SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 just because you repeat things a million times will not suddenly make them come true. i'll tell you what is not healthy, you. am i to understand that just because we win, i can not critique Tyrods performance or question anything having to do with Tyrod? that is the definition of unhealthy. just run along now, mommys calling. Foxx, your not allowed to critique Tyrods performance or question anything having to do with Tyrod even after a Loss in the book of jm2009. Try this, it helps This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by JM2009. View it anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Same thing that was said last year was it not???? And what did he do??? Sorry he is not worth an 18M cap hit. The Crusade never dies, does it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM2009 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Foxx, your not allowed to critique Tyrods performance or question anything having to do with Tyrod even after a Loss in the book of jm2009. Try this, it helps This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by JM2009. View it anyway? More dishonest posting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 I haven't seen the all 22, but Tyrod still missed some wide open recievers. One in particular was a deep pass to Thompson. While he completed the pass, their was a reciever (Holmes maybe?) that had his man beaten and would've probably been a td. I'm good with Tyrod for now, but again he's missing big plays Watch some all-22 of other games. Other QBs miss throws too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM2009 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Why haven't you been banned ? Do you send cash ? Bingo. I think we have a winner here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 I have this thing called the internet. With it I can see things. He might not grasp the concept of Lurking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xRUSHx Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 There was NO MARKET for him last year as a starting QB, and that is exactly why he redid his contractI agree.The running QB gimmick works only for so long, teams know injury risks are much, much higher when your QB leaves the line that protects him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM2009 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 He might not grasp the concept of Lurking. Which you seem to do with me considering you have me on ignore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Watch some all-22 of other games. Other QBs miss throws too. Especially when the example he cites is Tyrod missing a better option while completing a pass. Every QB misses those throws. The plays he misses more than anyone else are open receivers while he is running around not throwing it. One of my favourite plays this week was the miss to Taiwan Jones in the endzone where Jones checked his route. That is a play that in previous years Tyrod would have missed while scampering and maybe getting the 1st down. But standing there and throwing was the RIGHT play. That is progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM2009 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 The Crusade never dies, does it? We get under their skin calling it as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xRUSHx Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Foxx, your not allowed to critique Tyrods performance or question anything having to do with Tyrod even after a Loss in the book of jm2009. Try this, it helps This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by JM2009. View it anyway? With your post I can see JM must be hard at work again not letting posters look at both sides of a coin....SMH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 teams know injury risks are much, much higher when your QB leaves the line that protects him.This is a common refrain, but I dont think there is any evidence to support it. What is true, though, is that QBs like Taylor become much less effective when they lose a step or two, whereas guys like the Mannings, Brady, and Big Ben seemingly can go on forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM2009 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 With your post I can see JM must be hard at work again not letting posters look at both sides of a coin....SMH lol You are one of the worst with the crusading. And dishonest posting. Tell me again how I have said TT is a franchise, long term answer, which I and the others have never said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBean Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 In a parity driven league, falling more victim to that description by the day, you either have an elite QB or your nothing. In that, even teams with the so called elite signal callers have fallen to the wayside. Who are the the tier 1 contenders in the AFC with an elite QB? NE, KC, PIT? You could argue KC and PIT may or may not fit that description. Most elite QB's have had father time run it's course. While these QB's can still show signs of former greatness the pure dominance that elevated them and the teams they played for isn't the same as it once was. In all this parity teams are trying to follow the win with QB blue print, they do so at the expense of development which often shows up in the form of losing. Specifically, losing through turnovers. Not I say the Buffalo Bills. What makes us special? We never turn the ball over. Repeat like Billy Bean in Moneyball. We never turn the ball over. We know who Tyrod is and isn't. Not a pocket passer, chunk plays buying time, great runner, good deep ball, sacks, poor vision.... etc. He doesn't turn the ball over and he moves the chains enough in combination without turning it over to win games. Now, for the first time, we compliment that style with a defense that generates turnovers in chunks. This team is +10 in turnover margin and while that tends to be one of the least consistent stats around, we do it in such a way that makes it nearly certain it will continue. As stated, Taylor will not suddenly start turning it over. He's been playing turnover free ball since arriving in Buffalo. Now he has a defense that pressures the QB, forces dink and dunk long drives, and poor decisions.... Yes, the drought will end this year. I don't say that as hopeful, fandom, chain reaction, etc. We currently lead the league in turnovers and I expect us to finish the year in the top 3 in that area. You finish top 3 and you make the playoffs. I never would have thought it would be this year, this team. We can beat anybody and we can lose to anybody. In the end it will be a Wild Card. Agreed. It ends this year. This team is special and we have finally hit on a HC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xRUSHx Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 just because you repeat things a million times will not suddenly make them come true. i'll tell you what is not healthy, you. am i to understand that just because we win, i can not critique Tyrods performance or question anything having to do with Tyrod? that is the definition of unhealthy. just run along now, mommys calling. He refuses to let people talk about both sides of the coin it's horrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM2009 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 This team feels different, and if they make the playoffs with TT, it will be a happy day. But not for all -most of them are in this thread. He refuses to let people talk about both sides of the coin it's horrible. Both sides-you mean your one man crusade against TT, calling him terrible in every post and putting up dishonest posting about me and others, like here. be careful, your friend Crusher is banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xRUSHx Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 (edited) This is a common refrain, but I dont think there is any evidence to support it. What is true, though, is that QBs like Taylor become much less effective when they lose a step or two, whereas guys like the Mannings, Brady, and Big Ben seemingly can go on forever.I agree butIMO Tyrod was a injury risk year one and IMO it's why they wanted him to stay behind the line more year 2, sadly our OC got fired because it didn't turn out so well. Edited October 24, 2017 by xRUSHx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x-BillzeBubba Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 I actually think TT is safer running and sliding than he is in the pocket...seems this dude gets sacked hard a lot more than he gets hit upfield Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grb Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 I agree. The running QB gimmick works only for so long, teams know injury risks are much, much higher when your QB leaves the line that protects him. It's a truism that no critical factoid by Taylor critics can ever be surmounted by evidence, no matter how obviously wrong. Once the cliche is branded into their grey matter it simply can't be erased. Now, I had considered this law inviolate - like one of the core principles of physics - but there was one glimmer of hope. The old "truth" that Taylor must enviably be decimated by injury had seemed to finally vanish from the discourse. But yet here it is again. I guess I was right after all. Also : There is no appreciable difference between the injury rate of mobile quarterbacks vs non-mobile quarterbacks. This is the study I quickly found, though I think other people have looked at the question with the same result. http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/02/quarterback_injuries_are_mobile_qbs_like_colin_kaepernick_more_injury_prone.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan130 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 He will stay until the offseason and only come back if he redoes his contract yet again. Changing your tune a little bit? I remember after the Carolina game you were yelling 14 more games for Tyrod as a Bill. Not so sure anymore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moshermw Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 This is a common refrain, but I dont think there is any evidence to support it. What is true, though, is that QBs like Taylor become much less effective when they lose a step or two, whereas guys like the Mannings, Brady, and Big Ben seemingly can go on forever. Agreed - specifically for TT. His style of play in college was the same and he started every game there he was asked to. And he's started 36 out of 38 NFL games he's been asked to (1 in Balt) playing the same style. He's very aware and smart about avoiding getting hit hard. Does a great job of getting out of bounds, down, or protecting himself if he's going to be hit. He's also a gym rat and very tough guy. He's in his prime physically these next 2 years - after that - who knows. For now there's no reason to think he can't be the QB that breaks the Playoff drought. If the D stays Top 5 and the WR/TE corps makes it to NFL average after the '18 draft, he (with Shady) is talented enough to take the Bills to a Super Bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 14-2 Baby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Wait, we don't like parity? huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolishDave Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 IMO posters need to stop propping him up, make him work harder to get our respect back, the fans deserve more from the most important position in football. He is working extra hard I want him to keep getting better, can Tyrod do it? We will see. Go Bills lol.. What does it hurt exactly, besides your feelings? Just classic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Arnold Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Turnover differential is not sustainable. Whether good or bad. /thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7975 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Turnover differential is not sustainable. Whether good or bad. /thread Tell that to KC who has won a lot of regular season games over the last few years primarily because of turnover differential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
It's in My Blood Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 If your not optimistic and excited about this team, then you have ice in your veins. We're seeing a legitimate football team in action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolishDave Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Tell that to KC who has won a lot of regular season games over the last few years primarily because of turnover differential. Yes. Teams can actually be coached and built so that they are predisposed to committing less of them and causing more of them. How many times is a ball carrier allowed to fumble in New England before he is sent packing? How is it that Trey White doesn't deserve full credit for causing and recovering the fumble late in the last game. That wasn't an accident or pure luck. A little lucky perhaps, but coaching and intention above and beyond anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan130 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Turnover differential is not sustainable. Whether good or bad. /thread Saints won a Super Bowl mostly because they led the NFL in turnovers, and also picked off Favre 5 times in the championship game, and Peyton Manning a couple times in the super bowl. Not many good teams have a bad turnover differential Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bills757 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 I agree the best way for Tyrod to do well is running...but A running QB is at bigger risk for injury it's why they were pushing him to learn to stay in the pocket more, it's working now and hopefully he will stay healthy but when you push this risk more and more odds go up to get hit more and more. They need to stay on course and draft a top QB in 2018, NE drafts QBs all the time while having a HOF type QB. I am all in on this staff if they draft a top QB in 2018, if they avoid it I see them not lasting and will lose my respect. The only way I would give Tyrod a raise at the end of this year is if he got us to the SB, if he sticks around his contract pays more anyway so no need to adjust it, playoffs 2 years in a row ok then let's talk. A lucky wild card birth with a 1st round loss any backup type QB could get lucky with for one season if all goes your way in a season. I have one leg on the Tyrod wagon in hopes he can get better, this last game helped but you know its Tyrod he has let us down many, many times. He still has a big hill to climb. IMO IMO posters need to stop propping him up, make him work harder to get our respect back, the fans deserve more from the most important position in football. He is working extra hard I want him to keep getting better, can Tyrod do it? We will see. Go Bills Fair post IMO. I've been on the band wagon since the start....not proclaiming him to be the long term solution....merely pointing out that he's the best we've got right now and has shown improvement. I agree.....you draft a top QB (without giving away the farm), build the Oline (which is critical IMO) and address the skill WR corps considering the current group is not that good. As you pointed out, even NE drafts QB's.....because if you're not looking ahead, you can put the franchise in a bad situation. TT is like a good job with benefits, nice retirement, stable environment with certain perks that you don't find at many companies. Is it your dream job? Maybe not but it's not a bad place to be right now given other jobs (QB's) you see in other places. You don't quit a job like this until the right job offer (player) comes around....and you certainly don't quit a job without having another job in hand. That's where I am right now with TT. Good player that works hard, doesn't turn it over and has earned a ton of respect from his teammates and coaches. But if the right guy becomes available in the draft (or through a trade) and assuming TT can't step up his game to get the Bills to the playoffs and win, that's the right time to make the transition/change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 The QB could not run it so therefore the OC had to implement a specific type of offense the QB can execute for this year What a crazy thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolishDave Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Saints won a Super Bowl mostly because they led the NFL in turnovers, and also picked off Favre 5 times in the championship game, and Peyton Manning a couple times in the super bowl. Not many good teams have a bad turnover differential Also, recall a game from earlier this season where a Bill defender (can't remember who) returned a fumble for a touchdown while the offense stood around thinking maybe it wasn't a fumble. Yet no refs blew the whistle. End result was extra 6 points for Buffalo. When asked about it - they commented how turnovers are a huge focus in practice. This player said they just did what cam naturally by scooping and returning the ball because it has been drilled into them in practice with McDermott as the head coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Arnold Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Tell that to KC who has won a lot of regular season games over the last few years primarily because of turnover differential. Yes. Teams can actually be coached and built so that they are predisposed to committing less of them and causing more of them. How many times is a ball carrier allowed to fumble in New England before he is sent packing? How is it that Trey White doesn't deserve full credit for causing and recovering the fumble late in the last game. That wasn't an accident or pure luck. A little lucky perhaps, but coaching and intention above and beyond anything else. Saints won a Super Bowl mostly because they led the NFL in turnovers, and also picked off Favre 5 times in the championship game, and Peyton Manning a couple times in the super bowl. Not many good teams have a bad turnover differential http://harvardsportsanalysis.org/2014/10/how-random-are-turnovers/ Conclusion in case you don't want to spend the time reading it: So after a few hundred words of statistics, we arrive at a whopping conclusion that just over half of seasonal turnover differential is due to luck. That’s huge, especially when you consider that (from earlier) seasonal turnover differential explains over 40% of seasonal winning percentage. At first glance, this does seem very high to me but evidence for this magnitude is the extraordinary year-to-year variability in turnover differential, which you would expect if luck was a mega factor as my analysis suggests. While starting quarterbacks absolutely play a role in turnover differential (Tom Brady throws fewer picks than Chad Henne) and tend to be fairly constant from year-to-year, nevertheless the correlation between turnover differential last year and this year is only 0.086 which is not significant at the 5% level. Ultimately in a 16-game season, there’s just a whole lot of luck involved with winning football games and for all that commentators will talk about defensive schemes forcing turnovers this season, it’s just as important to be lucky as to be good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billieve420 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Even if the Bills draft a QB in the next draft they aren't going to be rushed in to start. So get set for Taylor for at least another season. Well that depends on what Peterson has shown them in practice. If the coaches think he can step in and replace Tyrod then I would be willing to move on next year. However, that would depend if they are planning to draft a QB early in next year's draft as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan130 Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 http://harvardsportsanalysis.org/2014/10/how-random-are-turnovers/ Conclusion in case you don't want to spend the time reading it: So after a few hundred words of statistics, we arrive at a whopping conclusion that just over half of seasonal turnover differential is due to luck. That’s huge, especially when you consider that (from earlier) seasonal turnover differential explains over 40% of seasonal winning percentage. At first glance, this does seem very high to me but evidence for this magnitude is the extraordinary year-to-year variability in turnover differential, which you would expect if luck was a mega factor as my analysis suggests. While starting quarterbacks absolutely play a role in turnover differential (Tom Brady throws fewer picks than Chad Henne) and tend to be fairly constant from year-to-year, nevertheless the correlation between turnover differential last year and this year is only 0.086 which is not significant at the 5% level. Ultimately in a 16-game season, there’s just a whole lot of luck involved with winning football games and for all that commentators will talk about defensive schemes forcing turnovers this season, it’s just as important to be lucky as to be good. What does that have to do with my point though? They are saying it is lucky from reading the conclusion on a year to year basis. Does it mention that teams that make the playoffs and go to the super bowl generally have a good turnover differential? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 http://harvardsportsanalysis.org/2014/10/how-random-are-turnovers/ Conclusion in case you don't want to spend the time reading it: So after a few hundred words of statistics, we arrive at a whopping conclusion that just over half of seasonal turnover differential is due to luck. That’s huge, especially when you consider that (from earlier) seasonal turnover differential explains over 40% of seasonal winning percentage. At first glance, this does seem very high to me but evidence for this magnitude is the extraordinary year-to-year variability in turnover differential, which you would expect if luck was a mega factor as my analysis suggests. While starting quarterbacks absolutely play a role in turnover differential (Tom Brady throws fewer picks than Chad Henne) and tend to be fairly constant from year-to-year, nevertheless the correlation between turnover differential last year and this year is only 0.086 which is not significant at the 5% level. Ultimately in a 16-game season, there’s just a whole lot of luck involved with winning football games and for all that commentators will talk about defensive schemes forcing turnovers this season, it’s just as important to be lucky as to be good. It was our old guy Jimmy Schwartz who did an in depth study when a staffer for Belichick's Browns that told Bill that fumbles were basically random occurrences and the old adage "good teams don't fumble" was essentially nonsense. There is no correlation between being good and not fumbling. Belichick obviously despite that has never believed him because if you put it on the floor he benches you. But you are right... there is lots of evidence out there now that supports Jim's theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolishDave Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 http://harvardsportsanalysis.org/2014/10/how-random-are-turnovers/ Conclusion in case you don't want to spend the time reading it: So after a few hundred words of statistics, we arrive at a whopping conclusion that just over half of seasonal turnover differential is due to luck. That’s huge, especially when you consider that (from earlier) seasonal turnover differential explains over 40% of seasonal winning percentage. At first glance, this does seem very high to me but evidence for this magnitude is the extraordinary year-to-year variability in turnover differential, which you would expect if luck was a mega factor as my analysis suggests. While starting quarterbacks absolutely play a role in turnover differential (Tom Brady throws fewer picks than Chad Henne) and tend to be fairly constant from year-to-year, nevertheless the correlation between turnover differential last year and this year is only 0.086 which is not significant at the 5% level. Ultimately in a 16-game season, there’s just a whole lot of luck involved with winning football games and for all that commentators will talk about defensive schemes forcing turnovers this season, it’s just as important to be lucky as to be good. If just over half of the turnover differential is luck - then what is responsible for the other "just under half" - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Also, recall a game from earlier this season where a Bill defender (can't remember who) returned a fumble for a touchdown while the offense stood around thinking maybe it wasn't a fumble. Yet no refs blew the whistle. End result was extra 6 points for Buffalo. When asked about it - they commented how turnovers are a huge focus in practice. This player said they just did what cam naturally by scooping and returning the ball because it has been drilled into them in practice with McDermott as the head coach. That was...Tre White! Of course it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolishDave Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 That was...Tre White! Of course it was. Could have been anybody. After all - it is pure luck that he did that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Could have been anybody. After all - it is pure luck that he did that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts