Theory--starting Peterman more about the defense than anything

[dave mcbride]

Irrespective of whether the qb switch is the right move or not, I'm gonna throw this idea out there: the switch is a function of panic about defense and in a sense a hail mary throw with regard to the future of the qb position. 

 

Here's my thinking: McDermott and Beane have decided that Taylor, who is probably more likely to lead them to 9-7 than Peterman, is not the answer and not the future qb of the Bills. They need to find out what Peterman is, but not just for the reason everyone thinks. I susepect they always anticipated packaging picks and moving up to get a qb, but times have changed. That is, they may well be having serious second thoughts about that strategy right now. Why? They are presiding over a defense that is functionally devoid of talent on the front seven -- and I mean almost *completely* devoid of talent. Jerry Hughes is the only mid-level starting caliber player in the entire group (don't kid yourself about Lawson or Lorax), and it basically requires a massive overhaul. They need to spend high draft picks to fix this huge problem (late round prayers won't cut it), and spending a couple of firsts and a second in order to move up for a qb (which is usually the best strategy given the centrality of the qb position) won't let them do that. McDermott is a defensive coach at the end of the day, and overseeing this pathetic crew--which can't sack anyone and (post-Dareus) can't stop the run--has to be galling. 

 

Starting Peterman, who actually looks like a pro-style qb in his limited garbage time efforts (last week and preseason), represents something of a hail mary on their part. They're likely hoping that over the next few games he can show that he's potentially another Tony Romo or Kirk Cousins -- a guy who can evolve into a franchise qb in a relatively short period of time. Both of those guys have put up numbers regardless of who they were throwing to.

 

That frees them up to draft defense throughout on the first couple of days of the draft.

 

Whether this happens or not, I don't know. However, if you apply Occam's Razor to the situation, it is the most Bills-y approach (ignoring qb early in the draft and praying for the best with marginal talent) -- and history tells us that it therefore has a decent likelihood of happening.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

17 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Irrespective of whether the qb switch is the right move or not, I'm gonna throw this idea out there: the switch is a function of panic about defense and in a sense a hail mary throw with regard to the future of the qb position. 

 

Here's my thinking: McDermott and Beane have decided that Taylor, who is probably more likely to lead them to 9-7 than Peterman, is not the answer and not the future qb of the Bills. They need to find out what Peterman is, but not just for the reason everyone thinks. I susepect they always anticipated packaging picks and moving up to get a qb, but times have changed. That is, they may well be having serious second thoughts about that strategy right now. Why? They are presiding over a defense that is functionally devoid of talent on the front seven -- and I mean almost *completely* devoid of talent. Jerry Hughes is the only mid-level starting caliber player in the entire group (don't kid yourself about Lawson or Lorax), and it basically requires a massive overhaul. They need to spend high draft picks to fix this huge problem (late round prayers won't cut it), and spending a couple of firsts and a second in order to move up for a qb (which is usually the best strategy given the centrality of the qb position) won't let them do that. McDermott is a defensive coach at the end of the day, and overseeing this pathetic crew--which can't sack anyone and (post-Dareus) can't stop the run--has to be galling. 

 

Starting Peterman, who actually looks like a pro-style qb in his limited garbage time efforts (last week and preseason), represents something of a hail mary on their part. They're likely hoping that over the next few games he can show that he's potentially another Tony Romo or Kirk Cousins -- a guy who can evolve into a franchise qb in a relatively short period of time. Both of those guys have put up numbers regardless of who they were throwing to.

 

That frees them up to draft defense throughout on the first couple of days of the draft.

 

Whether this happens or not, I don't know. However, if you apply Occam's Razor to the situation, it is the most Bills-y approach (ignoring qb early in the draft and praying for the best with marginal talent) -- and history tells us that it therefore has a decent likelihood of happening.

I was watching a video last night and in it the guy said that Taylor had a big ? next to him at the beginning of the season and it was highly suspected that he would only be in Buffalo for 17.  

 

[1st Ammendment NoMas]

not a bad theory at all and TT was just not getting it done. I think they want to install their system and TT does not fit well into the machine.

[hondo in seattle]

My question is this...

 

Which would score more points?  A Peterman led Dennison offense or a Tyrod led Roman offense?

 

The way we used Tyrod last year was ideal for his skill set.  Not only did  Tyrod gain a lot of yards on the ground, the threat of his running helped our backs lead the NFL in rushing.  More importantly. we scored a lot of points.

 

Instead of running a similar offensive system, Rico put Tyrod in a different kind of offense that hasn't been productive.  So now instead of switching offenses he's switching QBs.   

 

Peterman might be the next-coming of Brett Favre as Micah suggests.  Maybe Peterman's looked so good in practice that they just couldn't sit him anymore.  But Rico's decision making has been interesting.  

[BillsVet]

A plausible theory. McBeane have already spent a great deal on the new secondary, but it wouldn't surprise me to see them go again focus on the front 7. They've already used two high picks last year on offense (Z. Jones and Dawkins) while trading for Benjamin. If Peterman is passable, I could see them justifing those moves as freeing them up to go defense in the 2018 draft.

 

If so, this ideology is why Buffalo doesn't win, hasn't won, nor will win in this era. We've been down the road of stacking the defense with high picks and big contract types and it's never worked. The game isn't suited to being strong defensively and pedestrian on offense. New England right now is among the league's worst defenses and yet they're still 7-2. Certainly they don't need as much on that side of the ball with Brady, but for Buffalo to return to the days of Jauron going defense heavy in 2006, or Nix doing the same in 2010-2012, they're not balanced for how the NFL operates now. Never focusing on obtaining a QB is the common denominator for the generation of failure we're witnessing.

 

 

 

 

[billsfan60]

12 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Irrespective of whether the qb switch is the right move or not, I'm gonna throw this idea out there: the switch is a function of panic about defense and in a sense a hail mary throw with regard to the future of the qb position. 

 

Here's my thinking: McDermott and Beane have decided that Taylor, who is probably more likely to lead them to 9-7 than Peterman, is not the answer and not the future qb of the Bills. They need to find out what Peterman is, but not just for the reason everyone thinks. I susepect they always anticipated packaging picks and moving up to get a qb, but times have changed. That is, they may well be having serious second thoughts about that strategy right now. Why? They are presiding over a defense that is functionally devoid of talent on the front seven -- and I mean almost *completely* devoid of talent. Jerry Hughes is the only mid-level starting caliber player in the entire group (don't kid yourself about Lawson or Lorax), and it basically requires a massive overhaul. They need to spend high draft picks to fix this huge problem (late round prayers won't cut it), and spending a couple of firsts and a second in order to move up for a qb (which is usually the best strategy given the centrality of the qb position) won't let them do that. McDermott is a defensive coach at the end of the day, and overseeing this pathetic crew--which can't sack anyone and (post-Dareus) can't stop the run--has to be galling. 

 

Starting Peterman, who actually looks like a pro-style qb in his limited garbage time efforts (last week and preseason), represents something of a hail mary on their part. They're likely hoping that over the next few games he can show that he's potentially another Tony Romo or Kirk Cousins -- a guy who can evolve into a franchise qb in a relatively short period of time. Both of those guys have put up numbers regardless of who they were throwing to.

 

That frees them up to draft defense throughout on the first couple of days of the draft.

 

Whether this happens or not, I don't know. However, if you apply Occam's Razor to the situation, it is the most Bills-y approach (ignoring qb early in the draft and praying for the best with marginal talent) -- and history tells us that it therefore has a decent likelihood of happening.

There are a few ways to define Occam's Razor. Two that are widely used are as follows:

 

When two theories are presented the simpler of he two is most likely

OR

When choosing from amongst several theories, the one that makes the fewest assumptions is most likely

 

After several paragraphs of well thought out dissection, the question becomes Why did the Bills make the switch now?

 

Theory #1 - Tyrod Taylor is simply not a complete QB and has hit a wall talent - wise. There is a rookie who has flashed some talent on the team. They need to find out how they will spend their draft capitol.

 

Theory #2 - Based on the actions of previous ownership, GM's and coaching staffs (none of whom are still here) the Bills will ignore what they see on the field for the rest of the year and waste their draft capitol by not taking a QB high, but instead drafting defense. (this after enumerating the deficiencies on that side of the ball).

 

Occam just wacked you across the knuckles with his ruler.

[The Now Moment]

While I fully understand the theory, Tyrod made this decision easy.  He played horrible.  QB was known to be a need, why wouldn't they see what they have before spending draft picks on a QB.  If Peterman pans out, that doesn't necessarily mean we are going all in on defense.  I'm positive they will address more holes along the offensive line early in this draft if they still have the draft picks.  I mean, they did trade up in the second round for Dawkins.  I expect them to draft a lot of defense too...hopefully they don't have to trade all of their picks for a QB...

[Boatdrinks]

You are over thinking this. Taylor has been " figured out" by opposing defenses . Not much different than happened to RG3 or Kaepernick. Teams have decided the best defense is to keep TT in the pocket , and he has shown zero signs of being able to beat anyone this way. If the team gets behind, which has happened as of late with the takeaways drying up Taylor just can't execute a passing attack that can get them back in the game. He just hasn't kept the offense afloat. McDermott is simply trying to win a football game. He doesn't believe that Taylor is more likely to get the team to 9 wins. The team probably still makes the playoffs at 9 wins in the weak AFC. Wins over the Chargers , Colts and Dolphins ( twice) are imperative. He has broken down the film and knows that Taylor would be presented with the same style defenses and there isn't any way to attack it with Taylor unless he reinevents himself. That won't happen. 

[The Now Moment]

Just now, ScottLaw said:

He played horrible.... last week.

 

Outside of that he was solid given the state of several aspects of the offense. Bad offensive line and no receivers. 

Well maybe instead of it always being on the oline and receivers (btw Clay, Mccoy, Benjamin and Mathews are pretty talented and Zay Jones has shown a ton of improvement) they want to see a quick release QB.  Tyrod has shown an inability to throw when someone appears covered yet Benjamin gets the majority of his catches that way...Also, a quick release will make the oline look better and back defenders off of the line.  Maybe it will help Shady get some room to run instead of defenses stacking the box against us begging for us to pass it.

[dave mcbride]

33 minutes ago, billsfan60 said:

There are a few ways to define Occam's Razor. Two that are widely used are as follows:

 

When two theories are presented the simpler of he two is most likely

OR

When choosing from amongst several theories, the one that makes the fewest assumptions is most likely

 

After several paragraphs of well thought out dissection, the question becomes Why did the Bills make the switch now?

 

Theory #1 - Tyrod Taylor is simply not a complete QB and has hit a wall talent - wise. There is a rookie who has flashed some talent on the team. They need to find out how they will spend their draft capitol.

 

Theory #2 - Based on the actions of previous ownership, GM's and coaching staffs (none of whom are still here) the Bills will ignore what they see on the field for the rest of the year and waste their draft capitol by not taking a QB high, but instead drafting defense. (this after enumerating the deficiencies on that side of the ball).

 

Occam just wacked you across the knuckles with his ruler.

The simplest explanation is that the Bills will act like the Bills. Hence Occam's Razor.  My assumption is that the Bills are the Bills and will act like the Bills typically act. Doesn't get any simpler than that. From the OED: "The principle that in explaining anything no more assumptions should be made than are necessary. Cf. law of parsimony n. at sense 3."

13 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

You are over thinking this. Taylor has been " figured out" by opposing defenses . Not much different than happened to RG3 or Kaepernick. Teams have decided the best defense is to keep TT in the pocket , and he has shown zero signs of being able to beat anyone this way. If the team gets behind, which has happened as of late with the takeaways drying up Taylor just can't execute a passing attack that can get them back in the game. He just hasn't kept the offense afloat. McDermott is simply trying to win a football game. He doesn't believe that Taylor is more likely to get the team to 9 wins. The team probably still makes the playoffs at 9 wins in the weak AFC. Wins over the Chargers , Colts and Dolphins ( twice) are imperative. He has broken down the film and knows that Taylor would be presented with the same style defenses and there isn't any way to attack it with Taylor unless he reinevents himself. That won't happen. 

You're missing my point. Taylor isn't even in this discussion. He's gone.

Edited November 16, 2017 by dave mcbride

[cd1]

9 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

The simplest explanation is that the Bills will act like the Bills. Hence Occam's Razor.  My assumption is that the Bills are the Bills and will act like the Bills. Doesn't get any simpler than that. From the OED: "The principle that in explaining anything no more assumptions should be made than are necessary. Cf. law of parsimony n. at sense 3."

 

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.

Edited November 16, 2017 by cd1

[oldmanfan]

People need to quit using trite hackneyed expressions like:  they are panicking.  Panicking.  Really.

 

McD is the kind of coach who knows how he wants his team to play, evaluates things constantly, and gives serious thought to changes.  Beane is the same in his job.  Saw this with Dareus; did his production and effort merit his big salary?  No.  So move on.

 

They have said over and over again they have short and long term plans.  They want the playoffs this year and for years to come.  After considerable thought McD thinks Peterman gives them a better chance to run the offense.  May work out, may not.  But spare me the panicking nonsense.  There is not one single thing in the HC or GM history to suggest decisions are made out of panic.

[dave mcbride]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

People need to quit using trite hackneyed expressions like:  they are panicking.  Panicking.  Really.

 

McD is the kind of coach who knows how he wants his team to play, evaluates things constantly, and gives serious thought to changes.  Beane is the same in his job.  Saw this with Dareus; did his production and effort merit his big salary?  No.  So move on.

 

They have said over and over again they have short and long term plans.  They want the playoffs this year and for years to come.  After considerable thought McD thinks Peterman gives them a better chance to run the offense.  May work out, may not.  But spare me the panicking nonsense.  There is not one single thing in the HC or GM history to suggest decisions are made out of panic.

If they aren't panicking a little about the talent level on this defense, they're doing something wrong. Panic isn't always a bad response. The issue has to be addressed. As for "long term," this league is the not-for-long league. If they're 4-12 next season, I wouldn't bet a ton of money on them being back for season 3, and if they have a losing record in season 3, they will be gone as sure as the sun rises in the morning. 

[Wayne Arnold]

One of three things is about to happen:

 

1. Peterman bombs and the team finishes with 5-6 wins and a Top 10 draft pick and knowing they need to choose a franchise QB in the draft (win)

 

2. The team stays the same and either squeaks into the playoffs or just misses them, in which case the Bills have the option of taking a QB in the 2018 draft (win)

 

3. Peterman lights it up and is the next Kirk Cousins or Dak Prescott and the team rolls into the playoffs and making a bit of a run and the team doesn't need to draft a QB in 2018 (win)

 

McDermott just put the franchise in a no-lose situation!

 

Edited November 16, 2017 by Wayne Arnold

[dave mcbride]

11 minutes ago, cd1 said:

 

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.

Every other Bills administration the last 30 years has acted in the same way, pretty much. Plus the guy they hired has more than a passing resemblance to another guy they hired nigh on about a decade ago - a former DB and longtime DC that went to an elite school and wants character guys who care a lot to populate his team.  I'm not necessarily down on McDermott, but I've seen his type before. That other coach thought he had a gem with a Bill Walsh-endorsed mid-round pick who ran a pro offense in college too. We shall see. It's not impossible for Peterman to be the next Romo, but it's less than a 50/50 proposition. It'll be interesting to see how he performs and what his limitations are. They exist.

Edited November 16, 2017 by dave mcbride

[Starr Almighty]

Why is signing FA's for the DL and drafting a QB not an option? 

[Dr. Who]

8 minutes ago, Wayne Arnold said:

One of three things are about to happen:

 

1. Peterman bombs and the team finishes with 5-6 wins and a Top 10 draft pick and knowing they need to choose a franchise QB in the draft (win)

 

2. The team stays the same and either squeaks into the playoffs or just misses them, in which case the Bills have the option of taking a QB in the 2018 draft

 

3. Peterman lights it up and is the next Kirk Cousins or Dak Prescott and the team rolls into the playoffs and making a bit of a run and the team doesn't need to draft a QB in 2018

The quality of the 2018 qb draft doesn't appear as desirable as it did before the season.  Nonetheless, I like the win-win-win scenarios.

[BillsFan130]

5 minutes ago, Starr Almighty said:

Why is signing FA's for the DL and drafting a QB not an option? 

Always an option, but of course they are older and will cost more money which isn't necessarily ideal. 

Generally you want to build in the draft and add 1 or 2 missing pieces in free agency. And the Bills have a lot of missing pieces in their front 7 which makes it very expensive to sign them

Edited November 16, 2017 by billsfan11

[Marty McFly]

1 hour ago, ScottLaw said:

Can't pass on QB AGAIN.

 

Assuming Peterman doesn't look like the next coming of Brady, they need to draft QB with their first round pick. Stop passing on QBs. Why is that so easy for them? 

 

As for the defense, this is the roster McBeane assembled so they have no one to blame but themselves for the ****ty talent.They'll have cap room to work with so I suspect they'll bring in a few FAs to help patch some holes, but they need just about EVERYTHING. I'd start upfront with getting some interior pass rushers.

 

I knew they were in trouble when Rico said in the offseason he didn't care what they did last season on offense. 

 

Sounding like a coach who will force his system on the players... which is exactly what we are getting.

 

Yep. Lets hope mcderm is smart enough to make the change at OC the same way he did at QB bc he didnt know how to use him to his strengths. This seems like they need to see how high QB to draft seeing what they have in the rook.

[dave mcbride]

8 minutes ago, Starr Almighty said:

Why is signing FA's for the DL and drafting a QB not an option? 

Front four players who can get to the QB are VERY expensive.  Bear in mind that the Carolina D at its peak in 2013 was getting double digit sacks out of the LDE (Hardy) and RDE (Charles Johnson) positions. They were an overwhelming force that year.  For a five-year stretch, Charles Johnson averaged 10.5 sacks/season at the RDE spot in Carolina. Look at what McDermott has now in that position. 

 

Plus look at what a player like Luke Kuechly does in comparison to Preston Brown. Night and day.

Edited November 16, 2017 by dave mcbride