FireChan Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 Nothing you said changes anything I wrote. And who cares if TT was 19th in total TDs, Bills were THIRD in total TD's in Tyrods 15 starts going into week 17. It isnt QB vs QB on Sundays, its NFL TEAM VS NFL TEAM. There are MORE than 1 player on the field scoring points for teams. We were the number 1 rushing attack in the NFL...so who the hell cares how we score, all that matters is we SCORE. And only 2 teams scored more than TT led Bills...Falcons and Saints. I do. Because why should TT get credit for all of Shady's TD's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 I do. Because why should TT get credit for all of Shady's TD's. Only ONE person can score walk across that end zone line...who cares if someone ran it there or if TT Taylor threw it there, its worth SIX POINTS regardless. So there is that...but keep rambling and showcasing your ignorance and alternative facts for us all to enjoy. PS: And any idiot knows that Tyrods dual threat attack benefits the other runners and we ran a lot of plays to capitalize on that in which our Backs did a great job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 Only ONE person can score walk across that end zone line...who cares if someone ran it there or if TT Taylor threw it there, its worth SIX POINTS regardless. So there is that...but keep rambling and showcasing your ignorance and alternative facts for us all to enjoy. PS: And any idiot knows that Tyrods dual threat attack benefits the other runners and we ran a lot of plays to capitalize on that in which our Backs did a great job. Sure, it's not like 2013 RBOY Shady has ever had monumental success without a mobile dual threat QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 (edited) Sure, it's not like 2013 RBOY Shady has ever had monumental success without a mobile dual threat QB. Hahahaha...2013...hahahaha. Lord you are a fool. That was approaching one of your dumbest responses ever to any point ever. So because Shady had a good year in 2013, Tyrod and his dual threat have no impact on the run game. Even though MG and Feast Mode Karlos also found great success here. Karlos can't even make a roster, and MG was an after thought until playing on this roster. And Philly didn't even want McCoy after a declining year and traded him for a LB with 2 bad knees straight up. All 3 have had great impacts and seasons here with our rushing attack though...but youre right, NONE of that has to do with defenses having to account for Tyrod's running ability. Zero impact. Got it. Edited March 29, 2017 by Alphadawg7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 (edited) Hahahaha...2013...hahahaha. Lord you are a fool. That was approaching one of your dumbest responses ever to any point ever. So because Shady had a good year in 2013, Tyrod and his dual threat have no impact on the run game. Even though MG and Feast Mode Karlos also found great success here. Karlos can't even make a roster, and MG was an after thought until playing on this roster. It certainly has an impact. Do I believe Shady needs TT to have a great year? Nope. Karlos couldn't even make our roster. It had nothing to do with his play. Edited March 29, 2017 by FireChan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Gun Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 Hahahaha...2013...hahahaha. Lord you are a fool. That was approaching one of your dumbest responses ever to any point ever. So because Shady had a good year in 2013, Tyrod and his dual threat have no impact on the run game. Even though MG and Feast Mode Karlos also found great success here. Karlos can't even make a roster, and MG was an after thought until playing on this roster. And Philly didn't even want McCoy after a declining year and traded him for a LB with 2 bad knees straight up. All 3 have had great impacts and seasons here with our rushing attack though...but youre right, NONE of that has to do with defenses having to account for Tyrod's running ability. Zero impact. Got it. Love you fools who give Tyrod all the credit for the running game, not like the RB or the O-line weren't any good or anything, naw it's all Tyrods doing that the running game was good. OMG ignorance knows no bounds! The in the next breathe you same fools come up with every fricking excuse imaginable and even fabricate stats to prop Tyrod up and excuse him from the dreadfully horrific passing game. Please, you clowns are good comedy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cripple Creek Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 "It really fits Tyrod getting him on the perimeter with the run game and ball-faking and bootlegs and so forth," McDermott said. "I believe in that system. I’ve gone against it and know how hard to defend in run and pass game. It's a great asset for us to have a guy of Tyrod’s skill-set under center for us." That is music to my ears. I'm not a Tyrod fan, but, those things should help his game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 Of course it is, and Taylors TD to INT ratio is very good. Let me put it to you this way, If Taylor throws say 16 TD's and 4 INT's one season, a more experienced Taylor the next season scores 32 TD's and 11 INT's Wouldn't you agree that despite the increase in INT's the 2nd season that the increase in points scored more then makes up for it? Yes, but it's not like there's an exact formula to it and it's not like those are the only 2 things to consider. But yes, I 100% would take 32 TDs and 11 INTs over 16 TDs and 4 INTs. But really we should be talking total TDs and total turnovers considering much of Taylor's production (whether you like it or not... and many don't) is on the ground. The same things were said fir Vick and Tebow. Just let them move around, run, and occasionally pass the football. It's a gimmick offense designed to cover up a limited passer, and it's proven to not work. Actually, it worked with Vick. His personal life and injuries ultimately derailed his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 But really we should be talking total TDs and total turnovers considering much of Taylor's production (whether you like it or not... and many don't) is on the ground. . What many don't like is he's 1-6 vs .500 teams. Thank god for Brissett or it would've been 0-7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 Ah yes, those two Super Bowl champion QB's Tebow and Vick.. While Tebow was the ultimate flash in the pan, Vick played in a good handful of playoff games and even won a couple with the Falcons. Again, Vick was Vick's own undoing. It's not like he played for a season or two. Teams had plenty of time to try to figure him out. He had enough sustained success to prove that his playing style could be successful in the NFL and seriously competitive in the post-season. What many don't like is he's 1-6 vs .500 teams. Thank god for Brissett or it would've been 0-7. And here I thought Football was a team sport and Wins and Losses were a team stat, not a QB stat... silly me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaCrispy Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 Sure, it's not like 2013 RBOY Shady has ever had monumental success without a mobile dual threat QB. Now, we both know logic and rationality have no place in this thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusher Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 Yes, but it's not like there's an exact formula to it and it's not like those are the only 2 things to consider. But yes, I 100% would take 32 TDs and 11 INTs over 16 TDs and 4 INTs. But really we should be talking total TDs and total turnovers considering much of Taylor's production (whether you like it or not... and many don't) is on the ground. Actually, it worked with Vick. His personal life and injuries ultimately derailed his career. Vick is a better player and was more dynamic when he ran. Tyrod can be successful to a degree, but what they are talking about doing with him is because he's just not a good passer. It may work ok for a time, but I don't believe it's sustainable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 While Tebow was the ultimate flash in the pan, Vick played in a good handful of playoff games and even won a couple with the Falcons. Again, Vick was Vick's own undoing. It's not like he played for a season or two. Teams had plenty of time to try to figure him out. He had enough sustained success to prove that his playing style could be successful in the NFL and seriously competitive in the post-season. And here I thought Football was a team sport and Wins and Losses were a team stat, not a QB stat... silly me... Pretty silly to think a good qb wouldn't be able to win games with the top rushing attack setting him up on easy street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 Vick is a better player and was more dynamic when he ran. Tyrod can be successful to a degree, but what they are talking about doing with him is because he's just not a good passer. It may work ok for a time, but I don't believe it's sustainable. Vick was absolutely more dynamic when he ran. But Taylor, though clearly not quite there, is probably pretty clearly 2nd amongst all the QBs we've seen over the years in terms of running alone. Taylor is at least as good in terms of being a pocket passer, though. Vick's arm was stronger, obviously. But as a pure passer of the football, Taylor likely edges him out. It's still early, though. But saying it's not sustainable might be your belief, but it's not historically accurate if Vick sustained it, which he did... and probably would have for longer. You say what they're talking about doing is because he's just not a good passer, but don't even consider that what they're talking about doing might simply be because he's such a dynamic athlete. In fact, McDermott's praise for Taylor goes pretty far, indeed. "turn the tape on and the product on the field was outstanding." "It's a great asset for us to have a guy of Tyrod's skill-set under center for us." Sure looks like a coach who sees a QB who can operate a system he really wants to run rather than a coach who has to change his offensive system/philosophy because the QB can't do what he wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 Vick was absolutely more dynamic when he ran. But Taylor, though clearly not quite there, is probably pretty clearly 2nd amongst all the QBs we've seen over the years in terms of running alone. Taylor is at least as good in terms of being a pocket passer, though. Vick's arm was stronger, obviously. But as a pure passer of the football, Taylor likely edges him out. It's still early, though. But saying it's not sustainable might be your belief, but it's not historically accurate if Vick sustained it, which he did... and probably would have for longer. You say what they're talking about doing is because he's just not a good passer, but don't even consider that what they're talking about doing might simply be because he's such a dynamic athlete. In fact, McDermott's praise for Taylor goes pretty far, indeed. "turn the tape on and the product on the field was outstanding." "It's a great asset for us to have a guy of Tyrod's skill-set under center for us." Sure looks like a coach who sees a QB who can operate a system he really wants to run rather than a coach who has to change his offensive system/philosophy because the QB can't do what he wants. And yet, the restructure sounds like a coach who needs to save $10M or he's gonna cut him loose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusher Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 And yet, the restructure sounds like a coach who needs to save $10M or he's gonna cut him loose. Transplant doesn't know what coach speak is, apparently. Actions speak louder than words, however, so yes...that restructure says a whole lot more than a coach endorsing the guy who will be their QB this upcoming season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 Transplant doesn't know what coach speak is, apparently. Actions speak louder than words, however, so yes...that restructure says a whole lot more than a coach endorsing the guy who will be their QB this upcoming season. Love the guessing game and finding ways to twist to certain people's agenda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 (edited) Only Buddy Nix is dumb enough to talk crap about his current starting quarterback. Edited March 30, 2017 by 2018 Our Year For Sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 Love the guessing game and finding ways to twist to certain people's agenda John, what is your explanation for TT taking a paycut? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted March 30, 2017 Share Posted March 30, 2017 And yet, the restructure sounds like a coach who needs to save $10M or he's gonna cut him loose. If you say so, hot stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts