THE ROCKPILE REVIEW - Good Gets Bad, Bad Gets Good

[JPP]

7 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

No Mathews fumble and no facemask that giftwrapped a Jets TD and the biggest reason we lost against the Jets is the long TD to Anderson and the lack of run defense.  We made to many mistakes in the Jets game.  That is the biggest difference from one week to another. 

Some of the players just looked lethargic.....thats why all the silly penalties i think......

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, BadLandsMeanie said:

NIce post as per your usual Shaw. Thanks.

About this part:

"At the risk of starting a firestorm, what I really liked in the Jets game was Tyrod Taylor. Well see what the second half of the season, but Im pretty much sold on him."

What do you mean by sold? He's the future? I figure that is your meaning.

For me, I have never once seen him in one of those games where both sides are airing it out. You remember the ones where team are coming out with four wide and just going at it. I have never seen him march the offense like that, repeatedly, for a half or whole game.

Granted Tyrod does a lot of things well. But until he can throw well, until he can orchestrate and succeeded in a consistent aerial attack, I won't be sold on him. And I haven't seen him do it one time so far.

Would you give 2 first round draft picks for a solid franchise QB? And would you give 2 first round draft picks for Tyrod?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sold on him meaning I would plan on him being my starter for the next five years.   Meaning, I wouldn't trade up to replace him with a gilt-edged rookie.   Meaning, if a QB I really really liked turned up late in the first round on in the second, I'd probably take him. 

Taylor looks much better to me this year than last year.   I think he's playing like a top 15 quarterback.   As much as I'd like to have a top 5 quarterback, the chances of getting one are slim.   

I don't buy your measure - he has to air it out for 400 yards in a head to head battle like Wilson and DeShaun Watson had a couple weeks ago.   That can't be the measure of your QB, because it's too arbitrary.   To have one of those duels you have to be on a team with good to great deep receiving threats, like Houston has.   Your team's run game has to have failed., so you're throwing 45 times.   

I don't mean I don't want one of those guys.   It would be great.   

I look at it differently.  I think it's a sucker bet to keep looking for the Hall of Fame QB.   If you have to look for a good quarterback, and when you find one you have to figure out how to win with him.  What's a good QB?   I think it's a guy who's regularly in or around the top 10 QBs in the league.  When you have one of those, he's the guy you ride, trying to build a winner around him. 

I've been saying since he finished his first season in Buffalo that Taylor COULD be the guy.   He did an awful lot right that first year; the only thing he didn't do was pile up yards, because his team didn't pass.   The last two games he's looked improved to me, and that's what makes me think he's worth riding.   The last two games he's been finding open receivers, open enough, and delivering catchable balls.   Against Tampa he was conservative and threw a few balls out of bounds.   Against New York there was little of that.   He looked like a top-10 guy on the TDs to both Jones and Thompson.   His throw up the sideline to Holmes was beautiful.   He was consistently making throws that I admire when I see Brady and Brees and Rodgers make.   He just looks good.  

I think he's looked better in the past couple of weeks because he's playing in a well-designed offense and he's starting to get comfortable in it.  And I think it's likely to get better now that he has Benjamin to throw to.   I like speed guys, but I also like the big guys, and the Bills have gone from Watkins and Woods - not tiny, but not big guys - to Matthews and Benjamin, with Clay coming back too.  I'm expecting to be very happy with the second half of Tyrod's season.  

I said it a few weeks ago.  Tyrod's contract is going to renegotiated in the off-season, and he's going to be five years, $100 million, minimum.  With five picks in the first three rounds, I'm expecting the Bills to draft at least  two offensive linemen.

[BadLandsMeanie]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

I'm sold on him meaning I would plan on him being my starter for the next five years.   Meaning, I wouldn't trade up to replace him with a gilt-edged rookie.   Meaning, if a QB I really really liked turned up late in the first round on in the second, I'd probably take him. 

Taylor looks much better to me this year than last year.   I think he's playing like a top 15 quarterback.   As much as I'd like to have a top 5 quarterback, the chances of getting one are slim.   

I don't buy your measure - he has to air it out for 400 yards in a head to head battle like Wilson and DeShaun Watson had a couple weeks ago.   That can't be the measure of your QB, because it's too arbitrary.   To have one of those duels you have to be on a team with good to great deep receiving threats, like Houston has.   Your team's run game has to have failed., so you're throwing 45 times.   

I don't mean I don't want one of those guys.   It would be great.   

I look at it differently.  I think it's a sucker bet to keep looking for the Hall of Fame QB.   If you have to look for a good quarterback, and when you find one you have to figure out how to win with him.  What's a good QB?   I think it's a guy who's regularly in or around the top 10 QBs in the league.  When you have one of those, he's the guy you ride, trying to build a winner around him. 

I've been saying since he finished his first season in Buffalo that Taylor COULD be the guy.   He did an awful lot right that first year; the only thing he didn't do was pile up yards, because his team didn't pass.   The last two games he's looked improved to me, and that's what makes me think he's worth riding.   The last two games he's been finding open receivers, open enough, and delivering catchable balls.   Against Tampa he was conservative and threw a few balls out of bounds.   Against New York there was little of that.   He looked like a top-10 guy on the TDs to both Jones and Thompson.   His throw up the sideline to Holmes was beautiful.   He was consistently making throws that I admire when I see Brady and Brees and Rodgers make.   He just looks good.  

I think he's looked better in the past couple of weeks because he's playing in a well-designed offense and he's starting to get comfortable in it.  And I think it's likely to get better now that he has Benjamin to throw to.   I like speed guys, but I also like the big guys, and the Bills have gone from Watkins and Woods - not tiny, but not big guys - to Matthews and Benjamin, with Clay coming back too.  I'm expecting to be very happy with the second half of Tyrod's season.  

I said it a few weeks ago.  Tyrod's contract is going to renegotiated in the off-season, and he's going to be five years, $100 million, minimum.  With five picks in the first three rounds, I'm expecting the Bills to draft at least  two offensive linemen.

Well, you know football. I don't agree with you but I consider your opinion could be right.

 

I actually hope you are right since we already have him. But if it was up to me I wouldn't pay him 20 million a year for five years unless I had ways out of it. And I would keep one of the first round picks and just keep trading it at a profit if possible for the next year. That way I would have ammo if a real good prospect came along.

 

I hope they do draft oline because I am always in favor of drafting olinemen.

 

PS this new board went down, but it saved my post here so I didn't have to retype it. pretty cool.

[QCity]

On 11/3/2017 at 9:22 PM, Shaw66 said:

I gave the stats. At the end of the third quarter he was 15-21, 163 yards, 1 TD no INT. Extrapolate that to a fourth quarter and he's 20 for 28, 217 yards. Nothing wrong with that at all. He was playing competitive football, completing 75% of his passes, and they weren't checkdowns. He completed passes at the same percentage in the fourth quarter - he completed more because he was throwing more.

 

I just don't see what there is to complain about in that kind of performance. Maybe you do. I can't help you with that.

 

Halfway through the 4th quarter we had 7 points on the board. By my count there were about 5 three-and-outs. He looked like he was filming an instructional video on How To Get Sacked. Sorry, but the quarterback is certainly complicit in that mess. The blocking up front was terrible but TT wasn't doing them any favors. They brought 5 all night and he didn't have an answer.

[BadLandsMeanie]

Oh I almost forgot. Thanks for mentioning the cheerleaders Shaw.

 

Nowadays the younger fans say they don't see what cheerleaders add to the game. 

 

And I say "What they add, is that they add cheerleaders to the game". And they don't understand what I mean. And that makes me uneasy and  wondering what has happened. 

 

So thanks pal I appreciated that you enjoyed the cheerleaders because I know that at least there are two of us left..

[transplantbillsfan]

On 11/3/2017 at 11:04 AM, GoBills808 said:

Really...yards. NOW yards are important?

 

How many of those yards came after the outcome was decided? Half? More?

 

110 passing yards.

 

Does it matter?

 

Did it actually look to you like the Jets D remotely lightened up?

 

Even his "garbage TD" was a contested catch on a beautiful throw. The Jets D was out to embarrass the Bills the entire game.

[transplantbillsfan]

14 hours ago, HappyDays said:

Just for fun I wanted to see how many games there are since 2000 where a team had 63 or less rushing yards, and their opponent had 194 or more rushing yards, and that team won. I used Pro Football Reference’s game finder.

10 games where the lower rushing total won:

http://pfref.com/tiny/SWauP

197 games where they lost:

http://pfref.com/tiny/LjVCo

You simply cannot win games when your opponent’s rush yards outnumber yours by such a wide margin.

 

Ya know what else someone should look up? When was the last time a team won when the QB was part of 90% of the offensive output, cause that's what Taylor did Thursday.

[CommonCents]

54 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

110 passing yards.

 

Does it matter?

 

Did it actually look to you like the Jets D remotely lightened up?

 

Even his "garbage TD" was a contested catch on a beautiful throw. The Jets D was out to embarrass the Bills the entire game.

 

Does it matter? Yes it matters. The game was over, the pressure was off, a mistake there doesn't change the outcome of the game. It's an entirely different mindset on the field.

 

90% of the teams output, that team you mention has Lesean McCoy who is still a good-->great running back. Between TT, the Oline, and the OC they failed to create any favorable matchups.

 

Watch the Rams game today and see how long the Giants are able to key in on Gurley. The Rams (not just Goff) will make them pay for it. That didn't happen on Thursday night for the Bills. The Jets rushed 5 all night and tackled the running back on the way to the quarterback.

 

The Jets never had to change their approach because it worked all night long. That is on the entire offense including Tyrod Taylor. It's not something you look past and say welp his completion percentage was high and yah no turnovers.

 

How about all the three and outs? The 7 points until well into the 4th quarter. A QB's job is to lead the offense not put together stat lines. When a team is unable to move the ball and dictate to the defense there is a problem.

 

A hall of fame running back is boxed in because the OC and QB couldn't adjust to getting steam rolled upfront. No audibles of course,  no checking to one on one coverage, no screens. Just kept doing what wasn't working, Tyrod was part of it.

 

When a team is able to consistently take away what you are trying to do then you need to adjust. This isn't the first time we have seen this approach. The Jets were very aggressive with the guy assigned to spy the QB, a few times it was nothing more than a delayed blitz and Taylor froze.

[Shaw66]

9 hours ago, QCity said:

 

Halfway through the 4th quarter we had 7 points on the board. By my count there were about 5 three-and-outs. He looked like he was filming an instructional video on How To Get Sacked. Sorry, but the quarterback is certainly complicit in that mess. The blocking up front was terrible but TT wasn't doing them any favors. They brought 5 all night and he didn't have an answer.

You may be correct. From my seat it was difficult to know for sure whether Taylor could have avoided many sacks. It didn't look like it because he was in trouble almost immediately. 

 

In any case it looked like the best he could have done was throw the ball away.  That might have helped but wouldn't have changed the outcome. He wasn't likely to have gotten positive outcomes out of those plays. 

[Maine-iac]

All the debate about the sacks.  Credit to the Jets with a good pass rush plan. They sold out coverage for pass rush.   All that said I still say that with no fumbles and minus a few penalties, we throw for well over 300 yards and the score is much much different. 

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, Maine-iac said:

All the debate about the sacks.  Credit to the Jets with a good pass rush plan. They sold out coverage for pass rush.   All that said I still say that with no fumbles and minus a few penalties, we throw for well over 300 yards and the score is much much different. 

Right 

 

And Zay doesn't get tripped there may have been a second quarter touchdown. 

 

Likenyou, I just don't see Taylor's performance contributing much at all to the loss. The lines got beat all night and that's why they lost. 

[Dr. K]

I just watched the game on game replay, and though they made numerous errors and tackled badly and the play calling was often suspect and in general they looked bad especially in the second half . . .

• I thought Tyrod played a good game, especially considering the pressure he was under
• Zay Jones looked very good
• I am not so down on the team as I was having seen only the hightlights/lowlights.

I think they will bounce back from this game and play much better. Whether this will mean many more wins this season is an open question. 

[Shaw66]

6 minutes ago, Dr. K said:

I just watched the game on game replay, and though they made numerous errors and tackled badly and the play calling was often suspect and in general they looked bad especially in the second half . . .

• I thought Tyrod played a good game, especially considering the pressure he was under
• Zay Jones looked very good
• I am not so down on the team as I was having seen only the hightlights/lowlights.

I think they will bounce back from this game and play much better. Whether this will mean many more wins this season is an open question. 

The Jets was an uncharacteristic game for the 2017 Bills.   They haven't been outplayed before, and this game looked like they weren't ready mentally.  

 

I have faith in McDermott that he will get them back on track.  However, my faith has been misplaced before.   It may be that all we saw last month was a hot streak and Thursday night was closer to what we'll see going forward.   I don't know.   We'll see. 

[mead107]

13-3 Baby 

[Comebackkid]

On 11/4/2017 at 12:25 PM, HappyDays said:

Just for fun I wanted to see how many games there are since 2000 where a team had 63 or less rushing yards, and their opponent had 194 or more rushing yards, and that team won. I used Pro Football Reference’s game finder.

10 games where the lower rushing total won:

http://pfref.com/tiny/SWauP

197 games where they lost:

http://pfref.com/tiny/LjVCo

You simply cannot win games when your opponent’s rush yards outnumber yours by such a wide margin.

nice work..notice one of those games was buffalo?   I just look at it like if your qb is throwing for 75% and your running back is lucky to get past the line of scrimmage then throw, and throw a lot until it stops working.  

[Shaw66]

57 minutes ago, Comebackkid said:

nice work..notice one of those games was buffalo?   I just look at it like if your qb is throwing for 75% and your running back is lucky to get past the line of scrimmage then throw, and throw a lot until it stops working.  

Hard to argue with that, except the qb was getting sacked a lot. 

[Comebackkid]

3 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Hard to argue with that, except the qb was getting sacked a lot. 

true..but minus the injury possibility, passing the ball was still where we were most effictient.   both in yards and tds

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, Comebackkid said:

true..but minus the injury possibility, passing the ball was still where we were most effictient.   both in yards and tds

I agree. I wasn't arguing.  No reason not to pass. But even passing might not have helped because the sacks were killing drives.  Still, there was no hope running so it made sense to try something else. 

 

That isn't McDermotts philosophy. 

[Happy]

24 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I agree. I wasn't arguing.  No reason not to pass. But even passing might not have helped because the sacks were killing drives.  Still, there was no hope running so it made sense to try something else. 

 

That isn't McDermotts philosophy. 

 

But we still kept trying to run it against a five man defensive front.  Is trying to force the run McDermott's philosophy or Dennison's?  I would guess the latter since he makes the offensive game plan and calls the plays.

 

Tony Romo pointed out in the first quarter, I believe, that the way to counteract the stacked defensive front was quick passes.  We did not do that; instead we kept trying to force the run which wasted a lot of time and effort.

 

Really like these write-ups, Shaw.  Thanks for doing these.

Edited November 6, 2017 by Happy Gilmore
Kudos to Shaw66

[Shaw66]

40 minutes ago, Happy Gilmore said:

 

But we still kept trying to run it against a five man defensive front.  Is trying to force the run McDermott's philosophy or Dennison's?  I would guess the latter since he makes the offensive game plan and calls the plays.

 

Tony Romo pointed out in the first quarter, I believe, that the way to counteract the stacked defensive front was quick passes.  We did not do that; instead we kept trying to force the run which wasted a lot of time and effort.

 

Really like these write-ups, Shaw.  Thanks for doing these.

Well, we don't know which coach is responsible.  Early in the season McDermott said things that suggested to me that they weren't going to go away from what they want to do until they had to.  That's the way the Bills seem to play.  

 

I think he's very conservative.  All season long they've stuck to the run if they were within 10 points.  If it were Dennison and McDermott wanted more passing, McDermott would tell him to pass more.  So I don't think it's Dennison.