Tyrod Taylor turning heads in Cleveland.

[Gugny]

6 minutes ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

What happens when:

 

1. Your QB throws an INT in the end zone and the DB is tackled immediately.

 

2. Your team punts the ball through the back of the end zone.

 

I'll help you out... both opposing offenses will start with the ball on their own 20. 

 

 

The point is that at the end of the day -- regardless of the situation -- the end result is the same: they have the ball and you don't. 

 

 

 

So, with your logic, at the beginning of each half- and after either team scores a touchdown or a field goal - the ensuing kickoff is a turnover.

Edited April 21, 2018 by Gugny

[Hapless Bills Fan]

17 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

The Browns are going to game plan for Taylor's strengths and surround him with talent. And the media will talk about what a Billsy move trading him was.

 

It is not impossible that Todd Haley will be able to construct an offense tailored, as it were, for Taylor.  Or at least that he will try.

 

However, to date, his ability to do that gets a resounding verdict of "not proven"

[Kirby Jackson]

4 minutes ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

What happens when:

 

1. Your QB throws an INT in the end zone and the DB is tackled immediately.

 

2. Your team punts the ball through the back of the end zone.

 

I'll help you out... both opposing offenses will start with the ball on their own 20. 

 

 

The point is that at the end of the day -- regardless of the situation -- the end result is the same: they have the ball and you don't. 

 

 

Which result gives the ball to the opposition in worse field position? You know the answer even as you try to defend another of your piss poor takes. Punting the ball away almost always leaves the opposition with worse field position than a turnover. Turnovers happen with 10 yards of the LOS often while punts are 40 yards down the field. 

 

Keep bringing these terrible takes though. The more you try to twist things the less credibility you have. 

[Cusefan66214]

On 4/19/2018 at 4:39 PM, PIZ said:

Part of Beane's master plan. Get Cleveland to think Tyrod is the guy for a few years, paving the way for Buffalo to trade up to #1.

 

 

To be clear, he isn’t turning heads with his actual quarterback play

[twoandfourteen]

1 hour ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

214 yards passing and 40 rushing per game is his career average over 42 starts. To me that’s him as a floor. So 250 ypg and less than 6 ints per season with a 90 ish passer rating. Certainly not greatness,  but not close to terrible. 

 

You've got to be kidding me. 

 

You clearly have absolutely no concept or understanding of what "floor" and "average" mean. 

 

Taylor has played in 44 games as the starting QB of the Bills.

 

30 of them have been under 230 yards passing. In fact, over 50% of his games as a starter have been under 200 yards passing. To expect 250 ypg from the guy is pure fantasy with a heavy dollop of delusion. You're far more likely to get 180 or less. 

 

A very smart, articulate, and enlightened poster once posted a breakdown of TT's career production. You should go take a look. 

 

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

9 hours ago, The Red King said:

 

Let me be crystal clear.  At no point did I say the JAX game was solely TT's fault.  But pointing out others' mistakes does not absolve TT of his.  My opinion of TT differs from most.  I think he's a good QB.  But he has his limits.  I think he is better then most TT detractors do and I think he is worse then most TT supporters.  The JAX game was a game that BUF needed TT to step up, and he didn't.  That is TT encapsulated.  It's rare to be able to point to a game and say "Yeah, TT lost that one for us."  But, at the same time, it is equally rare to be able to point to a game and say "Yeah, TT won that one for us."

I don't think TT is a good QB at all, I think we got so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so very lucky to even make it into the playoffs. I predicted before the game that Taylor would be ultra conservative and over throw passes so they would have no chance to be picked off. I would like to see a statistic for turnover that counts all INT's, Fumbles and every time the offense has to punt the football. If you add all that up I bet Taylor is in the top 3 for turnovers in 2017.

[twoandfourteen]

6 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Which result gives the ball to the opposition in worse field position? You know the answer even as you try to defend another of your piss poor takes. Punting the ball away almost always leaves the opposition with worse field position than a turnover. Turnovers happen with 10 yards of the LOS often while punts are 40 yards down the field. 

 

Keep bringing these terrible takes though. The more you try to twist things the less credibility you have. 

 

I'm not twisting anything. I'm simplifying things. 

 

You keep adding modifiers. I'm saying that when you strip away everything, the end result is the same. Sure, most of the time you put the other team further in their own end, but with offenses and elite QBs moving the ball the way they do now, field position is no where near as significant as you are making it out to be. 

 

TT avoiding INTs by not making throws results in the other team getting the ball with worse field position, but also guarantees he won't be scoring points or gaining yards either. You win the field position battle, but you've lost the game. 

[The Wiz]

All these comments and I'm surprised that crappy crayon drawing of taylor starring down KB and then checking down hasn't shown up yet.

[Kirby Jackson]

6 minutes ago, Call_Of_Ktulu said:

I don't think TT is a good QB at all, I think we got so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so very lucky to even make it into the playoffs. I predicted before the game that Taylor would be ultra conservative and over throw passes so they would have no chance to be picked off. I would like to see a statistic for turnover that counts all INT's, Fumbles and every time the offense has to punt the football. If you add all that up I bet Taylor is in the top 3 for turnovers in 2017.

Except even you would agree that punting the ball 40 yards down the field > than throwing a pick 6 yards from the LOS

[twoandfourteen]

15 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

So, with your logic, at the beginning of each half- and after either team scores a touchdown or a field goal - the ensuing kickoff is a turnover.

 

I suppose you could say that, in essence, yes -- you are giving possession to the other team. 

 

But it's not the same because a team has no choice in that situation. The kickoff is in the rules as part of the scoring sequence and to initiate gameplay. 

 

There is nothing in the rules about avoiding a throw on 3rd down because there's a DB near the WR and punting instead. 

[Kirby Jackson]

Just now, twoandfourteen said:

 

I'm not twisting anything. I'm simplifying things. 

 

You keep adding modifiers. I'm saying that when you strip away everything, the end result is the same. Sure, most of the time you put the other team further in their own end, but with offenses and elite QBs moving the ball the way they do now, field position is no where near as significant as you are making it out to be. 

 

TT avoiding INTs by not making throws results in the other team getting the ball with worse field position, but also guarantees he won't be scoring points or gaining yards either. You win the field position battle, but you've lost the game. 

You aren’t simplifying anything!! You are making yourself look really stupid. The end result isn’t the same!! So you think that handing someone the ball at your 30 and their 30 is the same? 

 

Apparently you don’t think this is important but teams that win the turnover battle have consistently been winning 78% of the games:

http://www.footballperspective.com/winning-the-turnover-battle/

 

 

[PromoTheRobot]

3 hours ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

7th ranked offense = 30th passing/1st rushing

 

There are no Russian judges assigning style points in football.

23 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

It is not impossible that Todd Haley will be able to construct an offense tailored, as it were, for Taylor.  Or at least that he will try.

 

However, to date, his ability to do that gets a resounding verdict of "not proven"

 

Because the Bills offensive geniuses kept trying to force Taylor into their pre-determined box, maybe?

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

7 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Except even you would agree that punting the ball 40 yards down the field > than throwing a pick 6 yards from the LOS

With the way offense's are moving the football turning the ball over is turning the ball over. I agree that turning over the ball at the LOS is worst than punting it 40 yards. 

[twoandfourteen]

6 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Except even you would agree that punting the ball 40 yards down the field > than throwing a pick 6 yards from the LOS

 

Of course. I can assume then, that you would agree that a QB throwing an INT on 3rd down at the other team's 37 > than a punt return for a TD, correct?

[Gugny]

5 minutes ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

Of course. I can assume then, that you would agree that a QB throwing an INT on 3rd down at the other team's 37 > than a punt return for a TD, correct?

 

Here it is in the simplest of terms:

 

A turnover is when a team unintentionally gives the ball to the other team.

 

When a team punts, they are intentionally giving the ball to the other team.

 

Therefore, they are not the same - even though the end result (the other team getting the ball) is the same.

[twoandfourteen]

7 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

There are no Russian judges assigning style points in football.

 

Because the Bills offensive geniuses kept trying to force Taylor into their pre-determined box, maybe?

 

True -- but we are clearly discussing Tyrod's production as a QB and his contribution to that "7th ranked offense".

 

The reality is that the guy contributed very little as a passer. He's a better-than-average, competent backup QB -- probably in the 35-40 range if you're looking at league QBs as a whole after this upcoming draft. 

 

His greatest attribute as a QB was not in what he was able TO do, but in what he DIDN'T do. At least, that's what all you Team Tyrod guys say. 

Just now, Gugny said:

 

Here it is in the simplest of terms:

 

A turnover is when a team unintentionally gives the ball to the other team.

 

When a team punts, they are intentionally giving the ball to the other team.

 

Therefore, they are not the same - even though the end result (the other team getting the ball) is the same.

 

Correct -- I have been focused on that end result this whole time.  

 

The two occurrences ultimately have the same end result. 

 

 

Now, back to the curious case of Tyrod Taylor... which is generally better?

 

8 drives that end in 8 punts or 8 drives that end in 2 INTs, 3 punts, 1 FG, 2 TDs?

 

 

[Gugny]

7 minutes ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

Now, back to the curious case of Tyrod Taylor... which is generally better?

 

8 drives that end in 8 punts or 8 drives that end in 2 INTs, 3 punts, 1 FG, 2 TDs?

 

 

 

 

The 8 drives that end in 2 INTs, 3 punts, 1 FG and 2 TDs would be the better drives.

 

Both drives, however, would indicate that the QB sucks.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

11 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Hotrod holds the record for highest completion percentage in Buffalo Bills franchise history.

You can keep holding on to the great stats for the worst passing offense 3 years running.   

 

I’m not fooled.  

[Kirby Jackson]

21 minutes ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

Of course. I can assume then, that you would agree that a QB throwing an INT on 3rd down at the other team's 37 > than a punt return for a TD, correct?

I would, but I’m sure that you’d agree a turnover is more likely to result in a TD than a punt. If not, there are plenty of facts that can be provided to confirm.

1 minute ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

You can keep holding on to the great stats for the worst passing offense 3 years running.   

 

I’m not fooled.  

Where we differ is I don’t care about “passing offense.” I care about points and wins. I don’t care if we win like Army or Navy. Last year the Bills offense regressed but top 10 DVOA and scoring in back-to-back years is plenty good enough for me. If we didn’t have Rex ruining the defense (should have just kept Schwartz) that team could have contended. 

[twoandfourteen]

35 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

You aren’t simplifying anything!! You are making yourself look really stupid. The end result isn’t the same!! So you think that handing someone the ball at your 30 and their 30 is the same? 

 

Apparently you don’t think this is important but teams that win the turnover battle have consistently been winning 78% of the games:

http://www.footballperspective.com/winning-the-turnover-battle/

 

 

 

And then you have Tyrod with the other 22% of those games, haha. 

 

The point I'm making here is this -- yes, obviously you want to avoid turnovers. But that's only really valuable if you are throwing the ball, gaining 1st downs, and scoring TDs, like Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers. 

 

If you are artificially avoiding turnovers by not putting passes in places that result in yards, 1st downs, and TDs -- like Tyrod Taylor -- then that is just as detrimental to your ability to win games as is throwing a bunch of INTs. Taylor actually loses you games, it's just not as obvious.

Edited April 21, 2018 by twoandfourteen

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

9 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

 

The 8 drives that end in 2 INTs, 3 punts, 1 FG and 2 TDs would be the better drives.

 

Both drives, however, would indicate that the QB sucks.

I love how “examples” are used to try to make someone look good.  

 

Like this one.  

[PromoTheRobot]

30 minutes ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

True -- but we are clearly discussing Tyrod's production as a QB and his contribution to that "7th ranked offense".

 

The reality is that the guy contributed very little as a passer. He's a better-than-average, competent backup QB -- probably in the 35-40 range if you're looking at league QBs as a whole after this upcoming draft. 

 

His greatest attribute as a QB was not in what he was able TO do, but in what he DIDN'T do. At least, that's what all you Team Tyrod guys say. 

 

Correct -- I have been focused on that end result this whole time.  

 

The two occurrences ultimately have the same end result. 

 

 

Now, back to the curious case of Tyrod Taylor... which is generally better?

 

8 drives that end in 8 punts or 8 drives that end in 2 INTs, 3 punts, 1 FG, 2 TDs?

 

 

Well I guess we'll have to wait and see how Tyrod looks throwing to actual NFL wide receivers instead of practice squad rejects.

 

As for how much credit Tyrod gets for leading the #7 scoring offense in 2016, you are being disingenuous when you try to argue that because Taylor was lacking in one category that he made no impact. His unique skills made him a challenge to defend and forced teams to adjust to him. The fact the Bills misused him and gutted his receiver corps are not Taylor's shortcomings but a handicap forced on him by coaching staffs that lacked imagination and the ability to get out of their own ways.

Edited April 21, 2018 by PromoTheRobot

[Kirby Jackson]

59 minutes ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

And then you have Tyrod with the other 22% of those games, haha. 

 

The point I'm making here is this -- yes, obviously you want to avoid turnovers. But that's only really valuable if you are throwing the ball, gaining 1st downs, and scoring TDs. 

 

If you are artificially avoiding turnovers by not putting passes in places that result in yards, 1st downs, and TDs -- like Tyrod Taylor does -- then that is just as detrimental to your ability to win games as is throwing a bunch of INTs. Taylor actually loses you games, it's just not as obvious.

