MTBill Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 Sunday can't get here fast enough... this has been the longest week ever.
Bob in STL Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 58 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said: Was move at QB a Good Move or Bad Move I know this is the age of instant gratification but how playing a few games before we decide?
Mike in Horseheads Posted November 17, 2017 Author Posted November 17, 2017 1 minute ago, Bob in STL said: I know this is the age of instant gratification but how playing a few games before we decide? Everybody on here seems to know right now so then they should get on record. If you don't know don't vote.
Alphadawg7 Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 Neither: It was a GREAT move. Clearly the FO and staff had enough info to make a long term decision on TT. They dont bench him if they feel like he could be in the plans still. So no value in trying to keep making it work with him. We have a ton of draft assets next year, so now FO gets extended look at Peterman to help understand how they will need to spend those draft assets. If he has a strong showing, they can be patient and take a QB were they feel comfortable and not over spend allowing them to use more of the draft assets to also fill in other big holes. If he blows, we could lose out or lose most our remaining games improving our draft position in the first place. That in itself will help us be in a better position to grab the guy they want or make a trade up less costly to get the guy they want by not having to trade up as far. We are still in the 6th spot of the playoffs. If Peterman excels, it could spark us into breaking the drought. If he falls flat on his face, he is easy to move on from as he was a 5th round pick and this team will be handed to the high draft pick next year. Its a big WIN WIN no matter how well or bad Peterman plays. 5 1
LABILLBACKER Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 51 minutes ago, BuffaloBill said: I would call it a necessary move. Good or bad will be determined at the end of the season and beyond. I keep saying it: “Good or Bad” is really more a function of whether the Bills identify the QB of the future or not before the start of next season. Peterman has a dress rehearsal for the job and I am fine with that concept. Tyrod had his dress rehearsal and failed. The real question here is how hot and heavy will the Bills have to get in the draft relative to the QB position. I'd still like to see us draft a QB this April in either the 1st or 2nd round. I still believe strongly in Nate's ability. Now he'll have a half a season to prove himself. Maybe we see the o-line and defense bounce back a little?
Real McClappy Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 6 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: Neither: It was a GREAT move. Clearly the FO and staff had enough info to make a long term decision on TT. They dont bench him if they feel like he could be in the plans still. So no value in trying to keep making it work with him. We have a ton of draft assets next year, so now FO gets extended look at Peterman to help understand how they will need to spend those draft assets. If he has a strong showing, they can be patient and take a QB were they feel comfortable and not over spend allowing them to use more of the draft assets to also fill in other big holes. If he blows, we could lose out or lose most our remaining games improving our draft position in the first place. That in itself will help us be in a better position to grab the guy they want or make a trade up less costly to get the guy they want by not having to trade up as far. We are still in the 6th spot of the playoffs. If Peterman excels, it could spark us into breaking the drought. If he falls flat on his face, he is easy to move on from as he was a 5th round pick and this team will be handed to the high draft pick next year. Its a big WIN WIN no matter how well or bad Peterman plays. I agree 100%, McD and Co. are trying to build a annual contender. They are not trying to build a one and done Wild card team. My hopes and dreams are that Peterman is the next Joe friggin Montana. Even if he (NP) does not pan out or shows zero progression this FO will know what needs to happen in the next 2018 draft.
SaviorPeterman Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 We likely weren't winning another game with Taylor as the starter and now we'll at least have a chance to change the entire make up of the offense so yes it was a good move. Also let's say Peterman does play very good to great this week and we win. This gives Andy Reid and Hoodie very little film on Peterman to work with in terms of trying to truly make him look like a rookie in these next few weeks.
Bray Wyatt Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 this game really is inconsequential on if it was a good or bad move. It is a good move regardless, if we are middling, wed be the same with tyrod, if we do better and make the playoffs, thats a win, if we bomb out and suck then higher pick and can get our future qb
Buffalo Boy Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 1 hour ago, Mike in Horseheads said: Was move at QB a Good Move or Bad Move The move was good! Will NP be good???
Cash Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 I'm in the 8.3% of people (so far) who said bad move. We'll see - hopefully I'm wrong. For the record, I'm only considering this season/this year's team. It's possible that Peterman is the worst QB since Jeff Tuel and we lose out, but that leads to some franchise savior QB in the draft or whatever. But I choose to hold McDermott accountable to his stated rationale, which is to improve the team now, and I don't think it will. Again, I'll be happy if I'm wrong on this one. Tyrod's play against the Saints was indefensible, and I won't try to defend it. He was terrible. However, I thought he was one of the very few Bills who actually played well against the Jets, and I don't really understand why 2 straight total team collapses seem to be 100% the fault of the QB? Is Peterman going to fix the lack of a pass rush, the inability to stop the run, or the inability of the O-line to run block? Could any QB fix those? Jerry Hughes, Shaq Lawson, Kyle Williams, and Adolphus Washington have been invisible for weeks. If McDermott thinks this team is so much better than 5 wins, where's the accountability for them? 1
BigPappy Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 I voted "It's a good move" because I think it's the right move. TT is an average to below average QB that make himself slightly above average because of his escape-ability and ability to use his legs to extend drives. We won't know what Peterman is unit you see him play in a real game with full week of prep time with the "1's" and we'll finally get to see that. He's going to struggle, that's a given, at least at times. What I like about him is that he is smart and can read a defense which I do not think TT was able to do, he has an accurate arm with the ability to lead the receiver and I have read that he actually knows how to throw the ball to the receiver before he's even made his break which TT has NEVER done or done so rarely it's like seeing a unicorn on the field.
Royale with Cheese Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 I just read Cian Fahey's twitter about this move and he's just terrible.
reddogblitz Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Bill Murray said: i said "bad move" because we are in the thick of the playoff race. Maybe Peterman is a total stud, but its just so unknown and so it is very risky by definition. If we started TT and lost, then you can move on w Peterman and have plenty of games left to evaluate. If you win w TT you are in very good shape for the wild card. Everyone quick to say "so what if we get in, we wont do anything so will be one and done and be a waste..." tell that to the Tebow led Broncos. Need to get in, then anything can happen. I voted bad move for exactly the same reason. We aRe in the 6th WC spot with a full game lead on the rest of the pack with 7 games to go.. Now is not the time to see what a rookie can do. It's time to go all in. Now Coach McDermott says this not an experiment. Says it gives a better chance to win. I'm taking him at his word. If the offense is more productive and the wins continue to roll on, good move. If not, bad move. As far as other teams that have gotten in at 9-7, there's the SB XL winning Stealers in 2004 and the 9-7 Giants in 2008. My real concern in all this is the defense. Hopefully Nasty Nate is a better tackler than Hotrod was. Edited November 17, 2017 by reddogblitz 1
GoBills808 Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 4 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said: I just read Cian Fahey's twitter about this move and he's just terrible. Been saying this for three years now.
Gavin in Va Beach Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 36 minutes ago, SaviorPeterman said: We likely weren't winning another game with Taylor as the starter and now we'll at least have a chance to change the entire make up of the offense so yes it was a good move. Also let's say Peterman does play very good to great this week and we win. This gives Andy Reid and Hoodie very little film on Peterman to work with in terms of trying to truly make him look like a rookie in these next few weeks. Not so fast. While I agree with the QB change and think Tyrod has his limitations, he likely would have helped us beat the Colts and the Dolphins at home at least. I'd even give him even odds against the Chargers playing in front of what should be a pro-Bills crowd.
Royale with Cheese Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 Just now, GoBills808 said: Been saying this for three years now. I never really had much of an opinion on him even though he's said some questionable things. I started to take notice more when he said he didn't think Goff or Wentz were good and that Vernon Adams from Oregon was the best on film.
SaviorPeterman Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 1 minute ago, Gavin in Va Beach said: Not so fast. While I agree with the QB change and think Tyrod has his limitations, he likely would have helped us beat the Colts and the Dolphins at home at least. I'd even give him even odds against the Chargers playing in front of what should be a pro-Bills crowd. It's a moot point now that he's been benched but I think at best we were looking at a 2011 finish again with one more win after a sustained losing streak. Still very well could happen but I think this offense will pick up the pace and score more points by default the rest of the way because of how drastically different NP is compared to TT. (i.e. a real NFL pocket passer).
BuffaloBaumer Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 (edited) It's good no matter what because we either found our guy in Nate or we draft a guy next year. Either way, Mr. 56 yards passing is gone once and for all....Are you expecting to jump on people if Peterman loses on Sunday and then we are supposed to know that Tyrod would have done better? The whole question is meaningless right now, totally meaningless.... Edited November 17, 2017 by BuffaloBaumer
GoBills808 Posted November 17, 2017 Posted November 17, 2017 Just now, Royale with Cheese said: I never really had much of an opinion on him even though he's said some questionable things. I started to take notice more when he said he didn't think Goff or Wentz were good and that Vernon Adams from Oregon was the best on film. He doesn't really understand what he's seeing....which would be OK if he wasn't so convinced otherwise. Just bad and boring takes.
Recommended Posts