Buddo

One of the last things he said was that we have to protect the QB. While hardly rocket science, the context was illuminating, when it was to do with keeping the rookie healthy so he can get the necessary reps and game time to improve. I found that quite a significant attitude and mmoderately illuminating as to McDermotts thought processess about developing Allen. Change may well be coming on the O-Line, but I wouldn't be entirely surprised if they sign someone else there, and possibly try and pick up another DB now Hyde is 'week to week'.

Bad officiating is the ruination of any sport. The NFL has more than its fair share of it. It would seem that they can't even be consistent in how they are going to apply new rules, on a week to week basis, league wide. Still, they were consistent yesterday, as they didn't call any holding on Hughes, at all. Hopefully the Bills, or McDermott/Beane/Pegula, whoever is responsible for doing so, sends a nice little cut up of non holding calls to the NFL, and asks for an explanation. Probably every week. The Bills yesterday, due to how bad they were offensively, couldn't have won that game in a month of Sundays, but the Packers didn't need to have had it made so easy for them, by typically poor officiating. I'm not entirely sure about the helmet to helmet one with Benjamin. I think there's a chance it could have gone either way. I don't think for one moment, that it was deliberate, however, and that is what probably should be defining that call. Similarly, I thought he non call when Edmunds sacked Rodgers, was a good call, although I could see where it might have gone the other way - especially recently. Two things sort of stood out about that, one of which was Rodgers ended up on his side more. The other being that it looked to me that Edmunds took some weight off of Rodgers, by landing with some arm extension. It would be nice to have a few games where nobody feels obliged to complain about the officiating, as that might mean they have done a good job.

Probably a fair comment, but he did make a couple of good plays along the way, confirming his potential. The tipped pass that lead to the int, for one, and the sack of Rodgers for another, off of the top of my head. As of this moment, the D is obviously not the problem with this team. Nor is STs. While there can be legitimate constructive criticism of them, e.g. tackling technique, they aren't the unit(s) who are responsible for the latest loss. I've said his elsewhere, but both the Offensive gameplan, and subsequent preparation, was completely flawed. You have to run against a Pettine D, because that's their weakness. Doesn't actually matter who your QB is, it's something you have to do, because it stops him sending an extra body after the QB all day long. Which is largely what happened. The O-Line was useless, with pressure coming through the middle a lot, preventing Allen from stepping up, but also giving him happy feet, so when there were opportunities to do so, he was reluctant to take them. The more I hear about Allen's accuracy issues, the less I like, as while they do exist, they are pretty much all about footwork. Just about every time he sets his feet properly, the football goes where it is intended to go. We have serious problems through the middle of the O-Line, where I'm not sure we have anyone who should be on a team, let alone a starter. As Clay is being hampered by injury, it doesn't appear that we have a TE who can block, at all. Note to Beane - O'Leary is on the 'Fins PS, it might be an idea to bring him back, as he can both block and catch, and doesn't give away as many penalties per snap as, say, Lee, who you could cut immediately, and he wouldn't be missed. Castillo also has to take some of the heat for the rubbish O-Line play, and also for not coming up with anything useful to counterract Pettine. Daboll should be insisting that we have a plan B for blocking, as plan A has only worked once so far. I'm not absolving Daboll btw. Seems to me we are getting to a 'smartest man in the room' situation, where on the back of one success, he decides that a rookie QB, behind a matador O-Line, is going to get time enough to throw downfield, against a team with a good secondary, and a DC who knows every blitz variation in the book. Why is it, that whenever we actually could use a heavy dose of 'run, run, pass', our glorious coaches can't seem to figure it out.

Tbh I think center is as big a problem as the guards. We’ve had just one game where pressure hasn’t come straight through the middle

The offensive gameplan was hapless. Pretty much played into Pettine’s hands. Hardly any serious attempt to run, leaving Allen exposed to whatever pass rush Pettine decided to dial up. Little wonder he played as poorly as you can expect a rookie QB to. The O-Line was garbage, but that also is, in part, down to poor preparation. I find it ridiculous that most people around here could have come up with a better plan, simply through having seen what he did as DC here previously.

.Glad the XP was missed, but the zebras are just giving the Pack yards by not penalizing stuff. The 'pick' is questionable on the TD also, but Graham probably would have got in anyway.

Hughes held again, no flag.

To an extent, this is what has happened with Alex Smith. At least once he had a couple of years with Harbaugh. I also don't see the ready made production line of BQs. As pointed out earlier by someone else, some years there isn't even one decent one. I'd also say that with the possible exception of Brees, big QB contracts should only really hurt you for a year or two, as the cap keeps going up. Switched on Front Offices, ought to be creating some room for when these contracts are due, to minimise their effect.

Well, Nate mostly throws to the opposition, so I'm not sure his part in this, is that significant. Against the Chargers, there were some tough balls to catch, that better receivers should catch. Against the Vikes, there should be no excuses - just about every ball was well placed to be caught easily, on all the drops.

I think it’s a combination of not especially good receivers, and Allen’s arm.

While I can see the thought behind this, I think you should adapt it, in respect of looking to ‘perpetually ‘ restock the other really high priced positions. I.e. LT, DE, DT & CB. Drafting each of those positions regularly.

Kerley probably doesn't fit in with the rest of the WR room, as he likely catches more than he drops.

In some respects, at least for me, the best thing about the Croom TD, was how well Allen 'sold' it. Lots of other QBs around the league disguise stuff pretty well, yet we haven't seemed to have someone who did it very well for ages. Fitz was probably the best in that respect, but none of the likes of Losman, Holcomb, Edwards, EJ etc, were very good at it, at all. Great play design by Daboll also, and well set up by earlier plays.

Enjoyed that, not least as it was the other team shooting itself in the foot that made the difference.

My best guess would be a combination of factors. Different schemes, coaches and players. Was Kromer (Kramer?) the O-Line coach then - because he was the best we had had for some time - and far superior to Castillo.

In respect of what someone else said earlier in the thread, I think Bodine's experience, may help more, not so much the line, but with getting Allen to recognise the protections/coverages.

While not advocating this, seems to me that any former QB who did get hired in that sort of role, would be into the playbook and up to speed pdq. Tbh, imho, teaching the fundamentals and the playbook isn't that difficult. What is difficult is getting the nuances of playing the position down, and understood. This, to me, is where veteran help should have been sought, and retained. What I find borderline farcical, is that we've seen this exact same scenario play out once before, with EJ, when Kolb went down. Different regime, for sure, but the same fundamental mistake is being made.

My biggest concerns revolve around getting better protection for Allen, and the potential consequences of not doing so. And by that I mean for this season. I felt there were a number of throws where his 'inaccuracy' reared it's ugly head. Thing is, I thought it was pretty much down to footwork under pressure. I find that worrying, as given time and a platform, largely his throws were accurate enough. I don't want to see him running for his life, and reverting to bad habits. The one thing I will say however, is that even when he doesn't get his footwork right, he's still trying to make a play - moreso than any other QB we've had since Fitz. This, to me, even when under an awful lot of pressure, is a major positive. But the kid needs to be helped with better protection, and it needs to happen this season, not next. Time for Beane and his scouting departments, to earn their money, and find guys who can come in and help with that.

I'd say at a guess, that a fair few of the accuracy issues Allen had against the Chargers, were due to poor footwork under pressure. This is concerning, as it implies a reversion to bad habits. It's also the reason why we should have had better options at QB, behind our porous O-Line. One thing I don't think you can fault Allen on, is his attitude. While it may have been a dumb play, seeing him try to hit a WR with a defender on his back, and almost making it, was great to see. While there are a lot of other rookie mistakes occurring, one thing he does do, is keep looking to make a play. Somehow, they have to do something with the O-Line, to get him time when we are in first and second downs.

The trouble with that, is that there are guys who are supposedly putting their bodies on the line, in playing Sundays. Expecting them to do so with Peterman behind center again, is not going to endear the coaching staff to them, and that sort of thing gets around the league quickly.

I'm not sure you read what I wrote. I realise Peterman won the competition, but I'm also aware that there wasn't any absolute need to get rid of McCarron, who has played successfully in the NFL, albeit on a small sample size. If they decided they wanted shot of McCarron, why didn't they pick up someone like Moore, to cover the situation we now have, where Allen is forced to start, because Peterman is useless when the bullets fly. This is the NFL, plan 'A' often doesn't work, you need to try and cover worst case scenarios - especially when you can do that with little difficulty.

The gamble and lose,was in shipping out McCarron, who has shown he can play in the NFL, and keeping Peterman, who hasn't. Reminds me of what happened when we got rid of Jackson and kept Kolb, which was again a similar situation, and we kept the wrong guy. Albeit different GMs and HCs. Tbh, my problem with the situation, isn't so much the starting of Peterman, either last year, when Tyrod's play was at a low, or yesterday, when they clearly decided he had won the QB competition. It's much more that there isn't a fall back option under the circumstances we find ourselves in, when Peterman has proven wanting when the live bullets are flying, as Gailey would have said. I think it's also fair to say that the 'plan' for Allen, has also had to be chucked out of the window, due to the mistake of not keeping McCarron, either over Peterman, or alongside him.

I think the game plans across all 3 phases, were designed for the same outcome, which was let's make a season's worth of mistakes in our first game, and get them all out of the way. It's about the only way I can rationalize how bad we were. I thought yesterdays game was played between two teams, one of which played actual NFL football and were called the Ravens. The other team played the circus clowns version of NFL football, and were called the Bills. I don't know how good the Ravens will be this year, but we currently are nowhere near them. The wet conditions had the Ravens looking like they were just having fun jumping around in puddles, whereas the Bills looked like they were drowning. Offensively, whenever the O-Line actually gave time to the QB, there was nobody open. When they did get open, it didn't matter, as the QB was on his back. If they got open and the QB passed the football to them, they either dropped it, or the O-Line was conceding yet another penalty. The D looked like they might be able to turn things around (eventually), as they did some good things, but too much other stuff broke down when it mattered. STs did some decent things also, and created a couple of opportunities, that they couldn't take. The flip side being that they gave the Ravens chances, that they did take. Hopefully we are going to cut a few this week, and sign a few, as the O-Line simply isn't good enough, and while Allen should remain the starter, we need a vet behind him, both for security, and assistance. Oh, and we need a CB.

Imho McDermott needs to come out today, and own yesterday's debacle. I understand people expecting that sort of accountability sooner, but I also understand the need to take a few deep breaths, before getting into it. It starts with the coaches and a poor game plan(s) and continues through to the players for an appalling lack of execution of those plans. There were far too many breakdowns all over the place, in all three phases. Fwiw, it's also my opinion, that it's actually not that difficult to criticize a performance in general terms, without throwing individuals under a bus. e.g. We couldn't get any offense going at all. While the D did some good things, we had too many communication breakdowns to keep the Ravens at bay. Same thing for the kicking units, where we both had opportunities and missed them, but also gave opportunities, that were taken.

The one thing I especially like about the pieces, is the comment that with Beane, McDermott and the Pegulas, the organisation is set up in the right way, with everyone pulling together. As he is a guy who spent a lot of time with the Patsies, that, to me, says we should be on the right track, if not this year, then within a couple.