So, it’s intutitive? Your point might hold true if the Bills didn’t win more than they lost with Tyrod starting. Before you go into some rant about “they won despite him” they lost every game that he hasn’t started the last 3 years until Indy this year. So they barely beat an awful football team, at home, in a blizzard. They have losses to a bad Jets, a bad Jags, a decent Charger and decent Bengals team (at home). The Bills didn’t win “despite” Tyrod. He was (and is) a solid game manager. He’s a guy you can win with (as evidenced by his winning record) but don’t win because of. We are all hoping that the next guy is a guy that you win because of. Your constant lumping of Tyrod in with the other scrubs is why people always go at you. Let it go or continue to absorb facts disputing all of your posts. 

Edited April 21, 2018 by Kirby Jackson

[K-9]

1 hour ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

What happens when:

 

1. Your QB throws an INT in the end zone and the DB is tackled immediately.

 

2. Your team punts the ball through the back of the end zone.

 

I'll help you out... both opposing offenses will start with the ball on their own 20. 

 

 

The point is that at the end of the day -- regardless of the situation -- the end result is the same: they have the ball and you don't. 

 

 

What was the line of scrimmage when the QB threw the ball? Anything inside the 40 and that INT and touchback just took the offense out of FG range. 

[twoandfourteen]

2 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

So, it’s intutitive? Your point might hold true if the Bills didn’t win more than they lost with Tyrod starting. Before you go into some rant about “they won despite him” they lost every game that he hasn’t started the last 3 years until Indy this year. So they barely beat an awful football team, at home, in a blizzard. They have losses to a bad Jets, a bad Jags, a decent Charger and decent Bengals team (at home). The Bills didn’t win “despite” Tyrod. He was (and is) a solid game manager. He’s a guy you can win with (as evidenced by his winning record) but don’t win because of. We are all hoping that the next guy is a guy that you win because of. Your constant limping of Tyrod in with the other scrubs is why people always go at you. Let it go or continue to absorb facts disputing all of your posts. 

 

Come on, you're better than this. 

 

Taylor's "winning" record is 22-20... and he was .500 up until last season, where there were multiple games that the team won "despite" his poor play. Also, he has never put the team on his back and "willed" them to victory like an actual starting-calibre QB. He sure has lost them a bunch of games, though. 

 

He's exactly what I've been saying he is -- a competent backup. A guy that can give you 2 or 3 wins and hold down the fort if your real starter goes down for 4 or 5 games. 

[teef]

And now this thread has evolved from being angry, to being bizarre. 

[twoandfourteen]

4 minutes ago, K-9 said:

What was the line of scrimmage when the QB threw the ball? Anything inside the 40 and that INT and touchback just took the offense out of FG range. 

 

Well, if you're inside the 40 then punting isn't an option -- so for this exercise it's not in FG range. 

[JohnC]

9 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

So, it’s intutitive? Your point might hold true if the Bills didn’t win more than they lost with Tyrod starting. Before you go into some rant about “they won despite him” they lost every game that he hasn’t started the last 3 years until Indy this year. So they barely beat an awful football team, at home, in a blizzard. They have losses to a bad Jets, a bad Jags, a decent Charger and decent Bengals team (at home). The Bills didn’t win “despite” Tyrod. He was (and is) a solid game manager. He’s a guy you can win with (as evidenced by his winning record) but don’t win because of. We are all hoping that the next guy is a guy that you win because of. Your constant limping of Tyrod in with the other scrubs is why people always go at you. Let it go or continue to absorb facts disputing all of your posts. 

Kirby, I say this with kindness: Let it go! Taylor plays for the Browns and the past is the past. 

 

 

[K-9]

1 minute ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

Well, if you're inside the 40 then punting isn't an option -- so for this exercise it's not in FG range. 

OK, thanks for specifying. 

 

What is the LOS and what is the down and distance before the INT was thrown? 

[twoandfourteen]

2 minutes ago, teef said:

And now this thread has evolved from being angry, to being bizarre. 

 

Less than a week to the draft, bro.

 

 

[Ol Dirty B]

What else would Cleveland say? We regret the trade we made a month ago or whatever? This is nothing. We get enough useless news out of the Bills I don't need more from other teams.

[row_33]

6 minutes ago, teef said:

And now this thread has evolved from being angry, to being bizarre. 

 

That’s the genius of it.

