GunnerBill Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Compare Taylors first 2 seasons as an NFL starter with any QB in any Era you wish including the elite and tell me how many you find that scored 47 TD's (passing and rushing) and only 12 INT's Let me know what you find... I'd still find he doesn't do enough things consistently well enough at this stage to be considered a franchise Quarterback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 What point are you trying to prove? Just say it instead of making ridiculous comments like blindly comparing TD and INT numbers to guys from 3 decades ago. I wonder if he's better than Kosar and Marino too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 I'd still find he doesn't do enough things consistently well enough at this stage to be considered a franchise Quarterback. Bradys first 2 seasons as starter, 47 TD's and 26 INT's (Top dog) Peyton Mannings first 2 seasons, 54 TD's and 43 INT's Do you consider ball protection in your assessment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royale with Cheese Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Compare Taylors first 2 seasons as an NFL starter with any QB in any Era you wish including the elite and tell me how many you find that scored 47 TD's (passing and rushing) and only 12 INT's Let me know what you find... You're still comparing era's which is not strong argument. The NFL has made the game much, much more passer friendly than it was 30 years ago. To answer your question, first person that comes to mind is Aaron Rodgers with 58 TD passes and 9 rushing TD's....67 total. 20 INT's. The 12 INT's for Taylor is good and also not good. As Anthony Lynn said last year, "sometimes Tyrod is too careful with the ball". I'd rather Tyrod be more aggressive throwing the ball. More INT's will happen but the offense will also open up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Bradys first 2 seasons as starter, 47 TD's and 26 INT's (Top dog) Peyton Mannings first 2 seasons, 54 TD's and 43 INT's Do you consider ball protection in your assessment? I consider it in the way Bill Parcells did. If you ain't throwing picks you ain't trying hard enough. The point with Manning was how much he learned by that 24INT rookie year. you don't learn if you don't throw the ball into that tight window and instead run around into pressure behind the line of scrimmage and scamper out for a 2 yard gain. Tyrod HAS to get more aggressive and take more chances throwing the football. I would happily accept double the number of picks to have that because long run I think it would lead to more points and more wins. And before anyone says it I know that if the defense was better last year we make the playoffs.... I get that. But that doesn't mean I think the "safe" offense that is petrified of turnovers and a top 10 defense is really a sustainable method of NFL success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royale with Cheese Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 https://www.besttickets.com/blog/evolution-of-nfl-offense/ This is from 2012...it's probably even a bigger difference now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 (edited) You're still comparing era's which is not strong argument. The NFL has made the game much, much more passer friendly than it was 30 years ago. To answer your question, first person that comes to mind is Aaron Rodgers with 58 TD passes and 9 rushing TD's....67 total. 20 INT's. The 12 INT's for Taylor is good and also not good. As Anthony Lynn said last year, "sometimes Tyrod is too careful with the ball". I'd rather Tyrod be more aggressive throwing the ball. More INT's will happen but the offense will also open up. I figured without looking A Rodgers and Cam Newton would be the exceptions. Do you realize Taylors stats were accomplished operating out of an O that registered the lowest pass attempts in the league? 3 to 1 TD to INT not good? Then why does everyone say the low wonderlic of JK or Dan Marino wouldn't cut it in todays NFL? Suggests to me the NFL has gotten harder on QB's, not easier... Edited July 28, 2017 by Figster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royale with Cheese Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 (edited) I consider it in the way Bill Parcells did. If you ain't throwing picks you ain't trying hard enough. The point with Manning was how much he learned by that 24INT rookie year. you don't learn if you don't throw the ball into that tight window and instead run around into pressure behind the line of scrimmage and scamper out for a 2 yard gain. Tyrod HAS to get more aggressive and take more chances throwing the football. I would happily accept double the number of picks to have that because long run I think it would lead to more points and more wins. And before anyone says it I know that if the defense was better last year we make the playoffs.... I get that. But that doesn't mean I think the "safe" offense that is petrified of turnovers and a top 10 defense is really a sustainable method of NFL success. I would rather Tyrod be a 26 TD/12 INT's than 17 TD/6 INT's. Edited July 28, 2017 by Teeflebees Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Gun Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Compare Taylors first 2 seasons as an NFL starter with any QB in any Era you wish including the elite and tell me how many you find that scored 47 TD's (passing and rushing) and only 12 INT's Let me know what you find... N Foles first 24 starts 50 TD 17 int, what's he doing nowadays? Mariota 49 TD 19 int Newton 62 TD 29 int RG III 43 Td 17 int what's he also doing nowadays? Stafford first 29 starts 63 TD 37 int Winston 57 TD 33 int Carr 53 TD 25 int Bortles 48 TD 35 int Point is int aren't as bad as some make them out to be. Oh and these are stats from legit rookie and 2nd years in in the NFL (Foles and Stafford included their 3rd years) not their 5th and 6th years like TT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Nope. None of those guys, not a single one, was not a franchise QB by their fifth year. In Steve Young's fifth year he completed 69.6% of his passes, had an unbelievable 10.9 yards per attempt and nearly a 3:1 TD:INT ration at a time in the league when that was top two. Yeah, he wasn't a starter, because he was behind Montana but he was absolutely a terrific QB by that time and everyone knew it. In Kurt Warner's SECOND season in the league he was a first-team All-Pro. Not just a Pro Bowler, a first-team All-Pro. In Aaron Rodgers' fourth year in the league - his first as a starter - he was 4th in yards, 4th in TDs, 11th in YPA, 7th in passer rating. And then he didn't regress, he greatly improved his next year. These guys were all playing at an unquestionable franchise level by their fourth year. None of them even begin to qualify. And my question is extremely fair. The reason Tyrod has only been the franchise QB for two years now is because he was drafted by a team that needed a backup and he never forced them to look at him in a different way. There have been probably dozens and dozens of guys who didn't play much for three or four years at the beginning of their careers and then got a chance. Cassel. Schaub. Derek Anderson. Shaun Hill. Seneca Wallace. Damon Huard. Rex Grossman. David Garrard. Jay Fiedler. Hell, our own Kelly Holcomb. Jim Miller. Steve Beuerlein. That's, what, a dozen guys who had only a few little bit of work for three or four years or even more and eventually got their chance to be the starter. None were good enough and none developed and became franchise guys. Jake Delhomme was on the bench for two years before he started. But he quickly became a borderline franchise guy. He was what he was from pretty early on, a gutsy guy who was never going to be a top ten or twelve guy but was Carolina's franchise guy for years. The really good ones - Romo, for example, who sat the bench for two and a half years but looked good very quickly once he got out there - had become ready so that they were able to seize their chance like Rodgers. Of the ones who couldn't, none have even then later turned around and become franchise guys after not proving themselves as such for six years. Basically, Gannon is it. There's an argument to be made for Plunkett, though I disagree. And that's it. Maybe you can find another one somewhere, but I can't and I've asked others before and nobody else could either. It's simply extremely rare. Again, nope. He sat out for his first four years but after that immediately established himself. In his fifth year, his first as a starter, he was 12th in yards, 5th in TDs. Sixth year, 12th and 8th. He was off to the races very quickly. What a joke! Steve Young started zero games and his fifth year and threw 92 total passes. That year established him as a franchise QB?!?! Are you nuts? You're being stubbornly ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royale with Cheese Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Do you realize Taylors stats were accomplished operating out of an O that registered the lowest pass attempts in the league? 3 to 1 TD to INT not good? The reason the offense didn't pass the ball as much is because we weren't very good at it. That's why we relied on our running game. If we were having very good success throwing the ball, you're going to throw more. Unless you want to argue that the Bills were really wanting to be a one dimensional offense. Anthony Lynn specifically stated in one of his last interviews with WGR that he wishes they could have been better in the passing game last year. He mentioned injuries but also specifically stated Tyrod needed to be better with throwing with anticipation and throwing better downfield. He said it would have really "opened up the offense". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 N Foles first 24 starts 50 TD 17 int, what's he doing nowadays? Mariota 49 TD 19 int Newton 62 TD 29 int RG III 43 Td 17 int what's he also doing nowadays? Stafford first 29 starts 63 TD 37 int Winston 57 TD 33 int Carr 53 TD 25 int Bortles 48 TD 35 int Point is int aren't as bad as some make them out to be. Oh and these are stats from legit rookie and 2nd years in in the NFL (Foles and Stafford included their 3rd years) not their 5th and 6th years like TT. Nice find on Foles Taylors TD to INT ratio beats everyone else on the list Big Fitzy fan ? The reason the offense didn't pass the ball as much is because we weren't very good at it. That's why we relied on our running game. If we were having very good success throwing the ball, you're going to throw more. Unless you want to argue that the Bills were really wanting to be a one dimensional offense. Anthony Lynn specifically stated in one of his last interviews with WGR that he wishes they could have been better in the passing game last year. He mentioned injuries but also specifically stated Tyrod needed to be better with throwing with anticipation and throwing better downfield. He said it would have really "opened up the offense". Then they shouldn't have devoted so much time with the run game. I'd still find he doesn't do enough things consistently well enough at this stage to be considered a franchise Quarterback. I agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 (edited) That smell is from the fertilizer I grew my stunningly terrific post on top of. Not only can I separate running from the whole QB thing, but I do Everyone should.. Running in a QB is fine. It's just not what you want a QB for. Having a QB who can run really well is like having a car with a terrific air conditioner. It adds value. It makes it a better car. But it doesn't mean all that much, it's just not what you buy the car for. You buy the car for getting you around. If it does that and has a great AC on top of that, terrific. You acquire a QB for passing. If he can do that and he can run also, that's great, You're right, it factors in, as an AC does. You need a QB who can run a good passing game. And read this again. I didn't just say, "full stop." I said, "not ... full stop." I have no earthly idea what you're talking about. I have been mostly avoiding Tyrod threads. Boring. So I have no idea what you said, nor am I interested in looking back when I don't know what I'm looking for. As a pure guess, were you talking about what I just talked about a couple of posts above? That there have been dozens and dozens of guys who like Tyrod spent three or four years on the bench and then got a chance? And that then outside of Gannon and maybe Plunkett none of them have gotten through six years of their career without becoming a franchise QB and then made it later? If not, I have no idea what you're talking about. If so, it took me about five to ten minutes to quickly come up with around a dozen guys who had the same situation, three or four years on the bench and a chance. Here's the list, quoted from my post just above. Ten? That's what, fourteen? There have been tons of guys in Tyrod's position, guys who didn't have experience for three or four years and then got their chance to start. Problem is that nearly all of them aren't good enough. And the ones who are have shown it pretty much immediately. Again, of all guys who hadn't proven themselves through six years as franchise guys, almost none have later improved enough to become franchise guys. That's the likely result with Tyrod. It'd be much better for the Bills if he makes that major leap upwards. He's a great guy. I'm rooting for him. History shows that his chances are far from good. Are you really feigning ignorance now? I know that you read the post. But since you need a reminder: -Rode the bench almost exclusively for the entirety of their rookie contract (4 years) -Given the opportunity to start in year five after earning the starting job -After earning the starting job, plays a significant number of games at "NFL starting QB" level Almost everyone of those guys on your "list" got a significant number of snaps by year five. And very few of them even ever played at "starting QB level" for an extended period of time the way that Taylor did over the span of 29 games. That was the criteria I originally set forth. And I set it forward because of your arbitrary "hasn't proven self as franchise QB by sixth year" rather than fifth, or fourth, etc. My point was simply to establish how unique Taylor's case is. That was the criteria you responded that there were at least 50 other guys in the NFL who met it. So I ask again, name 10... Edited July 28, 2017 by transplantbillsfan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royale with Cheese Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Then they shouldn't have devoted so much time with the run game. LOL...really? We were struggling in the passing game, Lynn gave you reasons why and you're telling me that should have abandon the run more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangarang Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 I figured without looking A Rodgers and Cam Newton would be the exceptions. Do you realize Taylors stats were accomplished operating out of an O that registered the lowest pass attempts in the league? 3 to 1 TD to INT not good? Then why does everyone say the low wonderlic of JK or Dan Marino wouldn't cut it in todays NFL? Suggests to me the NFL has gotten harder on QB's, not easier... You're all over the place. Marcus Mariota, Russell Wilson and if you want to include Dak Prescott as guys that have had very good success immediately. Now you want to try and put in qualifiers with the the number of pass attempts. They were low because our passing game wasn't good. LOL...really? We were struggling in the passing game, Lynn gave you reasons why and you're telling me that should have abandon the run more? Mind boggling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 (edited) You're all over the place. Marcus Mariota, Russell Wilson and if you want to include Dak Prescott as guys that have had very good success immediately. Now you want to try and put in qualifiers with the the number of pass attempts. They were low because our passing game wasn't good. Mind boggling Taylors 47 TD's and 12 INT's speaks for itself. For the record HC Rex Ryan wanted a run heavy O and Taylor delivered with the best running O in the league while keeping his overall QB rating top 10. What I find mind boggling is trying to blame Taylor for the design and intentions of the G Roman O. Edited July 28, 2017 by Figster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royale with Cheese Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 (edited) I figured without looking A Rodgers and Cam Newton would be the exceptions. Do you realize Taylors stats were accomplished operating out of an O that registered the lowest pass attempts in the league? 3 to 1 TD to INT not good? Then why does everyone say the low wonderlic of JK or Dan Marino wouldn't cut it in todays NFL? Suggests to me the NFL has gotten harder on QB's, not easier... Seriously...OMG. Your wonderlic comment is your evidence...LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL. Go ahead and argue all these reasons...LOL http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82a44e69/article/passing-league-explaining-the-nfls-aerial-evolution "The NFL is a passing league. The stats prove it. The money paid to quarterbacks, receivers, pass rushers and cornerbacks prove it. What has led to the change in the overall philosophy of a game that used to be based on running backs and the middle linebackers who tackled them? The reasons are many, and they are fascinating. They also go far beyond rule changes in recent years that protect quarterbacks and wide receivers. In conversations with coordinators on both sides of the ball, several reasons were provided as to why the passing game has exploded. One element resoundingly mentioned by players and analysts -- the heightened enforcement of penalties for hitting defenseless receivers in the middle of the field -- was mentioned but minimized by offensive and defensive coordinators alike. Quarterbacks Over the past few seasons, quarterbacks have come into the NFL with a much better understanding of the passing game. This was a universal opinion. Though finding the right quarterback isn't easy and NFL-caliber execution isn't guaranteed, those coming out of college are better versed -- and in greater numbers -- on the intricacies of the passing game. The coordinators said with so many high schools and college teams using spread offenses, the concepts of how to read the field and defensive-player placement before the snap have increased quarterbacks' awareness. Not long ago, quarterbacks were reading defensive ends and tackles to decide whether to hand the ball off to a running back or keep it and run. Now they're reading safeties and linebackers to exploit the part of the field the defense leaves open in the passing game. One offensive coordinator added that the growth and increased level of competition in 7-on-7 passing leagues for high schoolers has enhanced the awareness of passing-game concepts for quarterbacks and receivers, as well. New Orleans' Jimmy Graham is part of the new wave of athletic, dynamic tight ends. (Tom Hauck/Associated Press) The NFL is adapting to the skills and knowledge of the talent entering its league, instead of forcing players into an old standard. Personnel Cincinnati Bengals defensive coordinator Mike Zimmer said the talent and size of receivers have allowed offenses to dictate matchups. For the foreseeable future, the offense has the advantage. "The athletes on that side of the ball, you're seeing bigger guys, faster guys," Zimmer said. "The talent level of the receivers has really increased. You don't see fullbacks or blocking tight ends anymore. Teams put three receivers on the field, use shotgun on first and second downs, and with that third receiver, they find the better matchups." Flex tight ends such as Jermichael Finley, Jimmy Graham, Vernon Davis, Aaron Hernandez, Rob Gronkowski and even veteran Antonio Gates have advantages over slower safeties, smaller nickel backs or linebackers who also have to key against the run in play action. Compounding things, when defenses find somewhat of a proper fit against those players, teams like the New Orleans Saints counter with a smaller scatback like Darren Sproles (or Baltimore's Ray Rice or Jacksonville's Maurice Jones-Drew) to exploit other matchups. Schemes Brooks: Kolb vs. Skelton: Who'll win? Kevin Kolb or John Skelton?Bucky Brooks studies both Arizona quarterbacks and reveals who he'd pick to start in 2012. More ... More teams are using shotgun sets, especially on earlier downs, to combat hyper-athletic pass rushers. The ability of great pass rushers to win battles against highly paid offensive tackles and force offenses to use an extra blocker triggered a lot of what we're seeing in the passing game, multiple coordinators said. By using the shotgun formation, quarterbacks can survey the field before the snap, figure out the matchup advantage, take the snap and get rid of the ball quickly. By not having to take a five- or seven-stop drop from under center and get rid of the ball quickly, quarterbacks can reduce high-risk plays as well as pass pressure. That helps accuracy and gets the ball in the hands of playmakers. "We've done things to give us as coaches and the players more choices," Oakland offensive coordinator Greg Knapp said. Mentality Coaches have changed more than players. Play calling has become more aggressive in the passing game on first and second down and early in games. Taking a lead and forcing the opponent to play catch-up is even more the thinking in today's game, one coordinator said. Just a few years ago some of the strategy was to play things close and let the defense put the team in position to pull the game out late. Now, offensive coaches and play callers are more willing to take risks because of schematic and personnel advantages. "More coordinators and play callers, once they feel comfortable in what they have, are willing to cut it loose," one coordinator said. This puts pressure on defensive coaches to try and play to their strengths, whether it is using nickel or sub packages as the primary defense or hoping players are athletic and disciplined enough in the base sets to handle what offenses are calling. Rules The no-contact rule on receivers beyond five yards from the line of scrimmage has been around for years. What's changed has been the enforcement of contact against receivers running across the middle of the field, whether they have the ball or not. In years past, treading between the numbers was a danger zone for receivers, who expected to be re-routed if they tried to run a crossing pattern or to take a potentially concussive hit once they caught the ball. With officials being more cognizant of penalizing helmet-to-helmet hits, players have backed off, making the middle of the field a far safer place to play. That reluctance to intimidate has made offenses far more brazen and quarterbacks far more comfortable throwing the ball. Passing the ball to the middle of the field is much easier than trying to stick a 15-yard out pattern on the sideline. With athletes like Graham and Gronkowski and smarter quarterbacks who can decipher defensive weakness, throwing the ball is simply easier.Former Philadelphia Eagles and Denver Broncos safety Brian Dawkins recently said that one of the reasons why he retired is that players are now in a gray area, meaning there are times a player has to think or pause instead of react. He said he found himself pulling up on bang-bang plays instead of leveling offensive players like he did much of his career.[" Edited July 28, 2017 by Teeflebees Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangarang Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Taylors 47 TD's and 12 INT's speaks for itself. For the record HC Rex Ryan wanted a run heavy O and Taylor delivered with the best running O in the league while keeping his overall QB rating top 10. What is your point? Do you even have one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royale with Cheese Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 (edited) Taylors 47 TD's and 12 INT's speaks for itself. For the record HC Rex Ryan wanted a run heavy O and Taylor delivered with the best running O in the league while keeping his overall QB rating top 10. You know who else had a run heavy O? The Falcons, the Pats and Oakland. They all could pass the ball too..... Our own OC who ran our offense stated he wished he had a better passing game.... What is your point? Do you even have one? Well I read one point he made. Dan Marino's low wonderlic score is evidence that the NFL was easier to pass 30 years ago. Edited July 28, 2017 by Teeflebees Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 You know who else had a run heavy O? The Falcons, the Pats and Oakland. They all could pass the ball too..... Our own OC who ran our offense stated he wished he had a better passing game.... gotta run, it was fun, I could care less what Lynn who has zero experience as an OC said, with all due respect Tee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts