SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 As I repeatedly stated I believe that TT is a credible bridge qb. I firmly believe that he is not going to be our long term franchise qb. If you think otherwise that is fine. We'll just respectfully disagree. With respect to the highlighted area go ahead and name those teams. I promise you that I won't ask for proof. I have no doubt that some teams had an interest in him. However, their lack of actual response is a statement in itself. A Bridge Too Far A Bridge Over the River Niagara The Bridge Of Tears Bridge to Terabithia Can you tell QB talk is getting old? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 A Bridge Too Far A Bridge Over the River Niagara The Bridge Of Tears Bridge to Terabithia Can you tell QB talk is getting old? Don't worry the qb talk will pick up as the season advances. Then the draft talk will become very prominent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted June 28, 2017 Author Share Posted June 28, 2017 As I repeatedly stated I believe that TT is a credible bridge qb. I firmly believe that he is not going to be our long term franchise qb. If you think otherwise that is fine. We'll just respectfully disagree. With respect to the highlighted area go ahead and name those teams. I promise you that I won't ask for proof. I have no doubt that some teams had an interest in him. However, their lack of actual response is a statement in itself. May I ask why it is not reasonable to suggest that Tyrod did have interest from other teams, at around the same level of contract he is now playing under, but actually wanted to stay in Buffalo because of his familiarity with the players and the moves made by the front office? If he had equal opportunities elsewhere, why not play for the "big contract" in a place he is already comfortable? Would Tyrod really want to go to Cleveland, the Jets, or several other teams who don't have comparable skill players to try and prove his worth? The only thing anyone can "prove" in this context (by inference) is that Tyrod wasn't presented with an offer of top 10 money by anyone, but that does not mean there was no interest or that he did not have options (as you continue to assert). And for at least the third time, that's not the point of my critique of Vic's column. He said the Bills got worse at the QB position, which makes no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM2009 Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 Don't worry the qb talk will pick up as the season advances. Then the draft talk will become very prominent. Don't watch this season is my advice. You already know the ending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloHokie13 Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 As I repeatedly stated I believe that TT is a credible bridge qb. I firmly believe that he is not going to be our long term franchise qb. If you think otherwise that is fine. We'll just respectfully disagree. With respect to the highlighted area go ahead and name those teams. I promise you that I won't ask for proof. I have no doubt that some teams had an interest in him. However, their lack of actual response is a statement in itself. Again, not commenting on his role whatsoever in this topic. I simply wanted to provide context to someone who was using incorrect information. The teams who wanted him as their starter are generally who you'd expect, Kirby's gotten them all before plus or minus one. The couple teams that were interested who people here wouldn't expect were teams that wanted him to sit 1 more year, and they were offering more over the contract than the teams with bad QBs looking for a quick fix. What sort of 'actual response' are you expecting, by the way? They can't say they talked numbers with his agent and no teams were trying to trade for his contract at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 Buffalo was the best fit for him because they brought in an OC he is familiar with that is also familiar with him, and they have some quality (when healthy) skill position players that he is already familiar with. This is the part everyone forgets too. And it plays into my narrative that Tyrod wants to perform as well as possible this year and get a huge contract next offseason. Tyrod's best chance of performing at a top 10 level next year is coming back to Buffalo, no question of that. We have a strong running game and offensive players he is familiar with. Plus a coach and scheme he has worked under before. It's perfectly reasonable to think Tyrod decided to bet on himself with the possibility of losing out on money, while the Bills decided to hedge their bets on Tyrod with the possibility of having to pay him more than they would have under the old contract. Negotiations don't always end up with one side winning/losing. Both sides took a risk of losing out on money next offseason. We won't know the "winner" of the restructure until next year. Again, not commenting on his role whatsoever in this topic. I simply wanted to provide context to someone who was using incorrect information. The teams who wanted him as their starter are generally who you'd expect, Kirby's gotten them all before plus or minus one. The couple teams that were interested who people here wouldn't expect were teams that wanted him to sit 1 more year, and they were offering more over the contract than the teams with bad QBs looking for a quick fix. Thank you for the info. I tend to take insiders around here at their word and you have an established history here so I for one believe you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 Tyrod wants to perform as well as possible this year and get a huge contract next offseason. Which he could have done on ANY team that was (supposedly) interested in him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 Which he could have done on ANY team that was (supposedly) interested in him. That just isn't true unless other teams were also offering 1 year deals. Another part of the story we don't know which makes it hard to draw any conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 Again, not commenting on his role whatsoever in this topic. I simply wanted to provide context to someone who was using incorrect information. The teams who wanted him as their starter are generally who you'd expect, Kirby's gotten them all before plus or minus one. The couple teams that were interested who people here wouldn't expect were teams that wanted him to sit 1 more year, and they were offering more over the contract than the teams with bad QBs looking for a quick fix. What sort of 'actual response' are you expecting, by the way? They can't say they talked numbers with his agent and no teams were trying to trade for his contract at the time. I'm not denying that some teams had an interest in him. Just because there is an interest doesn't mean that teams were going to turn that interest into a consummated deal. If teams such as Cleveland or the Jets had an interest in him it would be for the same reason that the Bills would want to retain him (at a lower price) as a bridge qb. That's my point! I don't consider him a long-term franchise qb and I don't see any other team considering in that light. He is the caliber of qb that you seek as a temporary remedy for the position. Could he have gotten more money with another team? Maybe. But I'm confident that whatever contract he would have signed wouldn't be commensurate with a qb that a team is committed to on a long-term basis. As I stated in a prior post if you want to consider him being better than a bridge qb, a legitimate franchise qb, then so be it. I don't have him in that category. And his current contract terms don't demonstrate that he belongs in that category. It's clear to me that if TT wouldn't have modified his contract he wouldn't currently be on the team. Whaley wanted him off the roster while the new regime was willing to keep him under a more limited contract. That is a clear indication what this franchise thinks of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) Again, it's fine to say that you doubt other teams were interested, but it's wrong to state that as an established fact. There are a lot of reasons, other than lack of interest from other teams, that Tyrod may have signed the restructured deal. Those reasons have been covered in other threads at length, not to mention the fact that other teams were not allowed to even talk to Tyrod or his agent while he was under contract. And of course, it's not his agent's decision, it's Tyrod's. Of course there may be other reasons, but can we stop calling it a restructure. This was not a restructure - this was a contract reduction - both in terms of pay and length. Edited June 28, 2017 by GunnerBill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM2009 Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 I'm not denying that some teams had an interest in him. Just because there is an interest doesn't mean that teams were going to turn that interest into a consummated deal. If teams such as Cleveland or the Jets had an interest in him it would be for the same reason that the Bills would want to retain him (at a lower price) as a bridge qb. That's my point! I don't consider him a long-term franchise qb and I don't see any other team considering in that light. He is the caliber of qb that you seek as a temporary remedy for the position. Could he have gotten more money with another team? Maybe. But I'm confident that whatever contract he would have signed wouldn't be commensurate with a qb that a team is committed to on a long-term basis. As I stated in a prior post if you want to consider him being better than a bridge qb, a legitimate franchise qb, then so be it. I don't have him in that category. And his current contract terms don't demonstrate that he belongs in that category. It's clear to me that if TT wouldn't have modified his contract he wouldn't currently be on the team. Whaley wanted him off the roster while the new regime was willing to keep him under a more limited contract. That is a clear indication what this franchise thinks of him. And again, why are you using Whaley to support your argument? That's a big fail. Any QB that Whaley doesn't like, I'd take the opposite view. Of course there may be other reasons, but can we stop calling it a restructure. This was not a restructure - this was a contract reduction - both in terms of pay and length. https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2017/3/10/14881226/tyrod-taylor-restructured-contract-2017-nfl-free-agency-doug-whaley-buffalo-bills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 That is a clear indication what this franchise thinks of him. I don't understand why this is a controversial view on this board. It is as clear as day to anyone who can divorce themselves from the emotion and stand back and look at it logically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Direhard Fan Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 What is wrong with TT's contract? Not like he is going to go hungry. Fair price for sure but he still has something to prove and he has been like that his whole time in the NFL. He can retire rich is he picks the right path and he seems to. He is a smart guy and he is doing what he wants. He certainly sets a good example for a team not in the playoffs for 17 years- not that he is to blame. Simple- We win- He wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM2009 Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 "He began by posting on social media that he was “back in the city I love to play for.” Staying in Buffalo was apparently important to the Bills starting quarterback, saying he and his agent “chose to restructure.” He also told the team’s radio show that he wanted to lower his cap hit in order for the Bills to add pieces. (Then the team let two of their top three receivers leave in free agency without replacing them.)" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 I don't understand why this is a controversial view on this board. It is as clear as day to anyone who can divorce themselves from the emotion and stand back and look at it logically. There is no controversy. The Bills are not sold on Tyrod and neither are any of the fans. He has shown potential and he will get one more year to prove he has what it takes. If he steps up he will make $20 million next year. If he doesn't step up we will be drafting a QB high next year and Tyrod will have a future career along the lines of Ryan Fitzpatrick. I don't think anyone on "my side" of the debate would disagree with anything I just said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadstroke Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 What if it was a team he did not want to play for, or at least did not prefer to the Bills? And of course, one could argue that the current deal is better for Tyrod than the previous one if he has a big year in 2017. And just maybe, unlike numerous posters, he believes that along with the confidence that he has in himself, he sees the Bills as a legitimate playoff contender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 That just isn't true unless other teams were also offering 1 year deals. Another part of the story we don't know which makes it hard to draw any conclusions. Teams who trade for players can accept the contract in place or renegotiate new deals. None of this is set in stone. If a team wanted him that bad we would have heard something. (from Leroi) I'm not denying that some teams had an interest in him. Just because there is an interest doesn't mean that teams were going to turn that interest into a consummated deal. If teams such as Cleveland or the Jets had an interest in him it would be for the same reason that the Bills would want to retain him (at a lower price) as a bridge qb. That's my point! on the nose (Didn't) Cleveland (supposedly) have a choice before they chose Osweiller and his outrageous high $ contract wo swing a deal with Buff? Same with the JETS. Both "interested" teams had the time opportunity to swing a deal and didn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 And again, why are you using Whaley to support your argument? That's a big fail. Any QB that Whaley doesn't like, I'd take the opposite view. https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2017/3/10/14881226/tyrod-taylor-restructured-contract-2017-nfl-free-agency-doug-whaley-buffalo-bills What does that prove. A restructure is quite literally what it says on the tin... the same money re-structured. If I restructure my house I don't cut it in half do I? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM2009 Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 My advice for Shady, Crusher, and a few others is to take the season off. Why watch if you want the QB to fail?All they look for is reasons to degrade, not hope that he can lead the Bills to the playoffs. Buff Hoakie and a few others put up some nice arguments that go in one ear and out the other. What does that prove. A restructure is quite literally what it says on the tin... the same money re-structured. If I restructure my house I don't cut it in half do I? Why does it matter to you that you are right? Who cares-he's the starting QB for 2017 and every Bills fan should be behind him, but clearly a few are not. He hasn't earned a reputation like that as if he were EJ, or Edwards and such, but gosh darn, you're going to make sure that anyone with something positive to say is going to be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
section122 Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 There is no controversy. The Bills are not sold on Tyrod and neither are any of the fans. He has shown potential and he will get one more year to prove he has what it takes. If he steps up he will make $20 million next year. If he doesn't step up we will be drafting a QB high next year and Tyrod will have a future career along the lines of Ryan Fitzpatrick. I don't think anyone on "my side" of the debate would disagree with anything I just said. As a founding member of the inane "CoT" I absolutely agree with what you posted. He most likely won't be a franchise guy but I'm not convinced yet. In my mind he gets this year and we will all have our answer. If he regresses again it is all but over for his starting opportunities, if he is a middling QB again it is likely what he is a middling qb, if he improves though the Bills might have their guy and 2 first rounders next year to improve the team with. This is his prove it year. My advice for Shady, Crusher, and a few others is to take the season off. Why watch if you want the QB to fail?All they look for is reasons to degrade, not hope that he can lead the Bills to the playoffs. Buff Hoakie and a few others put up some nice arguments that go in one ear and out the other. Why does it matter to you that you are right? Who cares-he's the starting QB for 2017 and every Bills fan should be behind him, but clearly a few are not. He hasn't earned a reputation like that as if he were EJ, or Edwards and such, but gosh darn, you're going to make sure that anyone with something positive to say is going to be wrong. I have to jump in and defend Gunner real quick. He is always level headed when discussing things (except maybe Rex ) and has very defined reasons that he doesn't believe in TT. I fully respect his opinion on player evals and he has his reasons for not believing. He doesn't repeat them over and over and he is respectful in discussing them. I hope he is really wrong on this one though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts