than hitting the jackpot with Dak. So w/o a better option, he's starting

[BuffaloHokie13]

Taylors holding a clipboard in a purple jersey without Rex no ?

No, unless you think Denver is purple.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

lol, thought I was in agreement with you

 

[Figster]

 

cheers

[Big Gun]

No, unless you think Denver is purple.

He means TT would have most likely still been a backup in Baltimore if Rex/DW didn't get him in Buffalo.

[RaoulDuke79]

Evidently the NFL isn't a fan of Tyrod Taylor highlights.

[BuffaloHokie13]

He means TT would have most likely still been a backup in Baltimore if Rex/DW didn't get him in Buffalo.

I know this. However, he didn't want to go sit behind Joe and Denver offered him a nice contract that offseason as well. He'd have been a Bronco, not a Raven.

[SWATeam]

Just my opinion; however, I think most on this forum would rather read posts from cover1 than posts such as this....

+1,000,000

 

Cover1 is a valued contributor providing much needed football content.

[Thurman#1]

I 100% agree Taylor was not good in that game (though unlike the Cincinnati and Bengals games there were a handful of excellent plays he made), but calling a game that the Bills had a chance to drive down and tie (or win) with over a minute remaining in the game if they converted an onside kick full of garbage time is misguided.

 

 

 

 

No. It's not. If you have to recover an onside kick to have even a shot at winning, that's indeed garbage time. Your team shouldn't treat it that way of course, but that's what it is. Your team has almost no chance.

 

When that's your situation, the defense is going to be playing prevent, and your offense will absolutely have a chance to get some yards if you pay for them with time and taking risks. Garbage time. Inflated passing stats.

 

So, sure there's a thousand-to-one chance you can win if the ball bounces almost exactly perfectly right several times. But it's wildly unlikely. And what the defense will do in that situation is back off and allow you short passes if you can deal with their rush game. This ... is what is called ... garbage time. QBs can inflate their stats with good-looking yards and results because the defense doesn't mind you doing it as long as you aren't completing long passes.

 

Garbage time.

Edited March 24, 2017 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

 

 

I don't get the wildly simplified takes here.

 

There's very little hate towards Tyrod, a few nuts and crazies and trolls only. What there really is is simply a lack of belief that he's ever going to be good enough to be part of a Super Bowl victory as a starter.

 

Which is almost certainly correct, though there's a mathematical chance for pretty much every QB who sees significant playing time to suddenly show wild improvement and get his team there.

 

As for his highlight, great. I've seen all the games, I don't need to see them again, but I'm sure they're worth watching.

 

 

I guess you would also have to add Jim Kelly to the list.

 

Pretty UNREALISTIC expectations you got there folks.

 

Not happy until you see nail holes in their feet and hands...

 

 

First read, then respond.

 

I didn't say only QBs who have won Super Bowls are good enough for the many doubters out there. You either misunderstood or tried to pretend that's what I said. But it's not really difficult to see it's certainly not. Specifically, I said "There really is simply a lack of belief that he's ever going to be good enough to be part of a Super Bowl victory as a starter. " And after a year or two in the league, there was little of that kind of doubt about Kelly. Kelly looked like he was good enough. One thing that made me personally think so was his three fourth-quarter comebacks and five Game-winning drives in that one year.

 

So no, those expectations are pretty much the opposite of "UNREALISTIC" if your QB is someone like Jim Kelly.

 

But yeah, it's different when someone like Tyrod is your QB.

 

In fact, I find it astonishing that anyone could ever be happy with a QB who doesn't inspire the belief that he "is ever going to be good enough to be part of a Super Bowl victory as a starter." Generally out of all the QBs somewhere around #20 in league history, somewhere around one guy wins a Super Bowl once every ten years out of all ... what ... the hundred player-years of the roughly 10 QBs between #16 and #25 over that ten-year period. If you're happy with that kind of a shot, that's your choice.

 

But that's what concerns the large number of people who doubt Tyrod, and probably the ten or twenty people who may actually hate Tyrod or troll that way.

Edited March 24, 2017 by Thurman#1

[racketmaster]

 

 

 

No. It's not. If you have to recover an onside kick to have even a shot at winning, that's indeed garbage time. Your team shouldn't treat it that way of course, but that's what it is. Your team has almost no chance.

 

When that's your situation, the defense is going to be playing prevent, and your offense will absolutely have a chance to get some yards if you pay for them with time and taking risks. Garbage time. Inflated passing stats.

 

So, sure there's a thousand-to-one chance you can win if the ball bounces almost exactly perfectly right several times. But it's wildly unlikely. And what the defense will do in that situation is back off and allow you short passes if you can deal with their rush game. This ... is what is called ... garbage time. QBs can inflate their stats with good-looking yards and results because the defense doesn't mind you doing it as long as you aren't completing long passes.

 

Garbage time.

When teams are expecting and onside kick the success rate happens to be about 20%. How often has Rodgers been applauded for throwing hail mary touchdown passes after his team was able to recover onside kicks. Getting within a score and having a chance with an onside kick is not garbage time.

 

Getting to within one score is not a thousand to one probability of winning, unless a team has to rely on Dan Carpenter's pathetic onside kick attempts (then maybe your percentage is right).

 

The final score often dictates what people view as garbage time. If NE fails to tie on a 2 point conversion was the 4th quarter comeback in the SB viewed as just garbage time?

 

 

 

 

First read, then respond.

 

I didn't say only QBs who have won Super Bowls are good enough for the many doubters out there. You either misunderstood or tried to pretend that's what I said. But it's not really difficult to see it's certainly not. Specifically, I said "There really is simply a lack of belief that he's ever going to be good enough to be part of a Super Bowl victory as a starter. " And after a year or two in the league, there was little of that kind of doubt about Kelly. Kelly looked like he was good enough. One thing that made me personally think so was his three fourth-quarter comebacks and five Game-winning drives in that one year.

 

So no, those expectations are pretty much the opposite of "UNREALISTIC" if your QB is someone like Jim Kelly.

 

But yeah, it's different when someone like Tyrod is your QB.

 

In fact, I find it astonishing that anyone could ever be happy with a QB who doesn't inspire the belief that he "is ever going to be good enough to be part of a Super Bowl victory as a starter." Generally out of all the QBs somewhere around #20 in league history, somewhere around one guy wins a Super Bowl once every ten years out of all ... what ... the hundred player-years of the roughly 10 QBs between #16 and #25 over that ten-year period. If you're happy with that kind of a shot, that's your choice.

 

But that's what concerns the large number of people who doubt Tyrod, and probably the ten or twenty people who may actually hate Tyrod or troll that way.

 

Fortunately for Bills fans all that matters is what the players in the locker room believe about Tyrod. And, outside of some of Sammy's comments, players on the team appear to genuinely have faith in Tyrod as their QB.

 

Also remember that McDermott did a patient and complete analysis of Tyrod and the QB landscape and what did he decide? McDermott basically hitched his wagon to Tyrod for the next 2 years with the belief that Taylor is a winner. That is what McDermott said he wanted from his QB when he arrived. He wanted someone who was competitive and a winner and he studied Tyrod and watched him up close and decided that this is a QB that his team could win with.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Bills Mobile: Bills Today: Taylor makes list of free agent winners

http://yi.nzc.am/bERx6X

I think he can elevate his game even more now that former coach Rex Ryan is gone and discipline will be restored in Buffalo -- the team won't be penalized like it was last year, when it racked up 127 penalties costing a total of 960 yards. Sean McDermott is a worker, and it goes noted he rightly wantedTaylor back. Taylor won't have to worry about being used as a pawn in a mind-numbing and unfair game between Ryan and GM Doug Whaley.

[K-9]

Bills Mobile: Bills Today: Taylor makes list of free agent winners

http://yi.nzc.am/bERx6X

I think he can elevate his game even more now that former coach Rex Ryan is gone and discipline will be restored in Buffalo -- the team won't be penalized like it was last year, when it racked up 127 penalties costing a total of 960 yards. Sean McDermott is a worker, and it goes noted he rightly wantedTaylor back. Taylor won't have to worry about being used as a pawn in a mind-numbing and unfair game between Ryan and GM Doug Whaley.

Used as a pawn? What a ridiculous assertion.

 

Whaley would have been derelict in his duty if he played TT in the final game of the year. It's too bad RR pitched a fit that got him fired when he learned his best chance at a .500 record on the season was in the hands of EJ and Cardale. Too bad. Playing TT exposed the Bills to a certain liability if he played. That's not being used as a pawn, that's the GM (and owner) exercising their responsibility to the longer range good of the franchise.

 

If half these "sports writers" spent just a few more minutes acquainting themselves with other facts available, the collective intelligence of their community would increase exponentially. In the meantime it's just more lazy and stupid. Consumer beware.

[thebug]

but still insulted. Jerk!

And it's just boyst now.

Why did you take the j-off?

[boyst]

Why did you take the j-off?

I wanted boyst62 originally but messed up and registered it in 02 and forgot password so I just made a new name in 03

[transplantbillsfan]

 

 

 

No. It's not. If you have to recover an onside kick to have even a shot at winning, that's indeed garbage time. Your team shouldn't treat it that way of course, but that's what it is. Your team has almost no chance.

 

When that's your situation, the defense is going to be playing prevent, and your offense will absolutely have a chance to get some yards if you pay for them with time and taking risks. Garbage time. Inflated passing stats.

 

So, sure there's a thousand-to-one chance you can win if the ball bounces almost exactly perfectly right several times. But it's wildly unlikely. And what the defense will do in that situation is back off and allow you short passes if you can deal with their rush game. This ... is what is called ... garbage time. QBs can inflate their stats with good-looking yards and results because the defense doesn't mind you doing it as long as you aren't completing long passes.

 

Garbage time.

1000 to 1, huh?

 

http://archive.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2009/09/onside-kicks.html?m=1

 

I'm not a betting man, if I go to Vegas would 1000 to 1 odds be the equivalent of 20%? Because that's the chance of successful recovery of an onside kick when the other team is expecting it.

 

And so by your definition, Tom Brady's 90+ yards, 70+% completion %, and 2 passing TDs in the last 2 minutes of week 14 of 2013 when the Patriots got the ball with 1:38 left in the 4th were "garbage time" despite the fact that the Pats won...?

 

Really a head-scratcher there, Thurm...

[transplantbillsfan]

If Tyrod improves in his areas where he's not very strong and has a good year, save me a seat on his bandwagon.

 

I'll buy you a beer and pistachios.

How about macadamia nuts?

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

Its garbage time because the defense handles it differently, they give the offense a cushion for easy short completions and rarely bring additional pass rushers. They back off to prevent the quick strike. Therefore its easier for the quarterback to rack up stats than in a one-score game. You have to watch the actual games and have some idea what you're looking at to know the difference.

[Big C]

TT was featured twice on this list of "best QB duels" by PFF. https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-10-best-qb-duels-of-the-pff-era/

Of course, both were loses. I actually didn't think of the Washington game as a particularly good game for TT, but the Seahawks game was exhilerating.