Jump to content

Comprehensive "Tyrod Taylor is Bad" Thread (VERY Comprehensive)


BigDingus

Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, BuffaloBill said:

 

 

Are you out of your mind?  Seriously, you want to keep the guy?  Why?  I’m being serious, how can you say this?

I'm not against keeping him next year while we draft our hopeful QB of the future. Unless you plan on pulling a Peterman and just starting a rookie. If you think people are upset at an 8-7 Bills team on the verge of the playoffs, wait till you see a followup 4-12 season, even with the QB of the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

I'd venture a guess he's probably played a higher % of his teams snaps already this year than he did last year in Buffalo.

 

He was banged up for 7 games and in and out of the lineup in 2016 and claimed to play the entire 2015 season with a torn groin. 

 

Funny how the argument is..........."see how good Woods is without Tyrod"...........but the same people will say "Sammy is no good because his per game production is WAY DOWN" ...... but without the "without Tyrod".:lol:

 

 

Funny enough also is how the claim is how great they are somewhere else yet they are both being beat out by a rookie.  I honestly think if they had Thompson signed and starting from the preseason on he'd have Watkins like numbers.  Taylor loves a speed guy and it's his best pass.  People want to argue pocket presence, I'll buy it.  Holding the ball too long, you're absolutely right.  Can Taylor throw?  Yes he can.  He misses some.  They all do but he can throw.  Taking the 15 yard sack yesterday was the kind of thing that can't happen though.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

So he's currently got 5 more catches playing in 1 less game  than with Taylor is that supposed to prove your point?

 

Yeah. That’s my point. Look at his yards — he has more yards. 

 

Look at his YAC compared to Tyrod. There’s the whole frickin story. Look at the YAC. 

Edited by The_Dude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

You are just another damsel in distress............save us or die Tyrod!

 

I want to build around whoever the QB is.........does having playmakers in place HURT the next QB?    Really?   How so?  

 

Do they draft OL that can only block for Tyrod?

 

Receivers that can only catch passes from Tyrod?

 

And you think YOU have a clue..........YOU?

 

My contention that you should figure on propping-up the QB you have rather than just seeing if he can pass himself out of a flaming dumpster has only been further enhanced by what the Eagles and Rams have done.    And Nick Foles stepping in and playing well in place of Wentz has only FURTHER enhanced my position.

 

 

 

 

 

 

One game sample size vs a terrible Giants team is the new metric for cot math ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steelers don't have Ben they still win.  Pats don't have Brady they still win.  Many good teams are just that, good teams.  They're not getting rolled on for 300 yards rushing and 6 TD's.  Sure there are teams with better QB's but look a little deeper.  They also have better coaching, better pass catchers, better o-line, and a better defense.  If they aren't better in those areas then they probably aren't doing any better than us.  When was the last time Rivers won a SB?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

Steelers don't have Ben they still win.  Pats don't have Brady they still win.  Many good teams are just that, good teams.  They're not getting rolled on for 300 yards rushing and 6 TD's.  Sure there are teams with better QB's but look a little deeper.  They also have better coaching, better pass catchers, better o-line, and a better defense.  If they aren't better in those areas then they probably aren't doing any better than us.  When was the last time Rivers won a SB?

When do the Steelers win without Roethlisberger? When do the Patriots win without Brady?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

When do the Steelers win without Roethlisberger? When do the Patriots win without Brady?

I'm not doing the work for you but needless to say it's a fact.  Brady is easy to look up.  11 and 4 one season and 3 and 1 another without Brady.  Ben is more sporadic but it's there if you really care.  The Steerlers have had several stretches with Ben hurt and managed to win.  We have plenty of work to do to be a good team.  QB is just one position.  Granted an important one but if we can't win with Taylor we probably are not SB bound just by drafting a "franchise" QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Maine-iac said:

I'm not doing the work for you but needless to say it's a fact.  Brady is easy to look up.  11 and 4 one season and 3 and 1 another without Brady.  Ben is more sporadic but it's there if you really care.  The Steerlers have had several stretches with Ben hurt and managed to win.  We have plenty of work to do to be a good team.  QB is just one position.  Granted an important one but if we can't win with Taylor we probably are not SB bound just by drafting a "franchise" QB.

Steelers don't win without Roethisberger. This stat is from 2016, but they're 117-58 with him and 13-11 without him. And that 11-5 Cassel-led Patriots team was 16-0  just the year before, which is a -5 differential so in a normal 11-5 season they'd have been 6-10, so no...I 100% disagree that the Steelers or Patriots win missing their respective quarterbacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GoBills808 said:

Steelers don't win without Roethisberger. This stat is from 2016, but they're 117-58 with him and 13-11 without him. And that 11-5 Cassel-led Patriots team was 16-0  just the year before, which is a -5 differential so in a normal 11-5 season they'd have been 6-10, so no...I 100% disagree that the Steelers or Patriots win missing their respective quarterbacks.

You do realize that 13 and 11 is winning?  You are claiming one thing and proving another.  You are arguing for arguings sake. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Maine-iac said:

You do realize that 13 and 11 is winning?  You are claiming one thing and proving another.  You are arguing for arguings sake. 

Christ...13-11 is not winning when it's held against 117-58. Are you saying they'd have had to go 0-24 to make the case? 1-23 would have ruined it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does it have to be held against anything.  It's simple Ben is out and they won more than they lost.  Brady is out and they win more than they lose.  Tell me how we've done with out Taylor?  Winning is when you win more than you lose.  I'm not even sure what the hell you are talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Maine-iac said:

Why does it have to be held against anything.  It's simple Ben is out and they won more than they lost.  Brady is out and they win more than they lose.  Tell me how we've done with out Taylor?  Winning is when you win more than you lose.  I'm not even sure what the hell you are talking about.

 

Steelers and Patriots win ball games 

 

But don’t forget Tyrod still sucks. 

 

See the OP if you need to rehash it again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...