Tyrod Taylor

run and shoot

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 28, 2013
Posts:
16,254
Liked Posts:
4,381
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Illinois Fighting Illini
What the fuck is a New England approach to QB development? Get lucky and draft the GOAT in the 6th round and then ride him for two decades?
Ok so I'm not gonna do research on what or how G.B. was compensated for every Qb that was drafted, developed and traded. Matt Hasselbeck was a former Packer. Look him up. The Packes have been developing Qb's going back to Don Majkowski & Lynn Dickey . As for Taylor, my point is that he'd be a low cost, competent Qb option.



Starting with Jimmy G. look up some of the Qb's who've past through N.E. Look up Matt Casell. Go back to Jim Plunkett
You won't do the research because the research is not favorable to your argument. I don't need to look those players up, I know who they are. And they have nothing to do with the Packers current organization. Lynn Dickey was drafted by Houston and sucked his whole career. Don Majkowski sucked too and left GB as a free agent.

Since Rodgers was drafted they've drafted 6 QBs, all of whom have been bad (including a second rounder who never threw a single TD pass in the NFL), and got one 6th rounder in return.

NE results are a bit better because they have usually had a really good team that made their QB look better than they were, but only Garoppolo has had any real success anywhere else and I don't think most people would say he is a good NFL QB. Brissett and Cassel are meh to bad.

Sigh..... Majkowski was a decent Qb and had success against us. His career was never the same after being injured. I see u avoided discussing Matt Hasselbeck .

My point is over the yrs. G.B. and N.E. have had more success than us at Qb development. Going back to Jim McMahon we've really only drafted and developed Jim Harbaugh, Rex Grossman , Kyle Orton and Mitchell Trubisky .
As for Taylor, my point is that he'd be a smart, low cost, low turnover, competent Qb option.
 

Spitta Andretti

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
9,726
Liked Posts:
14,277
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Once again, Foles only had his opportunity because Wentz went down and was playing with one of the best offenses in the league at that time. There is a good chance Taylor would have won with that offense too. We have literally seen with our own eyes who Foles really is. At least Taylor has more mobility and is more accurate. So yes, I would say he is an upside, but not by much. Your “argument” with Foles winning playoff games and having a super bowl ring is a joke.

Taylor has literally done nothing and has not held down the starter job where ever he's been
 

run and shoot

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 28, 2013
Posts:
16,254
Liked Posts:
4,381
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Illinois Fighting Illini
Tyrod Taylor has a better overall record and QB rating. The only reason Foles has more playoff wins is because he was on a very good Philly team and Wentz got hurt. I’d take Taylor any day over Foles.


Tyrod Taylor is 24-21 89 rating
Foles is 28-27 87 rating

one has a super bowl ring and playoff wins and the other doesnt have anything there is no upside there

Once again, Foles only had his opportunity because Wentz went down and was playing with one of the best offenses in the league at that time. There is a good chance Taylor would have won with that offense too. We have literally seen with our own eyes who Foles really is. At least Taylor has more mobility and is more accurate. So yes, I would say he is an upside, but not by much. Your “argument” with Foles winning playoff games and having a super bowl ring is a joke.

Good points. And lets not forget Foles played so well he got replaced by Mitch. :oops::giggle:
 

MikeDitkaPolishSausage

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 12, 2013
Posts:
9,086
Liked Posts:
6,906
Location:
Black Rainbow’s Grandma’s house.
Hes done more than Taylor LOL

The fact that your claim switched from factual to a damn hypothetical says it all .
You are correct, he has accomplished more. That doesn’t mean he’s a better QB. It means he played on a great team. And that’s a fact as well!
 

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
43,011
Liked Posts:
23,221
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Once again, Foles only had his opportunity because Wentz went down and was playing with one of the best offenses in the league at that time. There is a good chance Taylor would have won with that offense too. We have literally seen with our own eyes who Foles really is. At least Taylor has more mobility and is more accurate. So yes, I would say he is an upside, but not by much. Your “argument” with Foles winning playoff games and having a super bowl ring is a joke.
Look at their last contracts and you'll see how the professionals viewed that.

Nick had a 119 rated season way back in 2013. They all have fits they click with and don't and with Nick, it comes down to protections. Taylor can do more with poor protection but is not as well versed in this O. The point here is that we don't need another stand in. Work on the line and bring in/draft a top player.
 
Last edited:

Mdbearz

Well-known member
Joined:
Jan 9, 2014
Posts:
4,519
Liked Posts:
3,133
Location:
Harford County, MD
I have watch Taylor since his days as a Backup QB in Baltimore, and his days in Buffalo seem to be the "chance" that he was able to take advantage of, however we should not forget that while he had some good stats in Buffalo he was benched for Nathan Peterman. He is a good Backup QB, jus like Foles, so I agree with many on here that unless Foles is gone, TT does not make much sense.

I think his opportunity to run the Chargers was also short lived considering they used the 6th overall pick on Herbert. Even if he had not had the lung puncture, he would have been on a short leash
 

MikeDitkaPolishSausage

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 12, 2013
Posts:
9,086
Liked Posts:
6,906
Location:
Black Rainbow’s Grandma’s house.
q

Look at their last contracts and you'll see how the professionals viewed that.
Contract has nothing to do with who’s better. All that proves is the Chargers were smart and the Bears are idiots.
 

MikeDitkaPolishSausage

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 12, 2013
Posts:
9,086
Liked Posts:
6,906
Location:
Black Rainbow’s Grandma’s house.
I have watch Taylor since his days as a Backup QB in Baltimore, and his days in Buffalo seem to be the "chance" that he was able to take advantage of, however we should not forget that while he had some good stats in Buffalo he was benched for Nathan Peterman. He is a good Backup QB, jus like Foles, so I agree with many on here that unless Foles is gone, TT does not make much sense.

I think his opportunity to run the Chargers was also short lived considering they used the 6th overall pick on Herbert. Even if he had not had the lung puncture, he would have been on a short leash
I 100% agree with this. On my end, I’m only stating I’d rather have Taylor as my short lived QB over Foles because he offers more. We all know Pace is going to fuck in the QB situation and end up with a starting QB of that caliber.
 

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
43,011
Liked Posts:
23,221
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Foles is nothing. The Eagles would have never been in the Super Bowl if Foles was starting all year.
He was 4-1 in the regular season before. He lost his 1st game in overtime after Wentz was 5-6 that year. WTF are you talking about? You're making up stuff as you go along. I am not a big Foles fan so I hate defending him like this but you're just talking nonsense and spin.
 
Last edited:

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
43,011
Liked Posts:
23,221
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Contract has nothing to do with who’s better. All that proves is the Chargers were smart and the Bears are idiots.
Bears never gave him a contract. Only inherited one they restructured down. The market controlled their values as FA.
 

MikeDitkaPolishSausage

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 12, 2013
Posts:
9,086
Liked Posts:
6,906
Location:
Black Rainbow’s Grandma’s house.
Bears never gave him a contract. Only inherited one they restructured down. The market controlled their values as FA.
Even with the restructure, that doesn’t make it a great deal for the Bears. Also giving up a 4th round pick.
 

msadows

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
24,734
Liked Posts:
20,030
I think he's very very much meh/bad, but i would rather "try" him than march foles or mitch out there again.
 

Mdbearz

Well-known member
Joined:
Jan 9, 2014
Posts:
4,519
Liked Posts:
3,133
Location:
Harford County, MD
I 100% agree with this. On my end, I’m only stating I’d rather have Taylor as my short lived QB over Foles because he offers more. We all know Pace is going to fuck in the QB situation and end up with a starting QB of that caliber.
Agreed, TT has mobility (rushing TDs) and is safer with the ball through the air. A Taylor/Foles combo is essentially the same as Mitch/Foles, we don't really need that again.

Additionally, Nagy never capitalized on Mitches mobility (yes, TT is better), so I doubt he would do any better with Taylor.

IF we had Taylor and a draft pick at QB, I could get behind that.
 

msadows

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
24,734
Liked Posts:
20,030
Hes done more than Taylor LOL

The fact that your claim switched from factual to a damn hypothetical says it all .

Yes he has, but he's also shown that he's not good on the bears.

Pretty much the entire league outside of mitch/foles has not shown that yet.
 

msadows

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
24,734
Liked Posts:
20,030
Agreed, TT has mobility (rushing TDs) and is safer with the ball through the air. A Taylor/Foles combo is essentially the same as Mitch/Foles, we don't really need that again.

Additionally, Nagy never capitalized on Mitches mobility (yes, TT is better), so I doubt he would do any better with Taylor.

IF we had Taylor and a draft pick at QB, I could get behind that.

Only way I support this move. Essentially put foles at #3QB due to his contract(unless someone wants to trade for that scrub).

Either way there is zero chance nagy/pace are willing to go into 2021 with that foles shitshow as your starter.

If they can't get wilson/watson, draft pick is the only option to save their jobs. If they draft a guy, I've said many times I don't want them seeing the field this year so Taylor would be a great stopgap. I'd rather have Winston or darnold in that role, however.
 

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
43,011
Liked Posts:
23,221
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Even with the restructure, that doesn’t make it a great deal for the Bears. Also giving up a 4th round pick.
I agree but Taylor would be more of the same. There just isn't a need unless the line gets dinged again. Even with Leno at LT, a healthy OL should be at least be average this year. Best would be to get a top QB on trade and draft a LT in one but that also can't happen.
 

Top