cd1

I found it very interesting that there was always such an emphasis on Taylor working hard on get chemistry with receivers. But Peterman had little to no chance to work with the first string and he came in and was able to connect on passes with anticipation. It has crossed my mind that Dennison may have just had it with Tyrod and let him sink so he could get a QB that COULD run the plays he wanted to call. We will start to see things more clearly Sunday afternoon. GO BILLS

I hate to say this BUT I think we see the same kind of play calling from Dennison that we have all along. Hopefully, Peterman will connect with our receivers and that will allow some space at the LOS for Shady to get some nice runs. Dennison will STILL BE Dennison! Conservative and run the ball. Also: It is possible to Lose and not look like a loser. I hope we see a winner in Peterman even if we lose.

I welcome the idea of watching a Bills game WITHOUT screaming "THROW THE BALL". ;-) I honestly feel that the Bills come out and throw a few quick passes, to keep the defense honest. Then POUND THE ROCK just as they wanted to all a long.

What sweat is it off your nose if he does or does not have sources? Certainly that claim could have been made for every "legitimate" sports writer last off season.

Speaking of FOOLISHNESS - can a ROOKIE at least play ONE F#%KING GAME before he is declared a LOSER? FCOL

OMG - REALLY? Now I am going to lose sleep while feeling bad for the poor man. I guess we could look at Tyrods benching as a GOOD thing for Tyrod. NOW he can go find a team that will appreciate him by paying him well.

Not for nothing - WHO on here uses a REAL name, SIMOOL?

This scars the tar out of me...

Okay, so I was curious and went back and looked at Tyrod 3rd quarter and Petermans two drives. 12 different players spotted due to substitutions. Tyrod - defense players 21,25,26,48,50,52,57,91,92,93,95,98 Nate - defense players 20,21,25,26,31,50,51,52,57,83,92,98 There were only 4 players [48,91,93,95] that were in the game for Taylor but not in the game for Peterman.

REALLY - "captain with a winning record"... Which of those wins was Tyrod responsible for?

Oh my - now there is some solid reasoning. In your world all horses must be jack-asses.

Except one tiny thing - Other than being located at One Bills Drive - What is the spiritual force that makes brand new owners, managers, coaches, and players act JUST LIKE people who worked at that location before them? THAT is what complicates your "simple" answer.

Fair enough. My point was to start right out of the gate with a predetermined time frame for success is RIDICULOUS.

Ha Ha - I fixed it for you...

Don't be ridiculous. Jim Kelly did not start out as JIM KELLY. Then there are those like RGIII who seemed the second coming of GOD then fizzle into nowhere. Some like Trent Edwards start out great then something happens and the gig is over. You ride the magic carpet as long as it flies.

thing is... we WILL get ours sooner or later. Maybe it is SOONER rather than later. Why is it that some here think the only QBs with potential are ALWAYS the ones NOT sitting on our bench? None of us knows what Peterman's got under the hood. I'm excited to finally get a peek. Gunslinger = Forcing the defense back into coverage which in turn opens up the RUNNING game.

Maybe the defense will be more effective because there won't be so many 3 and outs!

I have wondered if Dennison really DOES want Peterman. A smart person would know that the ONLY way you are going to get what you want is by injury or FAILURE.

THIS is why Peterman is our best chance to win. If for no other reason than there is not enough tape on him to game plan against.

I believe this to be true. I think Tyrod could do well with a team where they absolutely develop the plays to his skills. It is very obviou here that Dennison is trying to force a round peg into a square hole. Dennison's scheme would more suit Peterman. Plus - getting those passes out quickly is going to force teams to back off the LOS and open up our running game. IMHO

Pardon me if I am wrong - BUT - didn't Tyrod have all of those guys (except Zay) in the Saints game? You are right on one point - one 1 or 2 got open - but Tyrod failed that sniff test.

^^^^^^^^^ T.H.I.S. ^^^^^^^^^ It is just a GD shame that the Bills can't find a way to end the drought THIS YEAR - But no. Once you sign the "big" contract seems you have to screw up royally OR get hurt in order to turn the reins over to the next guy. Another thing - In this Bills culture of "must buy into the PROCESS" or you're out - WHO in their right mind is going to stand up and say ANYTHING that might go against the grain like like "maybe time to change QB". So this new culture does NOT ALLOW players to speak out for changes in the PROCESS. "The PROCESS" is kind of a catch 22. Seems to allow little room for suggestions or corrections. IMO

Not necessarily. With Peterman, opposing teams can't just crowd the line like they do with Tyrod. Opposing team (just like the Saints did) have to play back and respect that the QB is NOT AFRAID to throw the ball. THAT alone will help the running game!

MAYBE - just maybe they were "4 Deep 10 to 15 yards off the line" BECAUSE Peterman was NOT AFRAID TO THROW THE BALL!

Thanks for the link! I too had turned the channel and missed Peterman's plays. I am done watching Tyrod. Every snap yesterday I heard myself screaming "throw the damn ball"! Time to find out what we have in Peterman.