Report: Baker Mayfield not ready to compete with Tyrod Taylor

[Bing Bong]

On 6/22/2018 at 11:57 PM, The Red King said:

It doesn't have to be one or the other.  Good lord.

 

I am getting sick of TT supporters thinking that anyone who doesn't support him must think he's terrible.  And I'm sick of TT detractors thinking anyone who says he isn't terrible believes he's an outstanding QB.  There is a middle ground and some people, like me, are there.  I think Tyrod has his positives and negatives.  I think he was a good QB for the Bills, but it was obvious last season the team finally outgrew him.  They finally needed more then he could provide.  I think he is a perfect fit in Cleveland right now.  His ability to not make mistakes provides a stability that, for the Browns, outweighs Tyrod's inability/unwillingness to throw deep.  Tyrod can take them to 4-6 wins which, after 1-15 and 0-16 would be quite well received.  By the time the team outgrows Tyrod, Mayfield will be ready to go.

 

I am just sick of the "If yer not for us, yer 'gainst us!" attitude here.  Not everyone is a TT supporter or detractor.

Honestly I don't see anybody really lamenting losing Tyrod, or fighting people on his behalf. I'm on the Tyrod side of the spectrum and I just don't want to hear he sucks. Is that too much to ask for when there are people saying Peterman's the destined one? Go Pete, go Bills and all, but have respect for NFL players that don't have a 1:3 TD to pick ratio.i'm not going to say matt Moore sucks, Derek Anderson sucks, they are great, get paid a lot of money for a reason lol.

[Buffalo716]

1 minute ago, Royale with Cheese said:

If you're using the rest of the world to evaluate the level of talent in the NFL, then not a single player who plays in the NFL sucks.

 

 

None really “suck” ... the worst dude in the NFL has more talent in his pinky than any football player here

 

i was a damn good football player and I couldn’t even get a camp tryout after college 

 

its all about scheme fit and how much you want it... yea , u might dislike a player because you perceive him to “suck” but he doesn’t suck... everyone around him is just much better 

[Bing Bong]

6 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

If you're using the rest of the world to evaluate the level of talent in the NFL, then not a single player who plays in the NFL sucks.

 

Spot on. They don't. At all. they get paid a lot of money and if they last, get it for a long time. I'll set the bar that flameouts like Tebow suck sure.. Trent Richardson.

 

Jeff Tuel. Give that label to the players that had no business getting drafted or signing as rookie free agents. It's a speculative league and I guarantee a lot of talent gets missed on, while others get a shot they don't deserve

Edited June 25, 2018 by PetermanThrew5Picks

[Royale with Cheese]

Just now, Buffalo716 said:

 

None really “suck” ... the worst dude in the NFL has more talent in his pinky than any football player here

 

i was a damn good football player and I couldn’t even get a camp tryout after college 

 

its all about scheme fit and how much you want it... yea , u might dislike a player because you perceive him to “suck” but he doesn’t suck... everyone around him is just much better 

 

That's what I was trying to get at.  Talent should be measured and compared among your peers.

 

The guy that can't consistently stay on a 53 man, journey man is still a total bad ass compared to everyone in levels below him.  Compared to the field of the NFL.....not a total bad ass. 

[Bing Bong]

Just now, Royale with Cheese said:

 

That's what I was trying to get at.  Talent should be measured and compared among your peers.

 

The guy that can't consistently stay on a 53 man, journey man is still a total bad ass compared to everyone in levels below him.  Compared to the field of the NFL.....not a total bad ass. 

Tyrod CAN consistently stay on a roster.. he will for the rest of his career. this has been my whole point.

 

Peterman's on borrowed time, but I'm rooting for him. Rooted for Tuel, rooted for Levi Brown.

[John from Riverside]

16 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

Preach brutha. He'll be in the league as long as he wants to. As a bad to mediocre starter, or one of the best backups. His career is destined to be a shorter version of Fitzpatspicks

 

 

.. which is awesome for a 6th round pick. I get triggered when people say he sucks. He's only one of the top 40 quarterbacks in the world. He must suck right.

I cant stand it when ppl say he sucks either.....he is not a franchise guy but "suck"

 

Just lazy broke thinking

[Royale with Cheese]

4 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

Spot on. They don't. At all. they get paid a lot of money and if they last, get it for a long time. I'll set the bar that flameouts like Tebow suck sure.. Trent Richardson.

 

Jeff Tuel. Give that label to the players that had no business getting drafted or signing as rookie free agents. It's a speculative league and I guarantee a lot of talent gets missed on, while others get a shot they don't deserve

 

My HS QB was an All American, in every HS magazine before signing with Tennessee when the Vols were good.

As a WR, I felt like he threw the ball on a rope.  It hurt my hands catching his passes sometimes.  What's crazy is his scouting report when he got to college....below average arm.  How ******* hard do these NFL QB's throw the ball?

2 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

Tyrod CAN consistently stay on a roster.. he will for the rest of his career. this has been my whole point.

 

Peterman's on borrowed time, but I'm rooting for him. Rooted for Tuel, rooted for Levi Brown.

 

 I wasn't referencing Tyrod in my example....just any journeyman.  

[Buffalo716]

1 minute ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

That's what I was trying to get at.  Talent should be measured and compared among your peers.

 

The guy that can't consistently stay on a 53 man, journey man is still a total bad ass compared to everyone in levels below him.  Compared to the field of the NFL.....not a total bad ass. 

 

Completely agree... and that is why everybody picks apart QBs sooo much 

 

there are only 32 NFL starting QBs in the world... and how many are actually NFL caliber starters? 15-20? 

 

You can take the MVP QB from the Japanese league... he is probably a stud... but bring him over to America and he will fold quickly ... 

 

its all about being relative to your peers... and when you look drastically worse, they usually say you suck lol

[Royale with Cheese]

4 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

 

Completely agree... and that is why everybody picks apart QBs sooo much 

 

there are only 32 NFL starting QBs in the world... and how many are actually NFL caliber starters? 15-20? 

 

You can take the MVP QB from the Japanese league... he is probably a stud... but bring him over to America and he will fold quickly ... 

 

its all about being relative to your peers... and when you look drastically worse, they usually say you suck lol

 

Baseball is the same way.  You've got guys in the Minor Leagues scouted from all over the world that can throw 100 mph or can hit 500 foot homeruns.  Why are they still in the minors?  They can't play consistently to be in the MLB.  

Edited June 25, 2018 by Royale with Cheese

[Buffalo716]

1 minute ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Baseball is the same way.  You've got guys in the Minor Leagues that can throw 100 mph or can hit 500 foot homeruns.  Why are they still in the minors?  They can't play consistently to be in the MLB.  

 

I bet. I couldn’t even imagine how hard it is playing in the show... 162 games in like 185 days

 

the best players in the world at every position... you need consistency or you will never even get called up

12 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

My HS QB was an All American, in every HS magazine before signing with Tennessee when the Vols were good.

As a WR, I felt like he threw the ball on a rope.  It hurt my hands catching his passes sometimes.  What's crazy is his scouting report when he got to college....below average arm.  How ******* hard do these NFL QB's throw the ball?

 

 I wasn't referencing Tyrod in my example....just any journeyman.  

 

That is crazy about your HS QB and I bet he could still zip it even though reports say he has a “weaker arm”

 

That just shows you the QB talent in D1 football... To you he had a cannon, but to scouts they thought it was a bit weak lol

 

thank God I never played full time WR became I hate catching heaters ?

[The Red King]

26 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

Honestly I don't see anybody really lamenting losing Tyrod, or fighting people on his behalf. I'm on the Tyrod side of the spectrum and I just don't want to hear he sucks. Is that too much to ask for when there are people saying Peterman's the destined one? Go Pete, go Bills and all, but have respect for NFL players that don't have a 1:3 TD to pick ratio.i'm not going to say matt Moore sucks, Derek Anderson sucks, they are great, get paid a lot of money for a reason lol.

 

There are a number of people who think Tyrod would have excelled here had Buffalo kept him and instead of Allen instead picked up some receivers...and those people insist Buffalo should have done just that.  And you, yourself, note there are people here that claim he sucks.  My post was simply frustration at getting blasted by both groups because I have a middle-ground view of him.

 

Also, the Bills did not start Peterman because they thought he was better then TT.  They started him because the team was in a tailspin and they thought Peterman might be better.  They knew TT wasn't the long-term answer, and wanted to see what Peterman could do.  They knew they had a decision to make in the offseason.  And they wanted a good look at Peterman going into it.  How many "Make Peterman the starter and don't draft a QB!" threads were there this offseason?  Zero.  How many would there have been had Peterman not gotten a start (aside from the Hoth game, which he looked good in)?  They knew what TT could do, and knew it wouldn't be enough to win a playoff game.  They didn't know what Peterman could do, and decided it was worth at least checking.  At no point did they think Peterman was better.  They simply didn't know, and I hate the mistaken assertion some make that think they did indeed believe that.

[Royale with Cheese]

19 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

 

I bet. I couldn’t even imagine how hard it is playing in the show... 162 games in like 185 days

 

the best players in the world at every position... you need consistency or you will never even get called up

 

That is crazy about your HS QB and I bet he could still zip it even though reports say he has a “weaker arm”

 

That just shows you the QB talent in D1 football... To you he had a cannon, but to scouts they thought it was a bit weak lol

 

thank God I never played full time WR became I hate catching heaters ?

 

I grew up with the guy and he was in a mans body when he was 13 years old.

I bet if I caught passes from him now, I could probably feel more of an average arm.

 

When I was catching passes from him in HS, I was probably 140 lbs.  He was 6''4 and 215.  

I'm now not 140 lbs and 16 years old.

[Buffalo716]

2 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

I grew up with the guy and he was in a mans body when he was 13 years old.

I bet if I caught passes from him now, I could probably feel more of an average arm.

 

When I was catching passes from him in HS, I was probably 140 lbs.  He was 6''4 and 215.  

I'm now not 140 lbs and 16 years old.

 

Hahahahah lmao

 

my Freshmen year I was 5’8 137 pounds and I was starting on JV and got called up to varsity late in the year lol And I really felt like the small new guy in prison lmao

[Rocky Landing]

2 hours ago, Buffalo716 said:

 

Completely agree... and that is why everybody picks apart QBs sooo much 

 

there are only 32 NFL starting QBs in the world... and how many are actually NFL caliber starters? 15-20? 

 

You can take the MVP QB from the Japanese league... he is probably a stud... but bring him over to America and he will fold quickly ... 

 

its all about being relative to your peers... and when you look drastically worse, they usually say you suck lol

Now that this thread has fallen onto pure semantics, I would nitpick the above, bolded statement. It is illogical.

 

All 32 starting QBs are NFL caliber. The range that currently exists literally defines that caliber. Currently, NFL caliber would be defined as Brady*/Rogers, down to Paxton Lynch, or whomever is the crappiest, current starter. Taylor lands around the middle of that scale. 

[Buffalo716]

5 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

Now that this thread has fallen onto pure semantics, I would nitpick the above, bolded statement. It is illogical.

 

All 32 starting QBs are NFL caliber. The range that currently exists literally defines that caliber. Currently, NFL caliber would be defined as Brady*/Rogers, down to Paxton Lynch, or whomever is the crappiest, current starter. Taylor lands around the middle of that scale. 

 

No, I said actually starting caliber. Meaning boarderline franchise QB and can take your team to the playoffs

 

All 32 starting QBs are not of that caliber , though they are all NFL quality QBs

[Success]

It’s so hard to gauge Taylor.  Especially last year - terrible OC, bad line, pretty mediocre receivers.  And the year before, he ran a top10 offense.

 

A lot of it with him is eye test stuff, which isn’t very reliable.  It wouldn’t shock me if he did great in Cleveland.  

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

24 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

 

No, I said actually starting caliber. Meaning boarderline franchise QB and can take your team to the playoffs

 

All 32 starting QBs are not of that caliber , though they are all NFL quality QBs

 

...if you think about it from the perspective that only 1,696 are good enough to earn NFL jobs despite the hundreds or thousands chasing their dream, hard to attach the "suck" moniker to any of them......of course they vary in skill set, ability, etc., but the 1,696 is a pretty elite group IMO.....

[Buffalo716]

8 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...if you think about it from the perspective that only 1,696 are good enough to earn NFL jobs despite the hundreds or thousands chasing their dream, hard to attach the "suck" moniker to any of them......of course they vary in skill set, ability, etc., but the 1,696 is a pretty elite group IMO.....

 

Thats why I don’t ever say player xyz sucks in the NFL... they just aren’t as good as their peers

8 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...if you think about it from the perspective that only 1,696 are good enough to earn NFL jobs despite the hundreds or thousands chasing their dream, hard to attach the "suck" moniker to any of them......of course they vary in skill set, ability, etc., but the 1,696 is a pretty elite group IMO.....

 

People used to say Fitz sucked all the time and that is such a laughable statement lmao

 

he has thrown TD passes for like 6 different NFL teams, won games with like 5 teams

 

and has like 27,000 passing yards and 170 TDs in the NFL lmao

Edited June 25, 2018 by Buffalo716

[Bing Bong]

4 hours ago, The Red King said:

They knew what TT could do, and knew it wouldn't be enough to win a playoff game.  They didn't know what Peterman could do, and decided it was worth at least checking.  At no point did they think Peterman was better.  They simply didn't know, and I hate the mistaken assertion some make that think they did indeed believe that.

Eh Tyrod was good enough to get us in the playoffs. All I wanted for that year. And I think a FO would be out of it's mind if they hypothetically never played Peterman and didn't go quarterback next draft because "they just don't know how good this 5th rounder could be!". Or vice versa and play him "this 5th rounder isn't that bad! Let's just roll with him next year"

 

Peterman would have had to have played insanely good. Even if he has a solid 200 yard 2 TD game, we lose.. whatever, we were gonna go QB unless an absolute miracle happened. I think it would have been the same situation if Peterman was average to good, they'd like him, and still bring in a 1st rounder to compete.

 

You're probably right because I can't think of another explanation.. I just think it's stupid haha. We were going to do exactly what we did this off-season no matter what so why was the FO thinking anything regarding the offseason in the middle of the playoff hunt. If the explanation is they thought their 5th rounder could have been Tom Brady or Dak they were banking on an unprecedented assumption, betting on a 1 in a thousand's chance and jeapordizing the season.

 

Like.. where was this support for Levi Brown, literally any quarterback drafted late for any team. Dolphins never threw in Fales until elimination, Broncos never threw in Chad Kelly over Semen or Paxton, Lions never threw in Brad Kaaya, Niners threw in CJ Beathard out of necessity, he played as well as a rook could, quarterbacked their first win, yet they still traded for Garoppolo! They weren't saying "well if he doesn't suck, we know we need absolutely no plan B!". It's unprecedented, teams hedge their bets. No late round rookie quarterback has started in a mid season switch for a 500+ team ever, barring injury necessity.

 

I want to believe Peterman was crushing it in practice and then lost his swagger after the Chargers game. That the coaches were thinking about best chance of making the playoffs not "hmm we might not have to go QB in the draft.. this just might work". 

[Bing Bong]

1 hour ago, Buffalo716 said:

 

Thats why I don’t ever say player xyz sucks in the NFL... they just aren’t as good as their peers

 

People used to say Fitz sucked all the time and that is such a laughable statement lmao

 

he has thrown TD passes for like 6 different NFL teams, won games with like 5 teams

 

and has like 27,000 passing yards and 170 TDs in the NFL lmao

He's passed for the 62nd most yards in NFL history thus far. Like.. set your bar lower folks, there have been hundreds of quartebacks drafted ahead of him that haven't even sniffed more than 2 or 3 seasons.

[The Red King]

11 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

Eh Tyrod was good enough to get us in the playoffs. All I wanted for that year. And I think a FO would be out of it's mind if they hypothetically never played Peterman and didn't go quarterback next draft because "they just don't know how good this 5th rounder could be!". Or vice versa and play him "this 5th rounder isn't that bad! Let's just roll with him next year"

 

Peterman would have had to have played insanely good. Even if he has a solid 200 yard 2 TD game, we lose.. whatever, we were gonna go QB unless an absolute miracle happened. I think it would have been the same situation if Peterman was average to good, they'd like him, and still bring in a 1st rounder to compete.

 

You're probably right because I can't think of another explanation.. I just think it's stupid haha. We were going to do exactly what we did this off-season no matter what so why was the FO thinking anything regarding the offseason in the middle of the playoff hunt. If the explanation is they thought their 5th rounder could have been Tom Brady or Dak they were banking on an unprecedented assumption, betting on a 1 in a thousand's chance and jeapordizing the season.

 

Like.. where was this support for Levi Brown, literally any quarterback drafted late for any team. Dolphins never threw in Fales until elimination, Broncos never threw in Chad Kelly over Semen or Paxton, Lions never threw in Brad Kaaya, Niners threw in CJ Beathard out of necessity, he played as well as a rook could, quarterbacked their first win, yet they still traded for Garoppolo! They weren't saying "well if he doesn't suck, we know we need absolutely no plan B!". It's unprecedented, teams hedge their bets. No late round rookie quarterback has started in a mid season switch for a 500+ team ever, barring injury necessity.

 

I want to believe Peterman was crushing it in practice and then lost his swagger after the Chargers game. That the coaches were thinking about best chance of making the playoffs not "hmm we might not have to go QB in the draft.. this just might work". 

 

Even if it was a 1-in-a-100 chance, they figured it was worth taking.  The team was in a death spiral, and say what you will, the team did pull out of it the following game.  I'll still firmly hold to it being a two-fold benefit.  Find out what you got going into the off-season, and taking the chance, because they knew TT wasn't going to win a playoff game (prophetic, give TT's performance in JAX) and figuring even a long shot was better then no shot.  One game may not have been enough to fully evaluate Peterman, but I'd wager if he even played half-decently he'd have gotten the start at KC.  It's just, they rolled the dice and got snake eyes.  They then decided Peterman wasn't ready yet and at that point was not going to be an upgrade over TT...so they instead decided to just throw TT back in and take their chances.

Edited June 26, 2018 by The Red King

[Buffalo716]

4 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

He's passed for the 62nd most yards in NFL history thus far. Like.. set your bar lower folks, there have been hundreds of quartebacks drafted ahead of him that haven't even sniffed more than 2 or 3 seasons.

 

Absolutely. He is one of the best 7th round QBs in modern history lol 

 

Sure he had flaws but he was much better than a lot give him credit for . He was throwing to Stevie J(7th rounder), Donald jones(UDFA) and David Nelson(UDFA)and made Stevie a house hold name

[Augie]

Baker was ready for Cowherd.  ?

[Bing Bong]

2 minutes ago, The Red King said:

 

Even if it was a 1-in-a-100 chance, they figured it was worth taking.  The team was in a death spiral, and say what you will, the team did pull out of it the following game.  I'll still firmly hold to it being a two-fold benefit.  Find out what you got going into the off-season, and taking the chance, because they knew TT wasn't going to win a playoff game (prophetic, give TT's performance in JAX) and figuring even a long shot was better then no shot.  One game may not have been enough to fully evaluate Peterman, but I'd wager if he even played half-decently he'd have gotten the start at KC.  It's just, they rolled the dice and got snake eyes.  They then decided Peterman wasn't ready yet and at that point was not going to be an upgrade over TT...so they instead decided to just throw TT back in and take their chances.

So a 1-100 chance is fine. But you seriously don't think Tyrod wins more than 1 out of 100 games against the Jaguars? It's the double standard I dislike.

 

Peterman's play wouldn't have made jack on their off-season decision regarding quarterback. Tyrod's performance was prophetic? and Peterman's performance was a shot worth taking because IT COULD HAVE BEEN AMAZING. 

 

Like do you see how I can turn that around? Peterman's performance was pretty prophetic for a 5th round rookie in his first start with horrible surrounding cast against an elite pass rush. But boy the 1-10 chance Tyrod has to beat the Jaguars.. gotta go with those odds right. 

 

No matter what.. unless Peterman threw for 3 to 4 TDs every game the rest of the year.. we're drafting a Quarterback. Rookies literally have NEVER done that.

[The Red King]

12 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

So a 1-100 chance is fine. But you seriously don't think Tyrod wins more than 1 out of 100 games against the Jaguars? It's the double standard I dislike.

 

Peterman's play wouldn't have made jack on their off-season decision regarding quarterback. Tyrod's performance was prophetic? and Peterman's performance was a shot worth taking because IT COULD HAVE BEEN AMAZING. 

 

Like do you see how I can turn that around? Peterman's performance was pretty prophetic for a 5th round rookie in his first start with horrible surrounding cast against an elite pass rush. But boy the 1-10 chance Tyrod has to beat the Jaguars.. gotta go with those odds right. 

 

No matter what.. unless Peterman threw for 3 to 4 TDs every game the rest of the year.. we're drafting a Quarterback. Rookies literally have NEVER done that.

 

What double-standard?  Tyrod didn't get 100 tries against the Jags.  He got one.  The Bills knew it would take a miracle for TT to win a playoff game, so they tried Peterman just in case.  The difference here that renders your assertion irrelevant was...the Chargers game was not a playoff game.  If Buffalo (and Peterman) lost badly (and they did), the Bills could still put Tyrod back in for the rest of the season.  They do that, they still have a shot at the playoffs...and giving TT a shot in a playoff game...all of which still happened (with TT laying an egg and validating the staff's assessment of him).  So no, there was absolutely no double-standard there.  Regular Season vs. Playoffs, apples and oranges.  If they just up and threw Peterman in against JAX ala Rob Johnson, then you could claim double-standard.  And I would have considered that just as foolish a move as starting Rob was.

Edited June 26, 2018 by The Red King

[Bing Bong]

25 minutes ago, The Red King said:

It's just, they rolled the dice and got snake eyes.  They then decided Peterman wasn't ready yet

Like.. I think you're right too. Just has me more frustrated at the FO decision. Had we not drafted Peterman the logical equivalent would have been signing any undrafted rookie to start that game, and have no repercussions to your decision making because "this quarteback has never played, so he could be super good, beats having a quarterback we've seen have a few good games" so theoretically any virtually unknown quarterback is better than a quarter back that has played a game because a. He could be so so good we don't know and b. Heck we don't even need to draft a Quarterback in the offseason.

 

Why not just sign an undrafted rookie every week every year until one day all the **** you're flinging at the wall starts to stick.

[Lfod]

12 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

Like.. I think you're right too. Just has me more frustrated at the FO decision. Had we not drafted Peterman the logical equivalent would have been signing any undrafted rookie to start that game, and have no repercussions to your decision making because "this quarteback has never played, so he could be super good, beats having a quarterback we've seen have a few good games" so theoretically any virtually unknown quarterback is better than a quarter back that has played a game because a. He could be so so good we don't know and b. Heck we don't even need to draft a Quarterback in the offseason.

 

Why not just sign an undrafted rookie every week every year until one day all the **** you're flinging at the wall starts to stick.

I wouldn't take it that seriously. In the end Tyrod gets to start for a team. The Bills got a 3rd round pick. Tyrod is in a place that wants him. We have yet to really see what it all means. Tyrod has a starting season. We will see if Tyrod magic works for them. 

 

We will see who starts for us... 

 

 

Edited June 26, 2018 by Lfod

[Bing Bong]

16 minutes ago, The Red King said:

 

What double-standard?  Tyrod didn't get 100 tries against the Jags.  He got one.  The Bills knew it would take a miracle for TT to win a playoff game, so they tried Peterman just in case.  The difference here that renders your assertion irrelevant was...the Chargers game was not a playoff game.  If Buffalo (and Peterman) lost badly (and they did), the Bills could still put Tyrod back in for the rest of the season.  They do that, they still have a shot at the playoffs...and giving TT a shot in a playoff game...all of which still happened (with TT laying an egg and validating the staff's assessment of him).  So no, there was absolutely no double-standard there.  Regular Season vs. Playoffs, apples and oranges.  If they just up and threw Peterman in against JAX ala Rob Johnson, then you could claim double-standard.  And I would have considered that just as foolish a move as starting Rob was.

The double standard is wanting to take a 1-100 chance on a guy we've never seen in action over Tyrod. The guy who has had crappy games and yet also took a SB caliber Seahawks team to the wire on MNF. He didn't have a 1-100 chance against the chargers, 1-10 at worse. You're right, forget the playoffs (just don't call it prophetic lol), we weren't in a position to lose any AFC games to an AFC playoff Hunter.

[3rdand12]

3 hours ago, Buffalo716 said:

 

No, I said actually starting caliber. Meaning boarderline franchise QB and can take your team to the playoffs

 

All 32 starting QBs are not of that caliber , though they are all NFL quality QBs

and thats the definition of semantics.
I had an angry Doctor explain it to me once

[Lfod]

17 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

The double standard is wanting to take a 1-100 chance on a guy we've never seen in action over Tyrod. The guy who has had crappy games and yet also took a SB caliber Seahawks team to the wire on MNF. He didn't have a 1-100 chance against the chargers, 1-10 at worse. You're right, forget the playoffs (just don't call it prophetic lol), we weren't in a position to lose any AFC games to an AFC playoff Hunter.

The Offense got bad last season. The reason it doesn't matter is because everyone got to see what they wanted. Even if Tyrod wasn't benched the results are the same. You have an Offense that can't produce points. So it's no double standard. 

 

Starting Peterman was stupid and Tyrod was still the way he was. If you couldn't feel that we rode the defense all season I dunno what to tell you. 

Edited June 26, 2018 by Lfod

[3rdand12]

5 minutes ago, Lfod said:

The Offense got bad last season. The reason it doesn't matter is because everyone got to see what they wanted. Even if Tyrod wasn't benched the results are the same. You have an Offense that can't produce points. So it's no double standard. 

 

Starting Peterman was stupid and Tyrod was still the way he was. If you couldn't feel that we rode the defense all season I dunno what to tell you. 

we can start the Dennison argument too.

good idea to reboot the Offense.

[Bing Bong]

35 minutes ago, Lfod said:

I wouldn't take it that seriously. In the end Tyrod gets to start for a team. The Bills got a 3rd round pick. Tyrod is in a place that wants him. We have yet to really see what it all means. Tyrod has a starting season. We will see if Tyrod magic works for them. 

 

We will see who starts for us... 

 

 

No by all means I'm fine with him gone. We weren't going anywhere with him. Super happy we went balls deep for a high 1st round QB, hedged that bet keeping Peterman and signing McCarron. 

 

Just get annoyed at the revisionist narrative that starting a rookie on the road in a crucial game for playoff implications worked out real swell for us. "Well we needed to find out if our 5th round rookie played like a 5th round rookie and we did! Now we know we needed a QB!"

18 minutes ago, Lfod said:

The Offense got bad last season. The reason it doesn't matter is because everyone got to see what they wanted. Even if Tyrod wasn't benched the results are the same. You have an Offense that can't produce points. So it's no double standard. 

 

Starting Peterman was stupid and Tyrod was still the way he was. If you couldn't feel that we rode the defense all season I dunno what to tell you. 

Christ sakes I'm well aware we rode the defense by.. how do you ride the defense? not turning it over a crapload of times and letting Hyde Poyer and Tre have a flying chance to win the game. Quickest way to piss off your best players is to have them get back on the field every offensive possession.

 

Sorry boys, let's get back to Tyrod possibly starting over Baker for the Browns lol no sarcasm there it turned to a Peterman Chargers debate really quickly.

Edited June 26, 2018 by PetermanThrew5Picks

[Lfod]

10 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

No by all means I'm fine with him gone. We weren't going anywhere with him. Super happy we went balls deep for a high 1st round QB, hedged that bet keeping Peterman and signing McCarron. 

 

Just get annoyed at the revisionist narrative that starting a rookie on the road in a crucial game for playoff implications worked out real swell for us. "Well we needed to find out if our 5th round rookie played like a 5th round rookie and we did! Now we know we needed a QB!"

Christ sakes I'm well aware we rode the defense by.. how do you ride the defense? not turning it over a crapload of times and letting Hyde Poyer and Tre have a flying chance to win the game.

 

Sorry boys, let's get back to Tyrod possibly starting over Baker for the Browns lol no sarcasm there it turned to a Peterman Chargers debate really quickly.

I think it makes for an interesting season. So many questions to be answered. How does Tyrod work out in Cleveland. How long does it take for Baker Mayfield take to take the starting job. Who wins the starting job in Buffalo. 

 

I have my opinion on these things as well but next season becomes more interesting with more to follow. 

[billsfan89]

22 hours ago, Rocky Landing said:

What the hell are you talking about??? Do you really think that the millions of dollars spent on evaluating players entering the draft, and the people who spend their professional lives doing the evaluation have no idea what they're doing???

 

You may want to rethink that bolded statement!

 

The context of that statement is that the original poster knocked the player Tyrod Taylor currently is (A player 7 years removed from being drafted) by where he was drafted. Is Antonio Brown a **** player because he was a 6th round pick? No of course not. Evaluating a player 1-3 years into their career their draft stock might be a factor worth considering but once a player gets deep into their career their pro resume speaks for its self. So if you want to critique Tyrod because of his 3 years of starting fine but to say someone sucks because they were a late round pick is just silly. 

[Bing Bong]

16 minutes ago, Lfod said:

I think it makes for an interesting season. So many questions to be answered. How does Tyrod work out in Cleveland. How long does it take for Baker Mayfield take to take the starting job. Who wins the starting job in Buffalo. 

 

I have my opinion on these things as well but next season becomes more interesting with more to follow. 

I think Baker's a stud. But we haven't ever seen Tyrod with the caliber offense he currently has. And he's a guy very dependent on his personnel, not a bad thing at all.. if the personnel isn't what we trotted out last year

 

And I hope Josh Allen wins camp and starts, simply for the fact that the competition with the Bills QBs is 3 complete unknowns.. I hope it's the guy with all the tangibles the whole NFL was coveting.

Edited June 26, 2018 by PetermanThrew5Picks

[Bing Bong]

7 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

I wasn't referencing Tyrod in my example....just any journeyman.

Even a journeyman is impressive if he sticks around. The average length of an NFL career is like 2 years. Those guys "suck" if we want to set a bar. You don't know about them because you never hear about them. If somebody sticks around, plays long enough for you to merely recognize his name and say he sucks.. he definitely doesn't suck and has made a lot of money being a professional athlete. 

 

Like I don't know if you're referring to journey men practice squad players.. or journey men like Josh McCown. Josh McCown doesn't suck ?

 

I read that acclaimed book (title escapes me rn) about the life of NFL players on the margins.. it's brutal. Fascinating.

[Rocky Landing]

26 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

The context of that statement is that the original poster knocked the player Tyrod Taylor currently is (A player 7 years removed from being drafted) by where he was drafted. Is Antonio Brown a **** player because he was a 6th round pick? No of course not. Evaluating a player 1-3 years into their career their draft stock might be a factor worth considering but once a player gets deep into their career their pro resume speaks for its self. So if you want to critique Tyrod because of his 3 years of starting fine but to say someone sucks because they were a late round pick is just silly. 

Copy that. Context is everything. My bad.

[Bing Bong]

6 hours ago, Buffalo716 said:

 

I bet. I couldn’t even imagine how hard it is playing in the show... 162 games in like 185 days

 

the best players in the world at every position... you need consistency or you will never even get called up

I probably shouldn't comment on this cause I don't follow or care for baseball but.. I'd take 162 games in 185 games you can show up hungover for than 82 games in the NBA or the 60 or so games a soccer player plays. Or 16 games an NFL player goes through. The leagues are calibered to get the maximum profitable number of games without wrecking the players, the product.

 

That dude on Pittsburgh pitched a perfect game on acid in the 70s lol. I'll take that sport if I had no personal love for any other sport.

 

[BADOLBILZ]

6 hours ago, Buffalo716 said:

there are only 32 NFL starting QBs in the world... and how many are actually NFL caliber starters? 15-20? 

 

4 hours ago, Buffalo716 said:

 

No, I said actually starting caliber. Meaning boarderline franchise QB and can take your team to the playoffs

 

All 32 starting QBs are not of that caliber , though they are all NFL quality QBs

 

 

This stuff is the definition of "rhetoric"...........language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect but lacking in sincerity or meaningful content.

 

It's laughable to hear this after backup Nick Foles just beat the GOAT in the Super Bowl.

 

Taylor is a good quality starting NFL QB.........he's not conventional........but he's been in Pro Bowls and guided good scoring offenses and won games when other metrics not related to his play indicate that the team shouldn't have been as effective.

 

If the standard is "franchise/borderline franchise QB or not" then just say that.  

 

 

[Buffalo716]

1 minute ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

I probably shouldn't comment on this cause I don't follow or care for baseball but.. I'd take 162 games in 185 games you can show up hungover for than 82 games in the NBA or the 60 or so games a soccer player plays. Or 16 games an NFL player goes through. The leagues are calibered to get the maximum profitable number of games without wrecking the players, the product.

 

That dude on Pittsburgh pitched a perfect game on acid in the 70s lol. I'll take that sport if I had no personal love for any other sport.

 

As a 4 sport varsity athlete and college football player , imo baseball was the hardest sport I ever played 

 

yes, you get some crazy stories like the one you mentioned but it is very hard to hit a 90+ mph fastball and world class curve

 

i definitely respect baseball players

2 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

 

This stuff is the definition of "rhetoric"...........language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect but lacking in sincerity or meaningful content.

 

It's laughable to hear this after backup Nick Foles just beat the GOAT in the Super Bowl.

 

Taylor is a good quality starting NFL QB.........he's not conventional........but he's been in Pro Bowls and guided good scoring offenses and won games when other metrics not related to his play indicate that the team shouldn't have been as effective.

 

If the standard is "franchise/borderline franchise QB or not" then just say that.  

 

 

 

I could have but everybody has different definitions of a franchise QB... my definition would be is he able to take your team to the playoffs... I think their is a big difference between elite QB and a Franchise QB

 

There are only a handful of elite QBs, but a guy like Andy Dalton who has been a 7 year starter is a franchise QB... though a lower -mid level one

 

TT is definitely one of the best 32 QBs Alive and that’s why he’s still employed