oldmanfan

The hyperbolic nonsense on this board gets so tiring at times. How many people here think they can do no wrong? few if any. But when you say they have enough of a trak record to know what they'll do, and ignore that a part of their track record was a team making the playoffs last year, it just gets ridiculous. They have made good moves and bad moves. They have a plan in place to make what they think is a long term contender. Criticixe all you want about the one game on Sunday, but don't make that into a complete indictment. They had three terrible games in a row last year and the same coach rallied them to where? Oh yes, the playoffs.

Like making the playoffs their first year

What this stuff shows to me is what young QBs go through. They have to get the game to slow down for them enough to make plays. They have to get enough experience to make those pre-snap reads and get the ball to the right guy. Of course, it is also on the OC to design plays that get guys open, and then the WRs have to actually win their battles. But young QBs have to get the game to slow down. Peterman is having trouble with that. Allen it seems to me might catch on fairly quickly, in that he showed an ability to recognize when to get out of the pocket, etc. It is the rare young QB that can do it quickly. Didn't get a chance to watch last night, but it could be that Darnold might be one of those rare fins.

The post you refer to is a very good example of what puzzles me and why I started the thread.

You do not change people's inherent personalities just because they happen to be NFL head coaches. Gruden is more bombastic because that's who he is, and rex was the same kind of personality. McD is the kind of guy that is quiet, contemplative, and information driven. He is not going to light up press conferences because he's not that type of person. I am old enough to remember the Packers-Cowboys clashes in the 60's. Lombardi and Landry. Two completely different personalities. Both tremendously successful head coaches.

I would be stunned if Allen isn't named the starter. I understand why they went with Peterman based on his off season and preseason, but it seems clear Allen has way more upside.

Who said it was a fluke? Who is pretending that? Not me. I said Sunday night it was the worst opening game in my memory, and my memory goes back to 1960. Now you're just making things up and it's ridiculous. Shame you? Intimidate you? How absurd. It is a discussion about the Bills, and I asked a question. What is the motivation of those who can only see negatives about the team for whom they are a fan. And that's intimidating? Shaming? Please. Some around here talk about those who see positives as being overly sensitive to criticism, etc. If you can be shamed or intimidated by a question on a Bills chat room you need help. How about you just answer the question, because I really am intrigued by that attitude. I don't understand it. You claim the current HC and GM know nothing. You do realize they are the same two guys that got them to the playoffs, right? So how exactly did they screw the pooch last year? I am not saying people around here have no right to their opinion. I am asking you to explain it using some actual objective criteria. And we may disagree, which is absolutely fine by me. But let's have discussion based on real data. I think they should be criticized when criticism is deserved. You can pile the criticism on everyone in the organization for the train wreck on Sunday. McD can't have his team come out like that, it's unacceptable. I don't understand why they play Ducasse. I would like to see them bring another G or two in. I have no problem being critical; that is different than those who see only negatives even before any actual data, like the stuff about Allen where some already declare him a bust. Or I believe your pet project, about how the Bills don't care about winning and simply want to put more money in Terry's pocket, despite all evidence to the contrary. And then you complain when they try to make moves and they don't pan out (like Coleman) because it cost them cap money. That make no sense. So what is the answer? Why the continuing, relentless negativity? They deserve it for Sunday's game, but not for everything they've done so far. What is your answer, if it isn't too intimidating to ask?

I am stunned they haven't brought another O lineman in. But they do know these guys more than we do. My other question is why Lee was not dressed Sunday. They must know our O line is weak, so why is your best blocking TE sitting?

As always you completely miss the point. I am asking what motivates those who consistently post negatives about the team. What does that do to make them feel better? I sincerely don't get that attitude, and would sincerely like to know what the rationale is for such behavior. Am I saying people should be banned? No. Am I saying one should never be negative? No. I am saying that you should actually have some basis for it. Note my OP was before the first game. Do they deserve criticism for the performance Sunday? Of course. I said on this very site that I have watched games since 1960 and I can't remember a worse performance. But here's an example of what I mean. Before the season starts, before a pass gets thrown, how many people here were saying Allen is a bust? What is the purpose of that? What exactly do posters like that achieve, and what motivates that? Any rational thought process would tell you no one has any idea just yet, but folks like that for some reason get their jollies out of spewing that kind of negativity. I have no problem with negativity when warranted, as after the debacle on Sunday. I do wonder about those who are negative just to be negative, and I'd love to see an explanation..

You have to feel sorry for the kid

Well stated

Run defense was actually pretty good whichbwould suggest Star was doing his job. Benjamin for me. Didn't like his effort.

I responded to a comment suggesting that fan's feeling should affect who the coach is or how things are run. Which would be a nightmare. If you are a fan and you don't like it, walk. Yesterday was terrible. They all deserve criticism for that. Last season the same coach took a team everyone thought would be terrible and made the playoffs. You don't throw that out because of one bad game

That's his personality. It's not going to change. You and I can remember some awful years. But I don't know that I recall games worse that the one yesterday.

Kuoandijo got kicked to the curb. That's amusing.

Then I hope we see some changes this week

Then do so

They stunk yesterday. That's on everyone from McD down to the last guy in the roster. Let's see what they do to fix it. But they sure as hell aren't going to do things because they think the fans will like it the most. Thank God.

Then fans can choose to stop following the team. You may have heard of a couple guys named Polian and Levy. They were fond of saying you don't listen to the fans when making decisions.

No you didn't

Again if you can tell me you are like me and have watched games since 1960 fine. If not your take on worst in history is absurd. They stunk yesterday. One game.

I hope your right. The coaches and team leaders have to get on some folks though. Some of the play yesterday was inexcusable.

You go by the data bin front of you.

The plan was to draft a guy. They did. And then bring a veteran presence in to help. They did with McCarron. But then McCarron didn't play well and Peterman did in preseason, so they went with Peterman. Who laid an egg. In hindsight they could have opted for a guy like Matt Moore vs. McCarron. And they just might given Peterman's performance. But Peterman worked his tail off all off season and showed well in preseason games. So he got his shot. some talk about losing the locker room; you could if you'd have ignored what Peterman showed up till yesterday. But he then stunk.

You're the guy that would have traded the whole draft to get Winston. Excuse me if I place no validity in your thoughts on what constitutes a good QB.