[Teddy KGB]

21 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Well I guess we'll have to wait and see how Tyrod looks throwing to actual NFL wide receivers instead of practice squad rejects.

 

As for how much credit Tyrod gets for leading the #7 scoring offense in 2016, you are being disingenuous when you try to argue that because Taylor was lacking in one category that he made no impact. His unique skills made him a challenge to defend and forced teams to adjust to him. The fact the Bills misused him and gutted his receiver corps are not Taylor's shortcomings but a handicap forced on him by coaching staffs that lacked imagination and the ability to get out of their own ways.

 

 

This is it.         Just get Badol, ScottLaw, and Hemet to sign the bottom and we have the constitution of the COT.   

 

Clear, concise, and chock full of excuses ???

 

Gilleslie and McCoy should have given half their checks to Taylor for helping them run. 

 

 

Edited April 21, 2018 by Teddy KGB

[4thandGoal]

I am hoping he does great and he has a great chance to show what he is worth as they will booster that line and they will have weapons for him....and i hope we beat him in thr AFC championship game

[Kirby Jackson]

46 minutes ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

Come on, you're better than this. 

 

Taylor's "winning" record is 22-20... and he was .500 up until last season, where there were multiple games that the team won "despite" his poor play. Also, he has never put the team on his back and "willed" them to victory like an actual starting-calibre QB. He sure has lost them a bunch of games, though. 

 

He's exactly what I've been saying he is -- a competent backup. A guy that can give you 2 or 3 wins and hold down the fort if your real starter goes down for 4 or 5 games. 

His record was above .500 going into last year. Unless you want to give Matt Cassel credit for taking 1 snap on a trick play (and Tyrod did start anyways). So you’re wrong. 

 

You debating that that he is a solid game manager is why I keep coming at you. There are a million things to support it including his $18M salary. He’s Tannehill or Dalton. We all agree that you can upgrade but to pretend that he is EJ or Losman just makes you look like you have an agenda. There is nothing that supports it. 

[Bakin]

Let’s not forget who helped to lead this team to its first playoff game in 17 years. 

I won’t. 

His name was Tyrod. 

 

He had his moments. 

Without him - we would have been 0-16. 

[twoandfourteen]

31 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

His record was above .500 going into last year. Unless you want to give Matt Cassel credit for taking 1 snap on a trick play (and Tyrod did start anyways). So you’re wrong. 

 

You debating that that he is a solid game manager is why I keep coming at you. There are a million things to support it including his $18M salary. He’s Tannehill or Dalton. We all agree that you can upgrade but to pretend that he is EJ or Losman just makes you look like you have an agenda. There is nothing that supports it. 

 

He's definitely not "Tannehill" or "Dalton". Those are mid-level legitimate starting QBs, Dalton more than Tannehill. They can actually "win" you a game or two with a big throw. Taylor can't, hasn't or won't.

 

All you have to do is go and look at a certain 4th & 12 play in Baltimore from last season to see the difference.  

 

 

Interesting that you bring up JP.... in his only full season as a starter, his numbers looked awfully familiar: 3051 yards, 19 TDs, 190 yds/gm... of course, there were 14 INTs, too. 

 

Taylor's been ~3000 yds/season, ~20 TDs, 201.3 yds/gm..... ~6 INTs/season.

 

Really, the only thing separating Taylor & Losman is 8 INTs, or .5 INTs/gm. 

 

Of course, Tyrod is obviously a better QB than JPL... but he's definitely closer to JP Losman than he is to Andy Dalton. 

 

(By the way, EJ averaged 197.2 yds/gm as a rookie... just saying.)

54 minutes ago, Bakin said:

Let’s not forget who helped to lead this team to its first playoff game in 17 years. 

I won’t. 

His name was Tyrod. 

 

He had his moments. 

Without him - we would have been 0-16. 

 

Which ones?

[buffalobloodfloridahome]

He will be turning stomachs before long with so many missed opportunities down field. You could put Randy Moss and Megatron out there with him and the RB would still catch all the screens he throws. He can't make many throws past 15 yards.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

...Jesus the kid is gone....to the chagrin of some as well as the "cheering in the streets" contingent of others......so why the hell re-hash the 35,397 re-hash threads already in the archives?.....SMH......now let's talk about EJ and...............

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, K-9 said:

What was the line of scrimmage when the QB threw the ball? Anything inside the 40 and that INT and touchback just took the offense out of FG range. 

 

K-9 has a salient point.  If you're going to categorize a pass on 3rd down as "essentially a punt", you need to exclude the possibility of high-percentage points on 4th down.