Big C Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 Kirby, I agree with all your points. If Peterman looks ok in camp, I think they will cut Yates and go with just two QBs to start the season. If TT gets hurt the season is lost anyways. There was no point in wasting further time on Jones. They can focus all their attention on TT and Peterman. Yates already knows the offense. If he looks great in camp, go ahead and keep him. If he is terrible as we suspect, just cut him late in camp. Basically this. I agree with your points but do not believe they are "protecting" him by any means. He knows the system, which makes him a valuable player-coach during camp. I think that's the extent of it. My thinking is Peterman comes in and learns the offense well enough to execute in preseason and then they cut Yates before week 1. Peterman would have to be awful for them to keep all three guys on the roster.
GunnerBill Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 Does anyone really believe that Peterman can't equal that production? Yes. Rick Dennison.
GunnerBill Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 I think to try and answer Kirby's question that most NFL coaches have what I would call "scheme ego". They think "if I can just get a guy to run my brilliant scheme the way I brilliantly designed it we will be okay." So they like a smart vet who can be trusted to understand where the scheme says he should go with the football. To them that does give them a better shot to win because they think their scheme will cover the talent deficiency. It is the old "if I am going to fail I want to fail doing it my way" ie. Not with a mid round rookie freelancing and going off piste. I am not really a believer in Peterman's talent anyway... I hated his film I don't think he is as "accurate" as people seem to believe. So frankly I think we suck whichever one plays but I believe scheme ego is why franchises roll with a TJ Yates type.
ALF Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 I think McD will carry 3 QBs on the 53 and has till final cut down to decide. I hope Peterman and Cardale have a good showing in TC and preseason. Yates is insurance, if he is released and is needed later then he knows the playbook already. Astro will help us figure out who should stay.
Big C Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 (edited) I think McD will carry 3 QBs on the 53 and has till final cut down to decide. I hope Peterman and Cardale have a good showing in TC and preseason. Yates is insurance, if he is released and is needed later then he knows the playbook already. Astro will help us figure out who should stay. So you didn't hear ay? Edited July 27, 2017 by Big C
ALF Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 So you didn't hear ay? Darn I liked Cardale , I thought he had good upside (just woke up)
oldmanfan Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 It might be nice to actually see Peterman play before assuming he's better than Yates.
Kirby Jackson Posted July 27, 2017 Author Posted July 27, 2017 It might be nice to actually see Peterman play before assuming he's better than Yates.I've seen enough of both guys to form an opinion. I don't think either is particularly good but if Yates is better than Peterman, it's a problem. I think to try and answer Kirby's question that most NFL coaches have what I would call "scheme ego". They think "if I can just get a guy to run my brilliant scheme the way I brilliantly designed it we will be okay." So they like a smart vet who can be trusted to understand where the scheme says he should go with the football. To them that does give them a better shot to win because they think their scheme will cover the talent deficiency. It is the old "if I am going to fail I want to fail doing it my way" ie. Not with a mid round rookie freelancing and going off piste. I am not really a believer in Peterman's talent anyway... I hated his film I don't think he is as "accurate" as people seem to believe. So frankly I think we suck whichever one plays but I believe scheme ego is why franchises roll with a TJ Yates type. Good stuff Gunner. This is certainly the best argument for why it happens.
oldmanfan Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 You've seen enough of Peterman? A couple OTAs? Please.
Kirby Jackson Posted July 27, 2017 Author Posted July 27, 2017 He's a backup... who cares?It's more interesting to me than rehashing how often Tyrod throws over the middle or how good Gillislee is. It wasn't just meant to be a Yates question. It was meant to be a "Yates-type" question.
GunnerBill Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 Good stuff Gunner. This is certainly the best argument for why it happens. It is why I think Roman was in the Cassel camp in 2015.
Kirby Jackson Posted July 27, 2017 Author Posted July 27, 2017 You've seen enough of Peterman? A couple OTAs? Please.I've seen enough of him in college to have a pretty strong opinion. The irony is that he has a chance to be the "solid vet" that they are trying to pass Yates off as. I've also seen enough of Yates to know that there are a dozen guys on the street right now that can give you at least as good of a chance to win.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 Dennison is probably more loyal to his guys than he should be. He's a players guy. He pushed for Tyrod in Denver because he loved working with him in Baltimore. He pushed for Tyrod here for the same reasons. He was a part of the staff that drafted Yates in Houston. Ultimately, Yates' fate will depend on how Peterman progresses. As it stands right now, Yates worked with Dennison for 3 years. He can be trusted to run the offense, make some adjustments, run the hurry up, etc., in a pinch much more than Peterman.
Kirby Jackson Posted July 27, 2017 Author Posted July 27, 2017 It is why I think Roman was in the Cassel camp in 2015.Dan Orlovsky just got a job!!! It's definitely interesting and no one ever questions it. It's just something that we accept. I used Drew Stanton earlier as an example. I have no idea if he is any good. I've never really looked into his career. At the same time in my head he feels like "solid vet." He may be terrible but because he's played and seems to always have a job I assume that "he's a guy that can play in a pinch. He knows the playbook and he's a guy that can help the young guys develop." You can copy and paste that for a dozen guys. Some of them fit that description (insert a McCown here) and others just get grouped there. People are lazy and just accept it. Dennison is probably more loyal to his guys than he should be. He's a players guy. He pushed for Tyrod in Denver because he loved working with him in Baltimore. He pushed for Tyrod here for the same reasons. He was a part of the staff that drafted Yates in Houston. Ultimately, Yates' fate will depend on how Peterman progresses. As it stands right now, Yates worked with Dennison for 3 years. He can be trusted to run the offense, make some adjustments, run the hurry up, etc., in a pinch much more than Peterman.I buy all of that. I'm just saying let's not confuse "he can be trusted to run the offense more" with "he can more effectively run the offense." That's maybe a better way of saying it. I don't care who they trust more. I care who will do it better. If the answer is Yates then you keep him. If that's the case, you can take it a step further and start comparing him to other street free agents. Does he give you a better chance than Hill? Ponder? From my perspective, the answer has to be "yes" every time for him to be the number 2. There's some value in that he knows the system; I get it. I'm just saying that with other positions there is constant tinkering regarding depth guys. Learning the playbook is a big reason why but it's not rocket science.
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 beyond "insurance" don't teams need at lest 3 arms in camp? He's a backup... who cares? around here hahahahhahahahahaha that's funny
eball Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 So far I've heard, "solid vet," and "knows the playbook." He's a 30 year-old QB that averages 6.8 yards per attempt and has 6 TDs vs. 8 INTs IN HIS CAREER!! That's a "solid vet?!?" Does anyone really believe that Peterman can't equal that production? It may be that they are looking for that "coach on the sidelines" who will be able to help Tyrod between series...I agree with you that having Yates play means we're screwed and I'd much rather see Peterman out there if Tyrod goes down.
xsoldier54 Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 I've been preaching (maybe crusading) in other threads as to why you would waste a roster spot on Yates. Here are my reasons: - If he is playing for an extended period you are losing anyways - You miss the chance to get a look at Peterman - You have one less pit to use elsewhere on the roster - If cut you can probably call him on any given Monday and add him back - Is he really better than Kaep, RG, Shaun Hill, Whitehurst, Or Ponder We keep hearing that "the guy knows the offense." I guess that's a reason to bring him to camp but someone please convince me that he deserves a roster spot. Would the team be any worse with Peterman taking snaps than Yates? I'd rather win 3 games with the rookie than 3 games with a guy in his 30's. What am I missing (other than NFL teams like certain guys because they have played in games before)? Playing in games and being bad shouldn't be a prerequisite for a future job. Yates is better right now than any of those guys that you mentioned, including Kaepernick, RGIII, Shaun HIll, Whitehurst and Ponder. He is an experienced veteran who will run the offense just fine if TT goes down. Peterman has never played a down in the NFL. It would be foolish to pencil him in as #2. Let him learn the game at the NFL level and develop. Then he is ready if and when you need him. What the Bills are doing makes perfect sense and what you are proposing does not. Simple as that.
MikeSpeed Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 It makes me laugh when I hear someone say we need our back-up to play .500 ball. We can't even get our starter to play .500 ball.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 It makes me laugh when I hear someone say we need our back-up to play .500 ball. We can't even get our starter to play .500 ball.
Recommended Posts