Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 5 minutes ago, GG said: Just a reminder that Matt Shaub looked more than adequate in a Dennison offense, and no reason to believe that Foles would have been a horror show I was a big fan of Matt Schaub. I followed his career. Tell me, in that Dennison offense (it wasn't, actually) where Schaub looked "more than adequate", what was the OL like and who were the WR? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 6 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: He’s talking about Foles My mistake. I would still take Foles over Tyrod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said: Even the draft picks who develop into a decent NFL QB, more often or not, have a ceiling at or below what Cousins has shown. And then there are those who don't. I'm not dissing on the "draft" idea. I think every team has to look at their roster and decide how much they can "pay the man" at QB and still develop, so if Cousins went over their price, I'm good with moving to the next plan. I just don't think it's realistic to paint Cousins as "not the sort of QB you build your franchise around" but plan to get someone better through "draft and develop". You'll be lucky to get someone who winds up as good after 3 years, you have to live through those 3 years, and then you gotta start figuring out how to pay him. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but after watching him for a number of years it's where I land. As an organization, you have to trust the scouts and coaching staff to find and develop a QB. During that time there is a 5 year window with known cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobobonators Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 I can take another year of Tyrod on the field. I can’t take another year of the Tyrod convo on these boards. The discussion becomes nauseating. Every week, win or loss, the conversation turns into how many yards did he throw for; how many progressions did he miss; bring out the All-22 experts; create 20 weekly threads about Tyrod sucking. Its brutal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 10 minutes ago, JohnC said: I'm not advocating for Cousins. We're talking about Foles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan130 Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 6 minutes ago, GG said: Just a reminder that Matt Shaub looked more than adequate in a Dennison offense, and no reason to believe that Foles would have been a horror show Dennisons offence? I think you mean Kubiaks. Kubiaks offence was effective 10 years ago. It’s very outdated. Combine Dennison calling plays, an outdated offensive scheme, and a QB who doesn’t fit that awful scheme, equals up to one one the worst offences in the league Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 2 minutes ago, JohnC said: My mistake. I would still take Foles over Tyrod. Aren't you pretty strongly on record as you would take anyone over Tyrod? Glennon, Mccarron, Glass-leg Bradford, Bridgewater, McCown, Moore etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Call_Of_Ktulu Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 38 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Me, too. Was never gonna happen, alas. But let me ask you this: If the Bills had signed him, how do you think he would have performed with our OL and our WR corps, and Dennison? I don't think he would be as good with the Bills until they made some upgrades. I will say this though, and this is just my opinion. If we had Foles in the playoff game I think we win that game. Also if the Eagles had Taylor I don't see them winning that super bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 4 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: I was a big fan of Matt Schaub. I followed his career. Tell me, in that Dennison offense (it wasn't, actually) where Schaub looked "more than adequate", what was the OL like and who were the WR? It doesn't matter that Dennison was running Kubiak's offense in Houston, because Dennison was running a version of it in Buffalo. If you're going to attribute Tyrod's weak passing to a deficient WR corps, what would you call Foles' supporting cast in St Louis? You saw a glimpse of the passing offense design being more dynamic with Peterman under center, and I will argue that Foles doesn't throw wounded ducks that are ripe for picking. There's a high probability that Matthews is far more effective early on with Foles as QB. Bottom line is that TT has led to 2 OCs getting the boot because he's not really a good QB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimer1960 Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 18 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Even the draft picks who develop into a decent NFL QB, more often or not, have a ceiling at or below what Cousins has shown. And then there are those who don't. I'm not dissing on the "draft" idea. I think every team has to look at their roster and decide how much they can "pay the man" at QB and still develop, so if Cousins went over their price, I'm good with moving to the next plan. I just don't think it's realistic to paint Cousins as "not the sort of QB you build your franchise around" but plan to get someone better through "draft and develop". You'll be lucky to get someone who winds up as good after 3 years, you have to live through those 3 years, and then you gotta start figuring out how to pay him. Edit: You added the "Just like GB did with Rodgers" after I responded, but there's a very telling point there: at the point where GB developed Rodgers (and San Diego developed Rivers. And possibly as NE developed Garappolo), they had a HOF starting QB. So if it's "just like Green Bay", who is our HOF QB (or even our capable vet) we can play and win with while our draft-and-develop plays out? Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Costa Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 9 hours ago, yungmack said: Jackson's completion % is horrible. Jim Kelly’s completion % was lower in College. So by using this rationale you wouldn’t have drafted Jim Kelly? 8 hours ago, NastyNateSoldiers said: Paying 6mil to get a 5th rd pk isn't that cost prohibitive. Agree with Mcbeane we must keep all our options open. It could backfire as you suggest. TT is much more tradeable with a 10 Million cap hit. We will see his worth ? Maybe a higher pick maybe a player? Maybe TT is our QB in 18? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 19 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: We're talking about Foles See my response to Kirby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 29 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Even the draft picks who develop into a decent NFL QB, more often or not, have a ceiling at or below what Cousins has shown. And then there are those who don't. I'm not dissing on the "draft" idea. I think every team has to look at their roster and decide how much they can "pay the man" at QB and still develop, so if Cousins went over their price, I'm good with moving to the next plan. I just don't think it's realistic to paint Cousins as "not the sort of QB you build your franchise around" but plan to get someone better through "draft and develop". You'll be lucky to get someone who winds up as good after 3 years, you have to live through those 3 years, and then you gotta start figuring out how to pay him. Edit: You added the "Just like GB did with Rodgers" after I responded, but there's a very telling point there: at the point where GB developed Rodgers (and San Diego developed Rivers. And possibly as NE developed Garappolo), they had a HOF starting QB. So if it's "just like Green Bay", who is our HOF QB (or even our capable vet) we can play and win with while our draft-and-develop plays out? It's called a bridge QB. It's not required to have a HoF QB on board to take that path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nedboy7 Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 27 minutes ago, bobobonators said: I can take another year of Tyrod on the field. I can’t take another year of the Tyrod convo on these boards. The discussion becomes nauseating. Every week, win or loss, the conversation turns into how many yards did he throw for; how many progressions did he miss; bring out the All-22 experts; create 20 weekly threads about Tyrod sucking. Its brutal. Yeah another year of making the playoffs would be brutal. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 21 minutes ago, Call_Of_Ktulu said: I don't think he would be as good with the Bills until they made some upgrades. I will say this though, and this is just my opinion. If we had Foles in the playoff game I think we win that game. Also if the Eagles had Taylor I don't see them winning that super bowl. It's certainly possible we win with Foles. OTOH, Jax is the team that baited Big Ben into 5 INTs the first time they met. They specialize in deceptive coverage. Foles is far more of a passer than Tyrod, which is both blessing and curse. When he's confused by the coverage, Tyrod's primal QB instinct is to be cautious. Foles primal QB instinct is to trust his arm to get it there anyway. And Tyrod is far more able to cope with a sieve-like OL. So You may be wrong for all I know But you may be right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan130 Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 32 minutes ago, bobobonators said: I can take another year of Tyrod on the field. I can’t take another year of the Tyrod convo on these boards. The discussion becomes nauseating. Every week, win or loss, the conversation turns into how many yards did he throw for; how many progressions did he miss; bring out the All-22 experts; create 20 weekly threads about Tyrod sucking. Its brutal. It really is never ending. That’s half the reason I want him gone. The threads and the same posters making the same repetitive arguments and threads every single day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 6 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said: It's called a bridge QB. It's not required to have a HoF QB on board to take that path. I'm not going to get sucked further into the 26CB Circular Argument Carousel, where things are "just like Green Bay" until differences are pointed out, then there's some snarky shallow response. The point is: 1) teams who can allow a high draft pick QB to sit and develop, are generally speaking teams who have a QB they can win more than they lose with, in house. 2) having an expensive starting QB does not prevent a team from drafting a QB and seeing what they can develop 3) if the Bills want a "bridge QB" while a rookie takes 1-3 years to develop, who is that guy? Concepts are easy, as Da Bears have found out, finding quality NFL QB is hard. 4 minutes ago, billsfan11 said: It really is never ending. That’s half the reason I want him gone. The threads and the same posters making the same repetitive arguments and threads every single day That seems like a really dumb reason. This board does have an ignore feature. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grb Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 23 minutes ago, GG said: It doesn't matter that Dennison was running Kubiak's offense in Houston, because Dennison was running a version of it in Buffalo. If you're going to attribute Tyrod's weak passing to a deficient WR corps, what would you call Foles' supporting cast in St Louis? You saw a glimpse of the passing offense design being more dynamic with Peterman under center, and I will argue that Foles doesn't throw wounded ducks that are ripe for picking. There's a high probability that Matthews is far more effective early on with Foles as QB. Bottom line is that TT has led to 2 OCs getting the boot because he's not really a good QB I tell myself not to respond to this kind of nonsense but here I am : Quote : "You saw a glimpse of the passing offense design being more dynamic with Peterman under center" Facts : NP : 24 of 49, 49% 252 yds, 5.14 ypa, 2 tds, 21 yds, longest pass, 5 int, 2 fumbles, 12.1 qbr, 38.4 passer rating Quote : "If you're going to attribute Tyrod's weak passing to a deficient WR corps......" Fact : Whenever Taylor had Watkins and Woods on the field, this resulted : 63.6% comp. 8.25 YPA. 27 TD passes. 6 INTs Yeah. He's "not really a good QB" - except, of course, for the only time the Bills put a real pair of targets in the game with him. Then he was...... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 17 hours ago, Buffalo Bills Detective said: Tyrod + Lamar Jackson = worst case scenario, as they are pretty much the same player; Jackson just happens to be a bit taller. Wait, wait. A bunch of people just told me Jackson is nothing like Taylor. Someone's lying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted February 23, 2018 Share Posted February 23, 2018 Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said: I'm not going to get sucked further into the 26CB Circular Argument Carousel, where things are "just like Green Bay" until differences are pointed out, then there's some snarky shallow response. The point is: 1) teams who can allow a high draft pick QB to sit and develop, are generally speaking teams who have a QB they can win more than they lose with, in house. 2) having an expensive starting QB does not prevent a team from drafting a QB and seeing what they can develop 3) if the Bills want a "bridge QB" while a rookie takes 1-3 years to develop, who is that guy? Concepts are easy, as Da Bears have found out, finding quality NFL QB is hard. It's neither snarky nor shallow. I mentioned Rodgers because he was the example you initially used. Your #2 point doesn't make any sense because an expensive QB like Cousins is your guy at 29 years old. I just happen to think he's not a guy I'd want despite the big numbers that attract the eye of you and many others. We'll just agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts