paulbills Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 We won't be better than 9-7 under Tyrod, We will exit in the first round if we squeak by into the playoffs, build for the future, it's obvious this guy doesn't have what it takes to take this team to a Superbowl. Whether he's just eeking out victories with the help of his defense, having his 1-4 dominant games a year, or either totally flopping as a quarterback and losing us games. It alarms me when I think where we'd be if we didn't have such a superior running game, winless possibly? definitely at the bottom, and I can't remember the last time a rush heavy team won the SB in recent years, any team can rush for 100 yds if they run it 50 times. Indy was dead last in the NFL in rush efficiency in 2006 when they beat Chicago in the Super Bowl. I'm no Tyrod hater, he's super fun to watch and has his clutch moments, although I have to be realistic in that I'm not confident that this is the QB that can take us to the Superbowl, we aren't the seahawks, he isn't russel wilson. This will be his 3rd year here and if he produces another mediocre year I don't see the justification in banging our head against the wall thinking he is our savior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 For sure. I was so inspired by yesterdays performance that Ive decided to name my first born TYGOD DOGY T sounds better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stank_Nasty Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 his escape ability is pretty special. I know at least a couple times he managed to avoid the sack and make a play. I think one of best examples of that was the play that he actually only threw it away. rusher had him dead nuts and tyrod froze the guy and then at least get rid of it to avoid 2nd and FOREVER. if i'm not mistaken we got points on that drive. We won't be better than 9-7 under Tyrod, We will exit in the first round if we squeak by into the playoffs, build for the future, it's obvious this guy doesn't have what it takes to take this team to a Superbowl. Whether he's just eeking out victories with the help of his defense, having his 1-4 dominant games a year, or either totally flopping as a quarterback and losing us games. It alarms me when I think where we'd be if we didn't have such a superior running game, winless possibly? definitely at the bottom, and I can't remember the last time a rush heavy team won the SB in recent years, any team can rush for 100 yds if they run it 50 times. Indy was dead last in the NFL in rush efficiency in 2006 when they beat Chicago in the Super Bowl. I'm no Tyrod hater, he's super fun to watch and has his clutch moments, although I have to be realistic in that I'm not confident that this is the QB that can take us to the Superbowl, we aren't the seahawks, he isn't russel wilson. This will be his 3rd year here and if he produces another mediocre year I don't see the justification in banging our head against the wall thinking he is our savior. or as fan we can use our common sense and realize that we still have plenty of ammo to use for a pick at qb while we keep tyrod and he keeps us competitive. why do people always talk as though those 2 things are mutually exclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloHokie13 Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 We won't be better than 9-7 under Tyrod, We will exit in the first round if we squeak by into the playoffs, build for the future, it's obvious this guy doesn't have what it takes to take this team to a Superbowl. Whether he's just eeking out victories with the help of his defense, having his 1-4 dominant games a year, or either totally flopping as a quarterback and losing us games. It alarms me when I think where we'd be if we didn't have such a superior running game, winless possibly? definitely at the bottom, and I can't remember the last time a rush heavy team won the SB in recent years, any team can rush for 100 yds if they run it 50 times. Indy was dead last in the NFL in rush efficiency in 2006 when they beat Chicago in the Super Bowl. I'm no Tyrod hater, he's super fun to watch and has his clutch moments, although I have to be realistic in that I'm not confident that this is the QB that can take us to the Superbowl, we aren't the seahawks, he isn't russel wilson. This will be his 3rd year here and if he produces another mediocre year I don't see the justification in banging our head against the wall thinking he is our savior. First, can you please PM me the December powerball numbers? It'd be much appreciated. The truth is that the Bills have a winning record when he plays QB, and that includes a majority of games with a sub-par defense. Now he's backed up by a quality D and we're 4-2. It's cool if you're skeptical, but it's a good sign so far. Second, since when is a team that's 24th in YPC and 14th in YPG a 'superior running game'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaviorPeterman Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 (edited) Impressive numbers for Taylor, he's among the league leaders when under pressure so far this year: L.A.R.G.E. Edited October 23, 2017 by SaviorPeterman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xRUSHx Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 (edited) Every single player that talks about Tyrod heaps praise on him. As long as the guys on the team believe in him he can be successful. I love cheering for this guy! The whole post was great but specifically this part. I looked through 300 yard games and found only 2 of the 49 came on less than 30 attempts and each of those were 29 attempts. Further down the rabbit hole 23 of the 49 were without ints. I don't know that I would trade Jameis' 70 extra yards of offense for 2 turnovers. Jameis is a much better passer than Tyrod I don't think that is arguable but there is more to being a quarterback than just passing. Taking care of the ball is an incredibly important aspect. I give you a lot of credit for this post. I know it doesn't mean anything to do so but I just wanted to point it out. As one of Tyrod's biggest critics it is nice to see you show up and be supportive after a well played game. Not all of the anti-TT guys do that. Cheers! Thank you....i think,Im a die hard Bills fan man I just want my team to win, a team and QB to be proud of. If Tyrod can keep this up he will have my full support. BTW, I don't want to see posters trying to prop him up, if Tyrod does well he won't need posters to compare him to the greats of the game and bring up his 180 yard games as something great just because we won by a field goal. I expect this game to be a stepping stone for better things from him otherwise my opinion of him won't change that he should be replaced with someone better. 300 yard games from good QBs happen, so far his 300s are next to none in 4 Quarters. I'm watching and giving support but I only have one leg on this Tyrod wagon, I want a 300 machine gun at QB for the future not a timid QB playing like a backup pushing 180 yard day as great, our D is fabulous. Edited October 23, 2017 by xRUSHx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted October 23, 2017 Author Share Posted October 23, 2017 @Nick_Wojton VIDEO: When the #Bills went down 27-20, OC Rick Dennison said Tyrod Taylor's mind was on "winning the game" https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/922543008708550658/pu/vid/1280x720/sY1Og4W15PuGdxXj.mp4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
section122 Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 It alarms me when I think where we'd be if we didn't have such a superior running game, winless possibly? definitely at the bottom, and I can't remember the last time a rush heavy team won the SB in recent years, any team can rush for 100 yds if they run it 50 times. Indy was dead last in the NFL in rush efficiency in 2006 when they beat Chicago in the Super Bowl. I'm no Tyrod hater, he's super fun to watch and has his clutch moments, although I have to be realistic in that I'm not confident that this is the QB that can take us to the Superbowl, we aren't the seahawks, he isn't russel wilson. This will be his 3rd year here and if he produces another mediocre year I don't see the justification in banging our head against the wall thinking he is our savior. The Seahawks were a run heavy and should have been back to back champs if they were smart enough to run the ball. The Broncos when they won were a run heavy team. So you know the last 2 teams that weren't led by possibly the greatest qb of all time won with run heavy/strong defensive teams. We would be winless without this dominant running game? Well the run game hasn't been dominant this year. Here are the Bills rushing totals excluding Tyrod's contributions: 152, 14, 104, 63, 79, and 120. That average of 88.67 would place the Bills at 26th best run game. 4 of 6 games the Bills have run for less than 3.5 ypc. The other 2 are games where Tyrod himself averaged 4.8 and 8.8. Speaking of the Seahawks and Russel Wilson do you know that during their super bowl run he was throwing for 103, 215, and 206 yards respectively? During their 2 years of back to back super bowls Russel Wilson threw for 300 yards 4 times total and zero times in the playoffs. We have no idea what this team is capable of. Thank you....i think, Im a die hard Bills fan man I just want my team to win, a team and QB to be proud of. If Tyrod can keep this up he will have my full support. definitely meant it as a compliment. I don't expect people's opinion to change overnight but it is refreshing to see someone open to the idea of changing their mind. That certainly isn't the norm around here. It adds a lot of credibility to the rest of your posts even if I don't agree with your opinions. (at least to me again not that it means much ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 (edited) We won't be better than 9-7 under Tyrod, We will exit in the first round if we squeak by into the playoffs, build for the future, it's obvious this guy doesn't have what it takes to take this team to a Superbowl. Whether he's just eeking out victories with the help of his defense, having his 1-4 dominant games a year, or either totally flopping as a quarterback and losing us games. It alarms me when I think where we'd be if we didn't have such a superior running game, winless possibly? definitely at the bottom, and I can't remember the last time a rush heavy team won the SB in recent years, any team can rush for 100 yds if they run it 50 times. Indy was dead last in the NFL in rush efficiency in 2006 when they beat Chicago in the Super Bowl. I'm no Tyrod hater, he's super fun to watch and has his clutch moments, although I have to be realistic in that I'm not confident that this is the QB that can take us to the Superbowl, we aren't the seahawks, he isn't russel wilson. This will be his 3rd year here and if he produces another mediocre year I don't see the justification in banging our head against the wall thinking he is our savior. What is this boards obsession with posting things they know nothing about? Do us a favor, do some actual research next time you are going to spout facts that aren't actually facts. Just about every single word you wrote is both factually and historically completely false and inaccurate. Other posters have already corrected you, so I wont bother. But these are the posts that personally drive me nuts around here where people state literally false statements to further their own opinion. I don't have an issue if people don't believe in Tyrod, I just take exception when people spew nonsense and fake info to support that disbelief. Edited October 23, 2017 by Alphadawg7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7975 Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 What is this boards obsession with posting things they know nothing about? Do us a favor, do some actual research next time you are going to spout facts that aren't actually facts. Just about every single word you wrote is both factually and historically completely false and inaccurate. Other posters have already corrected you, so I wont bother. But these are the posts that personally drive me nuts around here where people state literally false statements to further their own opinion. I don't have an issue if people don't believe in Tyrod, I just take exception when people spew nonsense and fake info to support that disbelief. My thoughts in a nutshell. Thank you. Now I don't have to type it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grb Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 I don't know that I would trade Jameis' 70 extra yards of offense for 2 turnovers. Jameis is a much better passer than Tyrod I don't think that is arguable but there is more to being a quarterback than just passing. How much of Winston's 70 extra yards do you think he'd keep throwing to Jones, Holmes, Thompson & O'Leary - as opposed to Evans, Jackson, Howard, and Brate? How many "extra yards" do you think Taylor would reap if the receiving corps were reversed? I suspect those 70 yards would quickly disappear in the first case with Winston still getting those two turnovers (if not more). This, despite how much of a "better passer" Jameis is. And Taylor? Do you doubt he'd have a field day throwing to Jackson and Evans? It would be like the prime of Sammie squared........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xRUSHx Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 The Seahawks were a run heavy and should have been back to back champs if they were smart enough to run the ball. The Broncos when they won were a run heavy team. So you know the last 2 teams that weren't led by possibly the greatest qb of all time won with run heavy/strong defensive teams. We would be winless without this dominant running game? Well the run game hasn't been dominant this year. Here are the Bills rushing totals excluding Tyrod's contributions: 152, 14, 104, 63, 79, and 120. That average of 88.67 would place the Bills at 26th best run game. 4 of 6 games the Bills have run for less than 3.5 ypc. The other 2 are games where Tyrod himself averaged 4.8 and 8.8. Speaking of the Seahawks and Russel Wilson do you know that during their super bowl run he was throwing for 103, 215, and 206 yards respectively? During their 2 years of back to back super bowls Russel Wilson threw for 300 yards 4 times total and zero times in the playoffs. We have no idea what this team is capable of. definitely meant it as a compliment. I don't expect people's opinion to change overnight but it is refreshing to see someone open to the idea of changing their mind. That certainly isn't the norm around here. It adds a lot of credibility to the rest of your posts even if I don't agree with your opinions. (at least to me again not that it means much ) Cool, thanks man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 (edited) @Nick_Wojton VIDEO: When the #Bills went down 27-20, OC Rick Dennison said Tyrod Taylor's mind was on "winning the game" https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/922543008708550658/pu/vid/1280x720/sY1Og4W15PuGdxXj.mp4 Did you see how upset Tyrod was when he had to take that time out.....they had momentum going their way and he got very frustrated with the side line You can say what you want about Tyrod he doesnt do this....cant do that....isnt always accurate....the guy has a HEART of a winner. Edited October 23, 2017 by John from Hemet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulbills Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 What is this boards obsession with posting things they know nothing about? Do us a favor, do some actual research next time you are going to spout facts that aren't actually facts. Just about every single word you wrote is both factually and historically completely false and inaccurate. Other posters have already corrected you, so I wont bother. But these are the posts that personally drive me nuts around here where people state literally false statements to further their own opinion. I don't have an issue if people don't believe in Tyrod, I just take exception when people spew nonsense and fake info to support that disbelief. I'm sorry, what did I post that was wrong? Can you point it out to me instead of making vague accusations? No need to get emotional and reprimand me for posting statistics. Maybe if YOU did some actual research you'd find what I posted isn't false at all? lol.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 How much of Winston's 70 extra yards do you think he'd keep throwing to Jones, Holmes, Thompson & O'Leary - as opposed to Evans, Jackson, Howard, and Brate? How many "extra yards" do you think Taylor would reap if the receiving corps were reversed? I suspect those 70 yards would quickly disappear in the first case with Winston still getting those two turnovers (if not more). This, despite how much of a "better passer" Jameis is. And Taylor? Do you doubt he'd have a field day throwing to Jackson and Evans? It would be like the prime of Sammie squared........ Agreed! IMHO, Bucs are a better team with Tyrod over Jameis right now. Jameis has a LOT of time to change that ahead of hm, so who knows where his career goes moving forward, but the biggest killer to the Bucs offense has been very bad decisions by Winston and his tendency to the turn the ball over. I think there is no doubt his stats would dip significantly if he was the Bills starter throwing to these WR's, and is turnovers likely would RISE too. While I also think there is no doubt that Tyrod would see an increase in his passing stats while keeping his turnovers low throwing to that elite group of weapons, and Tyrod is a much better runner too. I will take 320 combined yards with no turnovers over Winston and his 70 more passing yards and 2 turnovers 100% of the time. There is not a stat more OVER EXAGGERATED than passing yards, its probably the single least important stat in all of professional football. But decades of fantasy football, John Madden football games, and a few all time greats like Rogers, Brady, and Brees has skewed perception. There is SOOOO MUCH more to playing QB than passing yards, and not turning the ball over is 100 times more important than a 300 yard passing game. Case in point...people can go check Winstons record throwing for over 300 yards and ask yourself if it helped them win. They can also ask Drew Bree's if being the most prolific passer in the NFL for the last 5 years helped him make the playoffs while everyone is at it. Spoiler Alert: It didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 How much of Winston's 70 extra yards do you think he'd keep throwing to Jones, Holmes, Thompson & O'Leary - as opposed to Evans, Jackson, Howard, and Brate? How many "extra yards" do you think Taylor would reap if the receiving corps were reversed? I suspect those 70 yards would quickly disappear in the first case with Winston still getting those two turnovers (if not more). This, despite how much of a "better passer" Jameis is. And Taylor? Do you doubt he'd have a field day throwing to Jackson and Evans? It would be like the prime of Sammie squared........ Lets not mention the fact that Winston tried to throw the ball to us TWO MORE TIMES and Gaines and Hyde didnt come down with gimmee interceptions I have said it before when it comes to Winston....he might be a very good passer of the ball but he is NOT a very good protector of the ball..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 (edited) I'm sorry, what did I post that was wrong? Can you point it out to me instead of making vague accusations? No need to get emotional and reprimand me for posting statistics. Maybe if YOU did some actual research you'd find what I posted isn't false at all? lol.. Well you could just read all the other responses posting out all your inaccuracies. But if you want the crib notes, here you go. 1. We don't have a dominant run game this year (as pointed out by others). In fact, its the worst average of McCoys career and its been struggling most the year, hell McCoy didn't even get his first TD until this week. 2. You can't remember when the last time a run dominant team won the SB? Guess you have short term memory loss and struggle to remember the 2016 SB, 2015 SB, 2014, and 2013 Super Bowls, all of which featured a run dominant team which 2 of them were won by a run dominant team. 2016 - Broncos - Worst rated QB in the NFL that year, and Manning had the single worst QB performance in SB history in his win on a team built on running and defense. 2015 - Pats beat the run first Seahawks to keep them from repeating. Ironically, the Seahawks lost on the goal line because they chose to pass rather than be the run dominant team they were and punch it in with Beast Mode. 2014 - Seahawks, a run dominant team won the SB beating the heavily favored high powered passing attack of Manning and the Broncos. 2013 - Ravens eek out a narrow win against SF who had a team very much built just like us, except they actually had talent to throw to. They had a running QB and an offense built on the run game between him and the running backs with a stout defense. So I am struggling to find any of your post as factual. Edited October 23, 2017 by Alphadawg7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulbills Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 Well you could just read all the other responses posting out all your inaccuracies. But if you want the crib notes, here you go. 1. We don't have a dominant run game this year (as pointed out by others). In fact, its the worst average of McCoys career and its been struggling most the year, hell McCoy didn't even get his first TD until this week. 2. You can't remember when the last time a run dominant team won the SB? Guess you have short term memory loss and struggle to remember the 2016 SB, 2015 SB, 2014, and 2013 Super Bowls, all of which featured a run dominant team which 2 of them were won by a run dominant team. 2016 - Broncos - Worst rated QB in the NFL that year, and Manning had the single worst QB performance in SB history in his win on a team built on running and defense. 2015 - Pats beat the run first Seahawks to keep them from repeating. Ironically, the Seahawks lost on the goal line because they chose to pass rather than be the run dominant team they were and punch it in with Beast Mode. 2014 - Seahawks, a run dominant team won the SB beating the heavily favored high powered passing attack of Manning and the Broncos. 2013 - Ravens eek out a narrow win against SF who had a team very much built just like us, except they actually had talent to throw to. They had a running QB and an offense built on the run game between him and the running backs with a stout defense. So I am struggling to find any of your post as factual. 1.) Our running game is superior to our passing offense, yes, whether it be a RB or QB running the ball. (that was the context in the original post mind you) 2.) Okay, lets actually look at some statistics here.... 2017 SB: Pats vs Falcons, Pats Ranked 7th Rush offense vs Falcons 5th ranked rush offense, Brady's arm won (and broke records too). 2016 SB: Broncos vs Panthers, Broncos ranked 17th rush offense, Panthers ranked 2nd, Broncos won, and also had a higher ranked pass offense than their rush, which was ranked 14th (so much for a team built on running). 2015 SB: Patriots vs Seahawks, Pats ranked 18th rush offense, Seahawks ranked 1st, Pats won. 2014 SB: Seahawks vs Broncos, Seahawks 1st ranked rush offence vs 15th ranked Broncos, Fair play Seahawks destroyed them, albeit it was never a close game to begin with and the running game didn't win them the game. 2013 SB: 49ers vs Ravens, Ravens ranked 11th rush offense, 49ers ranked 2nd, Ravens won. Idk man, rush heavy doesn't work, and it will NEVER work especially if you don't have a QB that can ball out when needed or even when complimented with a beautiful run game, doesn't running open up the pass? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
section122 Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 How much of Winston's 70 extra yards do you think he'd keep throwing to Jones, Holmes, Thompson & O'Leary - as opposed to Evans, Jackson, Howard, and Brate? How many "extra yards" do you think Taylor would reap if the receiving corps were reversed? I suspect those 70 yards would quickly disappear in the first case with Winston still getting those two turnovers (if not more). This, despite how much of a "better passer" Jameis is. And Taylor? Do you doubt he'd have a field day throwing to Jackson and Evans? It would be like the prime of Sammie squared........ you don't have to tell me. now that jfh has stepped down I may be the biggest TT fan on the board. He's exciting and makes a handful of wow plays each game. I also think he is still a work in progress and we are seeing him get better each year. this year he has answered the criticism of not being able to throw in the middle, not carrying a team when the run game is off, not using his tes, not going through progressions, etc... He's not perfect but I watch a ton of other teams and he is much better (imo) than a lot of qbs out there. He was around the 20th best qb to me coming into this year and I think he has moved up. To your point I wish he was surrounded by some of the talent these other guys are. Wentz and Goff are perfect examples. The eagles went out and got Alston and Blount, the rams went out and got woods, watkins, cupp, and a new proven lt. I would love to see more skill players brought in for TT. 1.) Our running game is superior to our passing offense, yes, whether it be a RB or QB running the ball. (that was the context in the original post mind you) 2.) Okay, lets actually look at some statistics here.... 2017 SB: Pats vs Falcons, Pats Ranked 7th Rush offense vs Falcons 5th ranked rush offense, Brady's arm won (and broke records too). 2016 SB: Broncos vs Panthers, Broncos ranked 17th rush offense, Panthers ranked 2nd, Broncos won, and also had a higher ranked pass offense than their rush, which was ranked 14th (so much for a team built on running). 2015 SB: Patriots vs Seahawks, Pats ranked 18th rush offense, Seahawks ranked 1st, Pats won. 2014 SB: Seahawks vs Broncos, Seahawks 1st ranked rush offence vs 15th ranked Broncos, Fair play Seahawks destroyed them, albeit it was never a close game to begin with and the running game didn't win them the game. 2013 SB: 49ers vs Ravens, Ravens ranked 11th rush offense, 49ers ranked 2nd, Ravens won. Idk man, rush heavy doesn't work, and it will NEVER work especially if you don't have a QB that can ball out when needed or even when complimented with a beautiful run game, doesn't running open up the pass? in each of the last 5 super bowls a team in the top 5 rushing has been there. 6 of the 10 teams were top 10. You're certainly making a point I just don't think it's the one you intended lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted October 23, 2017 Author Share Posted October 23, 2017 (edited) RU FN Kiddin' me!?! @buffalobills Look at that juke #GoBills https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/922598537799507968/vid/1280x720/OcREg5qkTjWqNGXw.mp4 Edited October 23, 2017 by 26CornerBlitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 (edited) just a lil' perspective here... ...Teams are 3-34 this year with three or more turnovers. ... one of those teams with a win are the Bengals over the Bills. ... @AP_NFL Tyrod Taylor answered his critics in comeback win over Bucs @john_wawrow http://pro32.ap.org/article/qb-taylor-answers-critics-rallying-bills-beat-bucs ... 3 for 16. not great. Edited October 23, 2017 by Foxx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Game Manager Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 Agreed! IMHO, Bucs are a better team with Tyrod over Jameis right now. Says no one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punching Bag Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Otherwise, Tyrod Taylor has been under contract since then and inquiries from other teams directed at him and his agent would have been considered tampering. That's a fact, Jack Unless the Bills gave his agent ability to bring offers to Bills yes. Fact: Bortles has played in more games then Taylor this year. So you are saying Tyrod has had more rest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Agreed! IMHO, Bucs are a better team with Tyrod over Jameis right now. Jameis has a LOT of time to change that ahead of hm, so who knows where his career goes moving forward, but the biggest killer to the Bucs offense has been very bad decisions by Winston and his tendency to the turn the ball over. I think there is no doubt his stats would dip significantly if he was the Bills starter throwing to these WR's, and is turnovers likely would RISE too. While I also think there is no doubt that Tyrod would see an increase in his passing stats while keeping his turnovers low throwing to that elite group of weapons, and Tyrod is a much better runner too. I will take 320 combined yards with no turnovers over Winston and his 70 more passing yards and 2 turnovers 100% of the time. There is not a stat more OVER EXAGGERATED than passing yards, its probably the single least important stat in all of professional football. But decades of fantasy football, John Madden football games, and a few all time greats like Rogers, Brady, and Brees has skewed perception. There is SOOOO MUCH more to playing QB than passing yards, and not turning the ball over is 100 times more important than a 300 yard passing game. Case in point...people can go check Winstons record throwing for over 300 yards and ask yourself if it helped them win. They can also ask Drew Bree's if being the most prolific passer in the NFL for the last 5 years helped him make the playoffs while everyone is at it. Spoiler Alert: It didn't. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangarang Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Huh? During what contract time? Taylor has never not been under contract with Buffalo since the offseason leading up to 2015. Is that what you're talking about? If so, no surprise considering he hadn't started a game at that point. Otherwise, Tyrod Taylor has been under contract since then and inquiries from other teams directed at him and his agent would have been considered tampering. That's a fact, Jack Tyrod himself said that his agent was speaking with other teams at the combine. Unless they were talking about favorite pizza toppings you should probably assume he was testing the market for his clients services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Tyrod himself said that his agent was speaking with other teams at the combine. Unless they were talking about favorite pizza toppings you should probably assume he was testing the market for his clients services. No no, because they didn't get caught, it didn't happen. That's a consistent line of thinking from Bills fans, especially when it comes to the Pats . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Arnold Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Get ready to lose that bet you made about Peterman starting. Fair critique of what Taylor is. @BMatthewsSports Tyrod Taylor will never be a great NFL QB but I think he doesn't get enough credit for his rare QB skills and he is OK for this Bills team. It's a long season, my friend. I'm certainly rooting for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted October 24, 2017 Author Share Posted October 24, 2017 It's a long season, my friend. I'm certainly rooting for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 @JoeBuscaglia Cut the Peterman clamoring, Tyrod deserves a ton of credit for the #Bills win. That and more in my 7 observations: http://www.wkbw.com/sports/bills/joe-b-7-observations-from-buffalo-bills-tampa-bay-buccaneers-10_22_17- @AP_NFL Tyrod Taylor answered his critics in comeback win over Bucs @john_wawrow http://pro32.ap.org/article/qb-taylor-answers-critics-rallying-bills-beat-bucs ORCHARD PARK, N.Y. (AP) — Rather than focus on his critics, Bills quarterback Tyrod Taylor said he was going to spend the week concentrating on beating the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. It was time well spent. There is no one better than John Wawrow when it comes to writing about the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 We won't be better than 9-7 under Tyrod, We will exit in the first round if we squeak by into the playoffs, build for the future, it's obvious this guy doesn't have what it takes to take this team to a Superbowl. Whether he's just eeking out victories with the help of his defense, having his 1-4 dominant games a year, or either totally flopping as a quarterback and losing us games. It alarms me when I think where we'd be if we didn't have such a superior running game, winless possibly? definitely at the bottom, and I can't remember the last time a rush heavy team won the SB in recent years, any team can rush for 100 yds if they run it 50 times. Indy was dead last in the NFL in rush efficiency in 2006 when they beat Chicago in the Super Bowl. I'm no Tyrod hater, he's super fun to watch and has his clutch moments, although I have to be realistic in that I'm not confident that this is the QB that can take us to the Superbowl, we aren't the seahawks, he isn't russel wilson. This will be his 3rd year here and if he produces another mediocre year I don't see the justification in banging our head against the wall thinking he is our savior. You're a dumbass troll who clearly doesn't watch this team. Superior running game, huh? Go away. I'm sorry, what did I post that was wrong? Can you point it out to me instead of making vague accusations? No need to get emotional and reprimand me for posting statistics. Maybe if YOU did some actual research you'd find what I posted isn't false at all? lol.. We aren't a superior running team in 2017, so are you a troll or a moron? 3 for 16. not great. Better than 2 for 16 Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat Did you not understand what he said? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Tyrod himself said that his agent was speaking with other teams at the combine. Unless they were talking about favorite pizza toppings you should probably assume he was testing the market for his clients services. We're back to this again? Oye. Funny how there was so much interest for TT after 15 and now that interest never existed. What a wacky world we live in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Arnold Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Huh? During what contract time? Taylor has never not been under contract with Buffalo since the offseason leading up to 2015. Is that what you're talking about? If so, no surprise considering he hadn't started a game at that point. Otherwise, Tyrod Taylor has been under contract since then and inquiries from other teams directed at him and his agent would have been considered tampering. That's a fact, Jack Eh, if Tyrod was getting any interest in the league to be a starter then he and his agent wouldn't have caved in to the Bills' contract-reduction demands and remained in Buffalo. Bills would have let him go and signed Hoyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Myself personally, I've been very critical of T Mobile , but I'm also the only poster that believes Taylor worthy of becoming the face of the franchise. The little engine that could... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grb Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 (edited) Eh, if Tyrod was getting any interest in the league to be a starter then he and his agent wouldn't have caved in to the Bills' contract-reduction demands and remained in Buffalo. Bills would have let him go and signed Hoyer. Really? That's so simplistic as to be ludicrous. It's like you're not even trying to think things thru. Let's try a more plausible scenario : (1) From day one The Bills were always looking to bring Taylor back on a short-term deal. There was lots of talk about the front office wanting to dump TT. but never a word came from the front office - not even second hand, unattributed, or anonymous. Read that to mean they were posturing for contract renegotiation but very, very careful not to singe the bridge, much less burn it. (2) Taylor knew the Bills didn't want to commit long-term money, but was satisfied getting equal short-term cash and his freedom. Please remember : He did not take a pay-cut for this year or next. It was only the long-term money he lost. (3) If Taylor finishes the year strong he will do significantly better than with the old deal. Whaley placed a simultaneous bet on Taylor as wild-success or flop. With the latter, he could be dumped this past offseason. With the former, he was locked-up years at a cheap QB rate. Taylor signed because it gave him his first real starter money. (4) No one knows what deal Taylor could have gotten on the open market because things never got that far. It is quite possible - even likely - he would have gotten the same short-term cash he's getting from the Bills. It's highly unlikely he would have gotten the long-term cash of the old deal. So where was the best place for him to play to set himself up for a future contract? Buffalo, or say Cleveland? If you were Taylor and it was all about the next deal, wouldn't you stay put? Doesn't that sound a bit more realistic? Edited October 24, 2017 by grb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Really? That's so simplistic as to be ludicrous. It's like you're not even trying to think things thru. Let's try a more plausible scenario : (1) From day one The Bills were always looking to bring Taylor back on a short-term deal. There was lots of talk about the front office wanting to dump TT. but never a word came from the front office - not even second hand, unattributed, or anonymous. Read that to mean they were posturing for contract renegotiation but very, very careful not to singe the bridge, much less burn it. (2) Taylor knew the Bills didn't want to commit long-term money, but was satisfied getting equal short-term cash and his freedom. Please remember : He did not take a pay-cut for this year or next. It was only the long-term money he lost. (3) If Taylor finishes the year strong he will do significantly better than with the old deal. Whaley placed a simultaneous bet on Taylor as wild-success or flop. With the latter, he could be dumped this past offseason. With the former, he was locked-up years at a cheap QB rate. Taylor signed because it gave him his first real starter money. (4) No one knows what deal Taylor could have gotten on the open market because things never got that far. It is quite possible - even likely - he would have gotten the same short-term cash he's getting from the Bills. It's highly unlikely he would have gotten the long-term cash of the old deal. So where was the best place for him to play to set himself up for a future contract? Buffalo, or say Cleveland? If you were Taylor and it was all about the next deal, wouldn't you stay put? Doesn't that sound a bit more realistic? No. Tyrod took a pay cut. The Bills offered him less money or to be outright cut, and he took less money. They weren't betting on him to be successful. If they were, they would've kept him at his affordable original deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 (2) Taylor knew the Bills didn't want to commit long-term money, but was satisfied getting equal short-term cash and his freedom. Please remember : He did not take a pay-cut for this year or next. It was only the long-term money he lost. Not quite. If the Bills took up the option the $15.5m was payable immediately. It was spread across the contract for cap purposes but in cash terms he'd have received it up front in March. He then had under the old deal base salaries of $12m in 2017 and $13m in 2018. So over the two years that the new contract covers we'd have paid him $40.5m. The new deal pays $30.5m over those same two years. That is a $10m pay cut. It is also possible for the Bills to pay him LESS than that $30.5m if they cut him after this season. They will have paid him $14.5m in cash this year and will be on the hook for just over $8.5m dead money next year. So cutting him after this season (which I don't think will happen or want to happen btw) will mean he has taken a pay cut from $40.5m over two years to $23m over the same two years - though he would then admittedly have the chance to sign somewhere else and add new salary on top of that income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 No. Tyrod took a pay cut. The Bills offered him less money or to be outright cut, and he took less money. They weren't betting on him to be successful. If they were, they would've kept him at his affordable original deal. Link that they were going to cut him? Don't bother looking if you don't want, there isn't one. So all of this is just an opinion. Another equally valid opinion is that all of the stuff from the moment the season ended up until Taylor renegotiated was simply posturing based on a likely mistake tailor-made on clean out day in the locker room when he said he would be open to restructuring his contract. I'd say the second option where they weren't going to cut Taylor but were just trying to leverage him into taking less money is the more likely scenario. After all, who the hell was going to start at QB for the Buffalo Bills in 2017, otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 After all, who the hell was going to start at QB for the Buffalo Bills in 2017, otherwise? We know the answer to this.... it was going to be Brian Hoyer. He was their fallback option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Arnold Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Really? That's so simplistic as to be ludicrous. It's like you're not even trying to think things thru. Let's try a more plausible scenario : (1) From day one The Bills were always looking to bring Taylor back on a short-term deal. There was lots of talk about the front office wanting to dump TT. but never a word came from the front office - not even second hand, unattributed, or anonymous. Read that to mean they were posturing for contract renegotiation but very, very careful not to singe the bridge, much less burn it. (2) Taylor knew the Bills didn't want to commit long-term money, but was satisfied getting equal short-term cash and his freedom. Please remember : He did not take a pay-cut for this year or next. It was only the long-term money he lost. (3) If Taylor finishes the year strong he will do significantly better than with the old deal. Whaley placed a simultaneous bet on Taylor as wild-success or flop. With the latter, he could be dumped this past offseason. With the former, he was locked-up years at a cheap QB rate. Taylor signed because it gave him his first real starter money. (4) No one knows what deal Taylor could have gotten on the open market because things never got that far. It is quite possible - even likely - he would have gotten the same short-term cash he's getting from the Bills. It's highly unlikely he would have gotten the long-term cash of the old deal. So where was the best place for him to play to set himself up for a future contract? Buffalo, or say Cleveland? If you were Taylor and it was all about the next deal, wouldn't you stay put? Doesn't that sound a bit more realistic? No. More often than not, the simplest answer is the correct one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 (edited) We know the answer to this.... it was going to be Brian Hoyer. He was their fallback option. Why do we know that's the answer? The Hoyer "interest" could have easily been some last minute posturing and leveraging. And if it was, it worked. I wish people would stop pretending they know what happened, or worse, team intentions, during that time period. Edited October 24, 2017 by transplantbillsfan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts