BigDingus Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 1 minute ago, JohnC said: There is a role for Taylor as a qb in this league. He can for the next half dozen years earn a good paycheck as a backup and a change of pace qb. I simply don't see him as an entrenched starter. He could be a bridge qb for another team but he is always going to be a qb that you want to upgrade. I just don't think he fits the current NFL standard for a QB. It's a passing league, but even so his numbers look straight out of 1960. Although stats don't tell the whole story, they usually make Tyrod look even better than he actually played. Throwing for 300 yards is out of the question, as he's never once done it, but throwing for 200 is a HUGE milestone for him. Here's a big issue though - even his 168 yard passing games are inflated by big runs after the catch from dump passes to Shady or Clay, who usually make a few guys miss then break away for extra gains. On days where this doesn't happen, Taylor's stats reflect more accurately how he actually plays - 9/18 for 65 yards or 9/18 for 56 yards... Yes, every QB gets the benefit of YAC, but nearly all of them throw far more often downfield to balance that out. Also, they hit receivers in stride, setting up big plays and YAC, whereas Tyrod makes his receivers catch bad passes that end up killing any potential for after the catch (see the KC game where O'leary has 15 yards of open space, but has to dive to the ground 2 yards short of the 1st down marker just to catch the pass). That's why he struggles to hit 200 yards passing. The receivers have to do all the work. Tyrod doesn't throw them open, or find the weaknesses in the defense. He doesn't lead his targets to big plays, and he rarely hits people in stride. The only chances at big yardage is when someone like Shady makes 6 people miss after catching the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 5 hours ago, bobm said: No - That would be north Korea and Iran... And Barry who turned a blind eye to them for years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fridge Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 We're the same as always. Inexplicably average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 Answer: Pretty Bad. Not Awful. We now have a negative point differential of 56 points. Other teams in the same range: - Redskins (-42) - Bucs (-45) Go a little bit worse, you get the Dolphins (-89) and Bears (-76) A little better? Jets (-22), Raiders (-29), Packers (-23) ... better still, Titans (-16) and Texans (-13) That's our company. Point differential is, of course, not a perfect gauge, but it's a little more reliable than W-L. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreigner Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 If you don't know the answer to the thread, then you have not been watching Bills football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris66 Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 On 12/3/2017 at 11:43 PM, Foreigner said: If you don't know the answer to the thread, then you have not been watching Bills football. Bills accomplished what they wanted to do. They held the Pats to 23 pts and Shady rushed for almost 200yds. If you new those sta%s before the game you would think it is a win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts