McDermott's Subplot Emerging?

[KingRex]

We all saw the preseason. All of the preseason caveats notwithstanding, there was a prevailing thought that Nathan Peterman looked better in the offense than Tyrod. It was apparent Peterman got the ball out faster. He was poised. He seemed to process the defenses he faced much more quickly than Taylor.

 

It sounds really pretty football stupid to both rely on preseason performance as the clear evidence which drives us to a decision and then at the very same time dub pre-season caveats as notwithstanding and allows a judgement which ignores the limitations of preseason one wants to ignore.

 

It was my sense that the prevailing thinking was that Peterman did demonstrate he show great production for a rookie later round draftee.

 

However, the fact remains that no one (and I mean zip, zero, no one with any football intelligence mistakes Peterman for demonstrating first day of the draft (or even second day of the draft) skills that would make it reasonable to put him in the NFL as a rookie starting QB.

 

Peterman has been a great surprise who made a very good showing in the non-gameplanned, training speed of a pre-season game.

 

The Bills might have to start Peterman if Tyrod gets hurt.

 

However, to throw Peterman into the starters role and subject him to opposing DCs and the pro braintrusts of opponents dissecting the limited tape on him and exploiting the many failings in his game which led to the consensus of all scouts that his skills made him a 5th round pick.

 

Look even if you want to dub Peterman the next Tom Brady (boy you must love the fantasy game), remember even Brady needed a year on the bench to learn the pro game. Further, even he has publicly sung the praises of the importance when he got thron into the game by B ledsoe's collapsed lung, that he as lucky to have the wounded Bledsoe around to help him understand the game and what was going on his second year.

 

The fact quite likely is that if McDermott is stupid or weak enough to get bulldozed into throwing Peterman into the game it not only would likely pay few benefits for the Bills in terms of Ws as opposing staffs get to get more and more tape to gameplan for Peterman, but rushing this 5th round choice into a starters role is likely to be a poor way to train Peterman as a pro.

 

The consensus of football pros who have forgotten more than us fans know about the game is that 5th round pick Peterman MIGHT be a good pro one day after a lot of practice and training.

 

To force him to start way before he's ready is simply poor training practice.

 

I hope McDermott doesn't panic and start Peterman like some encourage him to do.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

It sounds really pretty football stupid to both rely on preseason performance as the clear evidence which drives us to a decision and then at the very same time dub pre-season caveats as notwithstanding and allows a judgement which ignores the limitations of preseason one wants to ignore.

 

It was my sense that the prevailing thinking was that Peterman did demonstrate he show great production for a rookie later round draftee.

 

However, the fact remains that no one (and I mean zip, zero, no one with any football intelligence mistakes Peterman for demonstrating first day of the draft (or even second day of the draft) skills that would make it reasonable to put him in the NFL as a rookie starting QB.

 

Peterman has been a great surprise who made a very good showing in the non-gameplanned, training speed of a pre-season game.

 

The Bills might have to start Peterman if Tyrod gets hurt.

 

However, to throw Peterman into the starters role and subject him to opposing DCs and the pro braintrusts of opponents dissecting the limited tape on him and exploiting the many failings in his game which led to the consensus of all scouts that his skills made him a 5th round pick.

 

Look even if you want to dub Peterman the next Tom Brady (boy you must love the fantasy game), remember even Brady needed a year on the bench to learn the pro game. Further, even he has publicly sung the praises of the importance when he got thron into the game by B ledsoe's collapsed lung, that he as lucky to have the wounded Bledsoe around to help him understand the game and what was going on his second year.

 

The fact quite likely is that if McDermott is stupid or weak enough to get bulldozed into throwing Peterman into the game it not only would likely pay few benefits for the Bills in terms of Ws as opposing staffs get to get more and more tape to gameplan for Peterman, but rushing this 5th round choice into a starters role is likely to be a poor way to train Peterman as a pro.

 

The consensus of football pros who have forgotten more than us fans know about the game is that 5th round pick Peterman MIGHT be a good pro one day after a lot of practice and training.

 

To force him to start way before he's ready is simply poor training practice.

 

I hope McDermott doesn't panic and start Peterman like some encourage him to do.

 

....I doubt very much McD is even thinking about a change now.....I'd guess not before the halfway point does it even become a consideration barring injury....

[Billzgobowlin]

We all saw the preseason. All of the preseason caveats notwithstanding, there was a prevailing thought that Nathan Peterman looked better in the offense than Tyrod. It was apparent Peterman got the ball out faster. He was poised. He seemed to process the defenses he faced much more quickly than Taylor.

 

We all saw the game yesterday. Taylor does not process quickly. We never saw a three-step drop and immediate throw. We could see his hesitation. We could see how late his throws to the outside were - he was nearly intercepted on two occasions.

 

Opponents know this and in response load up against the run. The counter play to this is to throw quickly. It's been called setting up the run with the pass. We've heard so much about the Bills having no receiving threats. I've grown weary of this. These are NFL receivers and an effective short passing game is possible with a quarterback that can see the field and process options. And why not throw long? Taylor did just that to an OPEN Zay Jones at the end of the game...right at the critical point the Panthers would have needed to defense a long throw.

 

McDermott, as a first-year head coach, is not interested in tanking. He really can't. Had they decided to start Peterman in week one (with a healthy Tyrod) it would have appeared to be a tank. The only reasonable way to insert Peterman is for Tyrod to play himself out of the position. With an offense that's decidedly not Tyrod Taylor's style, that seems to be what's taking place. It looks like a subplot.

 

Peterman starting may occur sooner than later. McDermott cannot possibly want to waste what appears to be a top defense. McDermott needs to see Peterman play to determine his viability. The change is coming soon.

 

If they were to start Peterman this year we first must get through the briar patch of defenses. We will see what happens after Denver and Atlanta and the pressure they bring.

[GETTOTHE50]

TT doesn't get yanked unless the playoffs are out of reach. You'd lose the vets if you bench Tyrod regardless of how he plays because you're essentially admitting the season is over. Peterman is not a worldbeater, of he were he would have won the job in training camp. When and if our season is officially over you may as well start the rookie to see how good he is while preparing to draft a QB in rd1. We'll not get the top QB in this draft, but I'm fine with #2. The Jets will have the top pick in the draft and won't trade out of that spot.

 

I've thought about this, and maybe the vets are tired of tyrod too.

 

IMO you gotta ask the leaders on the team if they would be ok with the change.

 

I was watching undisputed one day, and shannon sharpe said the vets were wanting a QB change from tony banks to trent dilfer in the year they won superbowl 35.

 

You do it if the leaders are on board.

[Ron Burgundy]

 

I've thought about this, and maybe the vets are tired of tyrod too.

 

IMO you gotta ask the leaders on the team if they would be ok with the change.

 

I was watching undisputed one day, and shannon sharpe said the vets were wanting a QB change from tony banks to trent dilfer in the year they won superbowl 35.

 

You do it if the leaders are on board.

 

I would think that if TT continues to play this poorly they wouldn't mind so much. Especially if Peterman can pull out a win. That said, i don't think he's a better option. Maybe he's a little bit better at reading defenses and leading receivers but what he makes up there ever so slightly he lacks in mobility.

 

I wish Dennison had just stuck to a similar offensive structure as last years. We are considerably worse this year. Playing Denver next week doesn't help, they manhandled a very good Dallas team.

[jaybee]

It sounds really pretty football stupid to both rely on preseason performance as the clear evidence which drives us to a decision and then at the very same time dub pre-season caveats as notwithstanding and allows a judgement which ignores the limitations of preseason one wants to ignore.

 

 

 

....but not as football stupid as rolling out for a 3rd year a QB that has topped out, hit his ceiling and has too slow of a CPU to be a consistently good football player at the position. We have our answer 3 years running on Tyrod.

 

Insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

 

I say put in Nate after the bye...that is if Tyrod continues to struggle which he most likely will based on our data so far.

[Captainrc4]

TT doesn't get yanked unless the playoffs are out of reach. You'd lose the vets if you bench Tyrod regardless of how he plays because you're essentially admitting the season is over. Peterman is not a worldbeater, of he were he would have won the job in training camp. When and if our season is officially over you may as well start the rookie to see how good he is while preparing to draft a QB in rd1. We'll not get the top QB in this draft, but I'm fine with #2. The Jets will have the top pick in the draft and won't trade out of that spot.

Are you sure he would lose the vets? Maybe the vets are just as fed up with the fans and would like to see a change. They want to win and they have seen that TT will not bring them to the playoffs and maybe Peterman will. Not saying that is the case, but the vets are saying all the right things and so are coaches. The issue is the body language on the field. I was at the game and saw Jordan Matthews get mad and threw his hands in the air when he was wide open, in the middle of the field. I saw a few players do that yesterday.

 

Point is, they have seen what TT can and cannot do and instead of turning against him and make it a problem in the locker room, they are going with the punches until a change is made.

 

That is just my opinion though.

[Buffalo Boy]

Mushin Muhammad and Co. are currently LAUGHING , ( on WFNZ, in CLT)literally at TT at the QB position. NFL receivers making fun of him and the Bills for fielding him.

How can it not be seen by all?

How could anyone defend him last year?

Edited September 18, 2017 by Buffalo Boy

[BillsFan130]

The backup QB is always the fan favourite. Backups are backups for a reason. Tyrod right now is obviously better than Peterman or Peterman would be starting. Keep in mind he is a rookie 5th round pick and probably isn't close to starting in the NFL

[RyanC883]

If our D continues to dominate, esp. if it plays well against Den and ATL, and the offense continues to sputter, I expect TT to be benched ASAP. Perhaps the O-line coach also.

The backup QB is always the fan favourite. Backups are backups for a reason. Tyrod right now is obviously better than Peterman or Peterman would be starting. Keep in mind he is a rookie 5th round pick and probably isn't close to starting in the NFL

 

While generally true, not always.

Are you sure he would lose the vets? Maybe the vets are just as fed up with the fans and would like to see a change. They want to win and they have seen that TT will not bring them to the playoffs and maybe Peterman will. Not saying that is the case, but the vets are saying all the right things and so are coaches. The issue is the body language on the field. I was at the game and saw Jordan Matthews get mad and threw his hands in the air when he was wide open, in the middle of the field. I saw a few players do that yesterday.

 

Point is, they have seen what TT can and cannot do and instead of turning against him and make it a problem in the locker room, they are going with the punches until a change is made.

 

That is just my opinion though.

 

I agree with this. Vets want to win NOW. Petterman may or may not give them that chance. TT def does not.

It sounds really pretty football stupid to both rely on preseason performance as the clear evidence which drives us to a decision and then at the very same time dub pre-season caveats as notwithstanding and allows a judgement which ignores the limitations of preseason one wants to ignore.

 

It was my sense that the prevailing thinking was that Peterman did demonstrate he show great production for a rookie later round draftee.

 

However, the fact remains that no one (and I mean zip, zero, no one with any football intelligence mistakes Peterman for demonstrating first day of the draft (or even second day of the draft) skills that would make it reasonable to put him in the NFL as a rookie starting QB.

 

Peterman has been a great surprise who made a very good showing in the non-gameplanned, training speed of a pre-season game.

 

The Bills might have to start Peterman if Tyrod gets hurt.

 

However, to throw Peterman into the starters role and subject him to opposing DCs and the pro braintrusts of opponents dissecting the limited tape on him and exploiting the many failings in his game which led to the consensus of all scouts that his skills made him a 5th round pick.

 

Look even if you want to dub Peterman the next Tom Brady (boy you must love the fantasy game), remember even Brady needed a year on the bench to learn the pro game. Further, even he has publicly sung the praises of the importance when he got thron into the game by B ledsoe's collapsed lung, that he as lucky to have the wounded Bledsoe around to help him understand the game and what was going on his second year.

 

The fact quite likely is that if McDermott is stupid or weak enough to get bulldozed into throwing Peterman into the game it not only would likely pay few benefits for the Bills in terms of Ws as opposing staffs get to get more and more tape to gameplan for Peterman, but rushing this 5th round choice into a starters role is likely to be a poor way to train Peterman as a pro.

 

The consensus of football pros who have forgotten more than us fans know about the game is that 5th round pick Peterman MIGHT be a good pro one day after a lot of practice and training.

 

To force him to start way before he's ready is simply poor training practice.

 

I hope McDermott doesn't panic and start Peterman like some encourage him to do.

 

Peterman did defeat arguably the best defense in college football (Clemson) last year. Tossing 5TD passes with 307 yards (no Int's).

[Fan in San Diego]

As Alaska Darin once said, the only reason most people are alive is because it's illegal to kill them.

Maybe we need a real life purge! Just saying.

[CEN-CAL17]

It irritates me that this team can't complete your basic 3 step drop passes, 5yd hitch, out, a slant etc.

 

Joe B pointed out TT had 2 completions to a WR through 3 Qtrs yesterday. That's embarrassing!!!!

Panthers D is good, but they ain't that damn good!

 

One more game like that from TT he should be done. If McDermott is gonna be a man of his word a look to build at every position... he can't stand by a guy who has 15 passing yards in a half and can't get the ball out quickly.

[2003Contenders]

I also believe a change is imminent despite McD's predictable canned remarks today at the press conference and insisting Taylor is the guy.

 

No way he will stick with Taylor after what is about to happen against the Broncos and Falcons and we are sitting at 1-3. Any momentum this regime has will be up in flames if they stick with Taylor much longer especially since they have no ties to him and he's a Whaley guy.

 

Or perhaps, you just uncovered the likelihood of what will happen based on the schedule. Assuming the offense does not improve substantially and we are looking at 1-4, the week 5 bye could be the appropriate time to make the switch to Peterman.

[LABILLBACKER]

I think we all need to get beyond whether something is conceived as "tanking" or not. TT is not a true starting NFL QB. He's exactly what he was on the Ravens. It doesn't make sense playing him anymore. If he struggles v Denver (which he will), insert NP and start evaluating him. We're going to be drafting a QB either early or late in the 1st anyway.

[nedboy7]

With the second worst wr crew in the league you still B word about TT. I can't wait for peterman to come in and just get his ass handed to him.

[Buffalo Boy]

 

Or perhaps, you just uncovered the likelihood of what will happen based on the schedule. Assuming the offense does not improve substantially and we are looking at 1-4, the week 5 bye could be the appropriate time to make the switch to Peterman.

Which is a point many of us made before the season because this was a very predictable outcome. Edited September 18, 2017 by Buffalo Boy

[HT02]

We all saw the preseason. All of the preseason caveats notwithstanding, there was a prevailing thought that Nathan Peterman looked better in the offense than Tyrod. It was apparent Peterman got the ball out faster. He was poised. He seemed to process the defenses he faced much more quickly than Taylor.

 

We all saw the game yesterday. Taylor does not process quickly. We never saw a three-step drop and immediate throw. We could see his hesitation. We could see how late his throws to the outside were - he was nearly intercepted on two occasions.

 

Opponents know this and in response load up against the run. The counter play to this is to throw quickly. It's been called setting up the run with the pass. We've heard so much about the Bills having no receiving threats. I've grown weary of this. These are NFL receivers and an effective short passing game is possible with a quarterback that can see the field and process options. And why not throw long? Taylor did just that to an OPEN Zay Jones at the end of the game...right at the critical point the Panthers would have needed to defense a long throw.

 

McDermott, as a first-year head coach, is not interested in tanking. He really can't. Had they decided to start Peterman in week one (with a healthy Tyrod) it would have appeared to be a tank. The only reasonable way to insert Peterman is for Tyrod to play himself out of the position. With an offense that's decidedly not Tyrod Taylor's style, that seems to be what's taking place. It looks like a subplot.

 

Peterman starting may occur sooner than later. McDermott cannot possibly want to waste what appears to be a top defense. McDermott needs to see Peterman play to determine his viability. The change is coming soon.

 

Agreed!

[CEN-CAL17]

I think we all need to get beyond whether something is conceived as "tanking" or not. TT is not a true starting NFL QB. He's exactly what he was on the Ravens. It doesn't make sense playing him anymore. If he struggles v Denver (which he will), insert NP and start evaluating him. We're going to be drafting a QB either early or late in the 1st anyway.

There will be solid QBs to be had in the 2nd and 3rd rounds next year. This draft is super deep at QB. I would bet 8 QBs may be drafted in the first 3 rds. 5 of those 8 may be 1st rd talent but will slide due to demand.

 

If Peterman can show potential you may want to grab a QB with one of our two 2nd rd picks.

 

Even more the reason for this staff to truly see Peterman through a span of games.

 

We all know TT won't be a Bill next year regardless....

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

There will be solid QBs to be had in the 2nd and 3rd rounds next year. This draft is super deep at QB. I would bet 8 QBs may be drafted in the first 3 rds. 5 of those 8 may be 1st rd talent but will slide due to demand.

 

If Peterman can show potential you may want to grab a QB with one of our two 2nd rd picks.

 

Even more the reason for this staff to truly see Peterman through a span of games.

 

We all know TT won't be a Bill next year regardless....

 

I want a QB early next year - if petermans good, wonderful - but I'm not counting on it.

If our D continues to dominate, esp. if it plays well against Den and ATL, and the offense continues to sputter, I expect TT to be benched ASAP. Perhaps the O-line coach also.

 

While generally true, not always.

 

I agree with this. Vets want to win NOW. Petterman may or may not give them that chance. TT def does not.

 

Peterman did defeat arguably the best defense in college football (Clemson) last year. Tossing 5TD passes with 307 yards (no Int's).

 

Taylor had 300 yards 3 tds and another bunch on the ground against miami last year. Many of these vet's actually played in that game.

The backup QB is always the fan favourite. Backups are backups for a reason. Tyrod right now is obviously better than Peterman or Peterman would be starting. Keep in mind he is a rookie 5th round pick and probably isn't close to starting in the NFL

 

stop it with the logic! we need to see what we have in him because obviously he would've helped mccoy get 100 yards yesterday somehow.

Edited September 18, 2017 by dneveu

[PromoTheRobot]

Mushin Muhammad and Co. are currently LAUGHING , ( on WFNZ, in CLT)literally at TT at the QB position. NFL receivers making fun of him and the Bills for fielding him.

How can it not be seen by all?

How could anyone defend him last year?

 

I'm curious what they said about Cam Newton's performance?