Bills bench Tyrod Taylor

[Jet_Engine1]

14 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

WE DON'T KNOW IF HE CAN START UNLESS HE PLAYS ACTUAL GAMES THAT CAN'T BE SIMULATED IN PRACTICE OR PRESEASONS.

WE KNOW THAT JOSH MCCOWN IS 38 AND IS NOT GOING TO BE HERE LONG.

WE KNOW THAT THE TEAM IS NOT MAKING THE PLAYOFFS.

THEREFORE WHY NOT FIND OUT IF A GUY CAN PLAY AND DUMP HIM IF HE CANNOT.

Is that clear enough for you?

 

Hes very, very stupid. Dont get riled up by it.

[ZachEY]

45 minutes ago, Jet_Engine1 said:

Earned it by being the best scout team QB in Western New York? Earned it during the very limited reps the backup QB gets during the season? No.

 

He earned it by virtue of Tyrod not really being that good, having an awful game vs NO, and not being a guy the Bills want to rest the foundation of their team on for the next several years. He "earned" it by default. Hes a mid round rookie QB who looked competent in the pre season. Not an heir apparent. They know what they have with TT, they want to evaluate their roster. Nothing more.

You seem to know an awful lot about what goes on in the Bills practices and meeting rooms!  Do you work for them?

[Dink and Drunk]

12 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

WE DON'T KNOW IF HE CAN START UNLESS HE PLAYS ACTUAL GAMES THAT CAN'T BE SIMULATED IN PRACTICE OR PRESEASONS.

WE KNOW THAT JOSH MCCOWN IS 38 AND IS NOT GOING TO BE HERE LONG.

WE KNOW THAT THE TEAM IS NOT MAKING THE PLAYOFFS.

THEREFORE WHY NOT FIND OUT IF A GUY CAN PLAY AND DUMP HIM IF HE CANNOT.

Is that clear enough for you?

YOU DON'T KNOW THOSE 2 QBS SUCK BUT THE COACHES DO

YOU ARE GOING TO DRAFT A QB ANYWAY

YOU MIGHT RETAIN A ROOKIE DEAL QB ANYWAY JUST TO HAVE A CHEAP #2

FOR BETTER OR WORSE, TODD BOWLES WAS NOT ASKED TO BE A TANK COMMANDER 

Is that clear enough for you?

[UnitedWhofans]

Just now, Jet_Engine1 said:

Hes very, very stupid. Dont get riled up by it.

I’m not very stupid. I just don’t give a sh*t about playing McCown over Petty because I don’t see the value in playing him.

[Jet_Engine1]

7 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

So why did they bring him back and why was he the starting QB?

Uh oh. Is the record skipping?

[UnitedWhofans]

Just now, Jet_Engine1 said:

Uh oh. Is the record skipping?

It must be because you haven’t given me a quality answer

[Jet_Engine1]

1 minute ago, gEYno said:

You seem to know an awful lot about what goes on in the Bills practices and meeting rooms!  Do you work for them?

Yes. Yes I do. If they call, I was never here.

[Dink and Drunk]

1 minute ago, Jet_Engine1 said:

Hes very, very stupid. Dont get riled up by it.

The person you are calling stupid has had consistently the most logical argument. The people critiquing him are basically just mad that you are not tanking. They have failed to address the points the stupid poster made for the last 8 pages.

[UnitedWhofans]

@Beerfish if you so worried about the Bills and Giants moving up to take QBs and you want to take a QB, then what is the point of playing Petty knowing that you want to take a QB anyway?

[Jet_Engine1]

Just now, UnitedWhofans said:

It must be because you haven’t given me a quality answer

So why did they bring him back and why was he the starting QB?

LOL.

[NoBowles]

1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

It may have been me.  I liked him at the time, and certainly felt he'd be better than anything we had.  He's still a decent "bridge guy", but as you say, will likely command too much money on the open market at this point.  

I don't ever recall saying he's a franchise guy though; in that regard he never has been and never will be.  

Props for ththe honesty 

[UnitedWhofans]

Just now, Jet_Engine1 said:

So why did they bring him back and why was he the starting QB?

LOL.

This is the same point the Bills reporter makes in this article. If Taylor was never going to be the guy, why bring him back and make him the starting QB? Why not just make Peterman the starter or go out and get a cheaper guy?

[#27TheDominator]

7 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

So why did they bring him back and why was he the starting QB?

They didn't "bring him back"  He was under contract already.  They redid his deal to make him palatable for a mid-low level starter. 

[UnitedWhofans]

1 minute ago, #27TheDominator said:

They didn't "bring him back"  He was under contract already.  They redid his deal to make him palatable for a mid-low level starter. 

16m owed next year. Very palatable. That’s worse than FitzpatrIck

[NoBowles]

So I’m wondering if Rex is still a genius for getting him??

[#27TheDominator]

6 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

16m owed next year. Very palatable. That’s worse than FitzpatrIck

They don't "owe" him $16M next year.  $6M is a roster bonus and I don't think his salry is guaranteed either.  The money they will owe is based upon the extension Whaley signed him to in 2016.  Remember him?  The guy you think they shouldn't have fired.

[JetFreak89]

8 minutes ago, UnitedWhofans said:

This is the same point the Bills reporter makes in this article. If Taylor was never going to be the guy, why bring him back and make him the starting QB? Why not just make Peterman the starter or go out and get a cheaper guy?

Do you know that over the course of time, with new information you can change your perception of something? They kept Taylor because it was a new coaching staff who likely wanted to see how he would play in their system. They brought him back because they likely felt he was better than the other FA QB's available this offseason. They gave him 10 games to see if he could elevate his game to another level. He didn't do that so they are moving on to Peterman. I don't see how that is a hard concept to understand. 

[Jet_Engine1]

15 minutes ago, Dink and Drunk said:

The person you are calling stupid has had consistently the most logical argument. The people critiquing him are basically just mad that you are not tanking. They have failed to address the points the stupid poster made for the last 8 pages.

Answered his stupid question pages ago. With logic and histroical comparison. And the Tank is done. Its gone. But moving forward running a 38 year old QB who will more than likely retire in the offseason after a 7-9 season and being right back at the same point in regards evaluating what you have on your roster going into an offseason where you will have the ability to spend big money under the cap and have to decide where their draft capital and needs meet. That's all. I have zero invested in Petty, I think Hackenberg is alost cause, but a I also know that McCown is a complete waste of time for the organization. 

 

As to the Bills and Tyrod, they kept him as the starter because their options were him, TJ Yates, and a raw 5th round pick. Tyrod bought them time but he isnt the future. They're 5-4 in spite of Taylor. He had an awful last two games where he couldnt move the Offense at all. So why not give tge young guy a shot. He could provide a spark, and they get an opportunity to evaluate what they have. Nothing to deep or complicated.

 

[Pac]

1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

Tyrod Taylor has the worst deep ball accuracy in the NFL this season.  Unlike the Jets, they want to properly evaluate the QB's they have on the roster.

Meanwhile, at the bye week (the best time to make a change), the Jets announce they're still rolling a 38-year old out there.  

You have no perception whatsoever of the bigger picture.  

The big picture is precisely why they're continuing to play McCown and not throwing in the towel.  It's not my problem if it's lost on you.

I think it's pretty obvious to anyone paying attention that getting a QB will be the #1 priority in a few months.  Petty playing does nothing for this team long term.  Continuing to play to win until all hope is lost on the other hand is the correct message to send to all the younger guys.

You can't seem to grasp the fact that you're getting the rebuild and culture change you've whined and cried so long for.  This is what it looks like.

Capeesh?

[#27TheDominator]

3 minutes ago, Pac said:

The big picture is precisely why they're continuing to play McCown and not throwing in the towel.  It's not my problem if it's lost on you.

I think it's pretty obvious to anyone paying attention that getting a QB will be the #1 priority in a few months.  Petty playing does nothing for this team long term.  Continuing to play to win until all hope is lost on the other hand is the correct message to send to all the younger guys.

You can't seem to grasp the fact that you're getting the rebuild and culture change you've whined and cried so long for.  This is what it looks like.

Capeesh?

How is needing a QB being the #1 priority a "culture change?" When was the last time we weren't in this position?  We were in 2017 and ended up with McCown.  We were in this position in 2016 and ended up with Hackenberg and Fitzpatrick.  We were in this position in 2015 and ended up with Fitzpatrick and Petty.  Who are we trying to impress with this message?  

[MDL_JET]

1 minute ago, Pac said:

The big picture is precisely why they're continuing to play McCown and not throwing in the towel.  It's not my problem if it's lost on you.

I think it's pretty obvious to anyone paying attention that getting a QB will be the #1 priority in a few months.  Petty playing does nothing for this team long term.  Continuing to play to win until all hope is lost on the other hand is the correct message to send to all the younger guys.

You can't seem to grasp the fact that you're getting the rebuild and culture change you've whined and cried so long for.  This is what it looks like.

Capeesh?

That's such bs. So if they played Petty or Hack rest of the way and lost every game, the younger guys will forever have a loser attitude and mentality? 

Playing McCown does nothing for this team now or the future. 

[ZachEY]

5 minutes ago, Pac said:

The big picture is precisely why they're continuing to play McCown and not throwing in the towel.  It's not my problem if it's lost on you.

I think it's pretty obvious to anyone paying attention that getting a QB will be the #1 priority in a few months.  Petty playing does nothing for this team long term.  Continuing to play to win until all hope is lost on the other hand is the correct message to send to all the younger guys.

You can't seem to grasp the fact that you're getting the rebuild and culture change you've whined and cried so long for.  This is what it looks like.

Capeesh?

Why now?  Why is getting a QB in year 4 the priority?  What's changed?  We needed one just as bad in Year 1, Year 2, and Year 3.  Why shouldn't we think that Josh McCown starts and another mid-round rookie is brought in?

I'm not saying that they won't do it, but I'm also not sure why it's "pretty obvious," as this year is really no different than the last two.

[Dink and Drunk]

12 minutes ago, Jet_Engine1 said:

Answered his stupid question pages ago. With logic and histroical comparison. And the Tank is done. Its gone. But moving forward running a 38 year old QB who will more than likely retire in the offseason after a 7-9 season and being right back at the same point in regards evaluating what you have on your roster going into an offseason where you will have the ability to spend big money under the cap and have to decide where their draft capital and needs meet. That's all. I have zero invested in Petty, I think Hackenberg is alost cause, but a I also know that McCown is a complete waste of time for the organization. 

As to the Bills and Tyrod, they kept him as the starter because their options were him, TJ Yates, and a raw 5th round pick. Tyrod bought them time but he isnt the future. They're 5-4 in spite of Taylor. He had an awful last two games where he couldnt move the Offense at all. So why not give tge young guy a shot. He could provide a spark, and they get an opportunity to evaluate what they have. Nothing to deep or complicated.

But once again, you are assuming that the FO & HC needs more information to evaluate Petty as a potential starter. Suppose they think the chances of becoming a JAG level are QB 1/100000:

Is it that hard to believe that the detrimental effect to team building outweighs the 1/100000? How about the impact to being able to get future coaches, when you have an ugly divorce with Bowles while forcing a unwarranted QB change? The owner created the space for him to "prove it", but midseason you want to force Bowles join the end of the tank line and buy a single lotto ticket? How about all the other young players who know that McCown is their best option? Nice job building a culture of accountability. 

[Augustiniak]

5 minutes ago, MDL_JET said:

That's such bs. So if they played Petty or Hack rest of the way and lost every game, the younger guys will forever have a loser attitude and mentality? 

Playing McCown does nothing for this team now or the future. 

it does, it tells the players the best guy will play.  this team is playing hard, they are doing a great job changing the culture.  

of course, if mccags re-signs mccown, and does not draft a qb high in the draft, it will be telling the team he is incapable of improving it.

[#27TheDominator]

1 minute ago, Dink and Drunk said:

But once again, you are assuming that the FO & HC needs more information to evaluate Petty as a potential starter. Suppose they think the chances of becoming a JAG level are QB 1/100000:

Is it that hard to believe that the detrimental effect to team building outweighs the 1/100000? How about the impact to being able to get future coaches, when you have an ugly divorce with Bowles while forcing a unwarranted QB change? The owner created the space for him to "prove it", but midseason you want to force Bowles join the end of the tank line and buy a single lotto ticket? How about all the other young players who know that McCown is their best option? Nice job building a culture of accountability. 

IF they know that about Petty, what does it say about Hackenberg who was beaten out by Petty twice?  More importantly, what does it say about them that they went into this season with money and the #6 pick in the draft and walked away with a 38 year old McCown backed up by a guy that thing has a 1/1000000 chance of being a JAG level QB and the guy who has been worse for 2 years? 

[Beerfish]

34 minutes ago, Dink and Drunk said:

YOU DON'T KNOW THOSE 2 QBS SUCK BUT THE COACHES DO

YOU ARE GOING TO DRAFT A QB ANYWAY

YOU MIGHT RETAIN A ROOKIE DEAL QB ANYWAY JUST TO HAVE A CHEAP #2

FOR BETTER OR WORSE, TODD BOWLES WAS NOT ASKED TO BE A TANK COMMANDER 

Is that clear enough for you?

So you honestly think that coaches, especially this lot can make a valid judgement without seeing them play in actual NFL games?  This league is just littered with successful QBs who were not thought to be high end prospects that when given the chance, in real games became something special.

So what?  We might not be able to and if we do we might at least have a started under the age of 75 for a few games next year.

Dumb teams think like that, teams that when the starer gets hurt the season is over, well except for the guys that actually play good when given the chance, (see point one above)

Todd Bowles thing might be relevant if mccown was a really good QB, he is not.

[Rangers9]

I didn't really see his games other than the two we played against him. And he was just ok. But if available I would sign him for next season. He has a lot of upside and his flaws can be worked around. But on the other hand he does have talent on the Bills and they have under produced on offense. I'd still sign him. 

[Pac]

11 minutes ago, gEYno said:

Why now?  Why is getting a QB in year 4 the priority?  What's changed?  We needed one just as bad in Year 1, Year 2, and Year 3.  Why shouldn't we think that Josh McCown starts and another mid-round rookie is brought in?

I'm not saying that they won't do it, but I'm also not sure why it's "pretty obvious," as this year is really no different than the last two.

Just because Petty and Hack appear be misses doesn't mean they haven't been putting an effort into getting a QB.  I've already posted it a couple times so I don't feel like looking for the list of all QB's available when the Jets were drafting the last 3 years.  It's not pretty.  The only true miss was Dak who everyone missed on and maybe Watson.  None of the other 30 or so QB's that the Jets passed on have turned into anything.

People like to act like Macc passed on 10 great QB's but the reality is it's been 1 very good QB in 3 years.  That everyone passed on 3 times...

[Dink and Drunk]

2 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

IF they know that about Petty, what does it say about Hackenberg who was beaten out by Petty twice?  More importantly, what does it say about them that they went into this season with money and the #6 pick in the draft and walked away with a 38 year old McCown backed up by a guy that thing has a 1/1000000 chance of being a JAG level QB and the guy who has been worse for 2 years? 

I have one of two interpretations:

1. The FO believes (as I do) that is better for team development to be able to play competent football and try to win games. They viewed McCown as a JAG QB incase Petty & Hack were still garbage, which they were. They wanted to give Petty & Hack one more shot, and they missed. For whatever reason, they also thought the available QBs were a reach at the spots they were drafting at. McCown has been getting them through the season while improving as a team, and their plan is to draft a QB or get a proven good FA QB.

2. The FO assumed that Bowles was such a bad coach that the tank was inevitable. They gave him (what they perceived to be) a bad vet QB, so they would have no excuses not to fire him at the end of the year. They wanted their current HC to be the tank commander, and the stuff about judging him over the seasons was BS. What they failed to realize is that Bowles is a deeply flawed, but not terrible coach. They actually made Bowles easier by giving him a bunch of young players who were trying hard. Now they are in the position of a failed tank, and being unsure if they can realistically fire Bowles without hurting the future chances of getting a better coach. 

[ZachEY]

1 minute ago, Pac said:

Just because Petty and Hack appear be misses doesn't mean they haven't been putting an effort into getting a QB.  I've already posted it a couple times so I don't feel like looking for the list of all QB's available when the Jets were drafting the last 3 years.  It's not pretty.  The only true miss was Dak who everyone missed on and maybe Watson.  None of the other 30 or so QB's that the Jets passed on have turned into anything.

People like to act like Macc passed on 10 great QB's but the reality is it's been 1 very good QB in 3 years.  That everyone passed on 3 times...

The list you provided is only relevant if you want to make the argument that outside of Watson and Prescott (and not sealing the deal for Wentz), the guy who brought you Petty and Hack was confident that none of the other QBs would turn out to be good and that's why he passed on them.  Hindsight may show a bunch of good no-decisions, but that doesn't indicate in any way that he has put a priority on improving the position, or that he will do what it takes next season to improve the position.  Nor, that he should be trusted with that decision, but that's another story entirely.

[Dink and Drunk]

14 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

So you honestly think that coaches, especially this lot can make a valid judgement without seeing them play in actual NFL games?  This league is just littered with successful QBs who were not thought to be high end prospects that when given the chance, in real games became something special.

I am not saying you can make the call by watching the college tape. When someone is considered a good or bad prospect, they are projected from CFB to NFL. I am saying you can make the call by watching him in NFL practice. Brady went from QB#4 to QB#2 pretty quickly, based on a QB competition in camp. I think fans extremely over-value the tape that they have on QBs, and undervalue the live scouting that happens in situational football drills. They have seen Petty fail in the 2-minuet offense in practice, why think his is going to do it in front of 60k? It not is like he was particularly "clutch" when he last played. 

Fans made a similar mistake with Jimmy Garoppolo. Everyone saying he has only played in 2 NFL games is missing the point. The Patriots ran three joint practices. There were opportunities for Jimmy to be evaluated running the Patriots offense. Just because we can't see it on the TV set does not mean it is not happening. 

I can't help you with the "this lot" part. 

[Augustiniak]

4 minutes ago, gEYno said:

The list you provided is only relevant if you want to make the argument that outside of Watson and Prescott (and not sealing the deal for Wentz), the guy who brought you Petty and Hack was confident that none of the other QBs would turn out to be good and that's why he passed on them.  Hindsight may show a bunch of good no-decisions, but that doesn't indicate in any way that he has put a priority on improving the position, or that he will do what it takes next season to improve the position.  Nor, that he should be trusted with that decision, but that's another story entirely.

agreed.  it appears mccags has deemphasized the position, opting to fill the spot first with 1) geno, who was already on the roster, then with 2) fitzpatrick and mccown, two below average starters, only using petty when absolutely necessary b/c of injury, and never using hackenberg.  in 3 drafts he's used an early 4th and a late 2nd round pick on qbs.  and yet, it is bowles who has to answer all the questions about petty and hack while mccags has what, one press conference during the season?

[Mogglez]

1 hour ago, Beerfish said:

WE DON'T KNOW IF HE CAN START UNLESS HE PLAYS ACTUAL GAMES THAT CAN'T BE SIMULATED IN PRACTICE OR PRESEASONS.

WE KNOW THAT JOSH MCCOWN IS 38 AND IS NOT GOING TO BE HERE LONG.

WE KNOW THAT THE TEAM IS NOT MAKING THE PLAYOFFS.

THEREFORE WHY NOT FIND OUT IF A GUY CAN PLAY AND DUMP HIM IF HE CANNOT.

Is that clear enough for you?

 

Probably not.

[Mogglez]

2 hours ago, UnitedWhofans said:

Lets go through all of these:

1. You mean the Patriots game where we had a TD  in the second half taken away from us by a bad call?

2. You mean the Falcons game where neither team could hold onto the football playing in a monsoon?

3. You mean the Raiders game where we were paid even with the Raiders until a dropped punt opened the floodgates?

4. You mean the first game of the year against Buffalo when team usually struggle anyway. Especially given that McCown got no playing time in the preseason( I guess to see what the YOUNG QBs has) “ hmm sound familiar?”

This is a hysterical revision of how these games went down.  My personal favorite is the Falcons game.  Neither team could apparently hold on to the ball.... except when Matt Ryan was able to go 18/29 for 254 and 2 TDs, including multiple bombs. 

Sh*t even McCown aired it out.  Difference was, one of the QBs was effective the entire game and the other blew his load in the first half and in garbage time.

[ZachEY]

1 minute ago, Mogglez said:

This is a hysterical revision of how these games went down.  My personal favorite is the Falcons game.  Neither team could apparently hold on to the ball.... except when Matt Ryan was able to go 18/29 for 254 and 2 TDs, including multiple bombs. 

When you really think about it, besides the Tampa game, we're undefeated.