Kirby Jackson Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 15 minutes ago, MiltonWaddams said: Our terrible truth. When a 5th round QB who just set the NFL record for ints in a half can be easily, and most accurately, described as the correct choice to start. I'd rather see Tyrod as I got the sense that he was the far superior player last week and that isn't going to change quickly. However, Peterman is the better choice for the future of this franchise. This is where I am at. The better player and the better option for this team are not necessarily the same.
Southtown Tommy Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 Play the kid and relax - it's one game. He played under the bright lights in college and will be fine. Some rookie QBs struggle more than others - he needs the opportunity to play and the expectation is he will improve as the season plays out. The season is toast and TT is not the future.
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 2 hours ago, JaCrispy said: People that don’t understand why we need to see what we have in Peterman before we draft a QB...it makes little sense to play Tyrod ever again imo...He is gone after this year anyway...Tyrod is a lame duck Thanks for the clarification. Lets answer an unknown to see what we have in him. At minimum, he could be a bridge QB until the guy they draft in '18 is ready to play.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 17 hours ago, Paulus said: I was just joking at Tibs. Though, it would be fun to point out how we ran Orton out of town. Benched Tuel after he outplayed EJ. And, had certain players sabotage Peterman's start. (Especially horrifying) Players need to be held accountable for playing like poop (looking at the especially poop like lines). I thought I'd seen some delusional posting here, but the Cake, it's Yours. We did not run Orton out of town. We enticed him back from retirement on the promise of "another shot at a playoff and a nice fat paycheck". It was no surprise that he continued his retirement plans after that season - he was clearly done with the "sacrifice your body to win games" schtick. The player who sabotaged Peterman's start is Peterman. The Chargers are at the top of the league for QB pressure and sacks. Bosa and Ingram can run wild against a good line, let alone a craptastic one missing its best player in Glenn. "Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence" Tuel was the backup, EJ was the hoped-for franchise guy. Unless the backup plays lights-out, he doesn't keep the gig when the starter can play. Here's the stat lines, you tell me which one is EJ and which one is Tuel: 8-20 (40%) 80 yds 0 TD 1 INT 2 sk rating 31.2 11-20 (55%) 129 yds 0 TD 0 INT 2 sk rating 74.8 18-39 (46%) 229 yd 1 TD 2 INT 0 sk rating 52.2 22-39 (56%) 155 yd 1 TD 1 INT 3 sk rating 63.5 Gee it's sure clear to me who outplayed whom there (sar chasm <<<<=======). The "EJ Manuel worst QB ever" narrative here has long jumped the shark.
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said: Literally, any other QB in that spot would have 10 more. Are you really questioning his escapability?!? He’s kept a zillion plays alive. He isn’t good when he drops back 3 steps and releases. When a guy comes free and he can move around he’s dangerous (see the throw to Zay Sunday). The thought that Peterman faced a level of pressure that Taylor hasn’t seen all year is laughable. The next guy is going to see the same without changes to the scheme and personnel. Which supports my premise. On the 2 INT's that Nate got hit because the pocket collapsed Taylor would have been sacked. His "escapability" imo is a bogus excuse and I will stand by that always. He's escaping because he's too damn hesitant to throw the ball!!! 6 more weeks and we can move on from What Would Taylor Do in a game in Buffalo. Knowing this board he'd be followed wherever he goes too. When they leave I wish them well and forget about them. (until they play the Bills should it happen)
Hapless Bills Fan Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 26 minutes ago, Southtown Tommy said: Play the kid and relax - it's one game. He played under the bright lights in college and will be fine. Some rookie QBs struggle more than others - he needs the opportunity to play and the expectation is he will improve as the season plays out. The season is toast and TT is not the future. Serious questions: 1) do you believe Peterman is the future, or may be the future? 2) do you believe the bolded words above are true of any college QB drafted by the NFL?
Scott7975 Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 2 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said: The two plays that Nate got hit when he threw, please tell me what would have happened with Taylor in the exact time frame? One was to a Bill that popped it up into the air when it hit his hands in front of his face. Not on Nate at all. Mr Sarcasm asks Or did he throw the ball to hard with his weak arm? Tyrod would have escaped or took a sack. Both are better than what happened. Can't believe you are making excuses for Ints when Tyrod doesn't get the same benefit of excuses.
YoloinOhio Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 1 hour ago, McBean said: When is next press conference? He usually does it Wednesday morning 9:30
26CornerBlitz Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said: Maybe not written but there is 100% chance that they are taking a guy early to be “the guy.” This isn’t about finding out if this guy is the franchise guy. The people that saw the most of him (Blokes and Gunner) said that before the draft. Neither believed he was even worthy of the 5th round spot. He was supposed to be “NFL ready.” That was one of the pros of him coming out. I am fine with him playing and elevating the draft pick but they HAVE to get the guy this year. For the umpteenth time, they need to spend an early draft pick in the '18 draft irrespective of Peterman's presence. The notion that they need to play him in order to make that determination does not add up IMO. 1
Kirby Jackson Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 17 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said: Which supports my premise. On the 2 INT's that Nate got hit because the pocket collapsed Taylor would have been sacked. His "escapability" imo is a bogus excuse and I will stand by that always. He's escaping because he's too damn hesitant to throw the ball!!! 6 more weeks and we can move on from What Would Taylor Do in a game in Buffalo. Knowing this board he'd be followed wherever he goes too. When they leave I wish them well and forget about them. (until they play the Bills should it happen) Escapability is bogus? Okay 3 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said: For the umpteenth time, they need to spend an early draft pick in the '18 draft irrespective of Peterman's presence. The notion that they need to play him in order to make that determination does not add up IMO. Exactly
buffaloboyinATL Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 2 hours ago, YoloinOhio said: Oh man, this place will go even crazier than it already is.
Kirby Jackson Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 11 minutes ago, Scott7975 said: Tyrod would have escaped or took a sack. Both are better than what happened. Can't believe you are making excuses for Ints when Tyrod doesn't get the same benefit of excuses. That’s the point. Can you imagine if Tyrod threw 5 INTs in 14 throws last week?!? This place would burn to the ground. If it is about the tank, I am okay with it. If it is about winning, then anyone that thinks Peterman is a better option is an idiot. 2
MiltonWaddams Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 What's the over/under for how many days of evaluation McD takes? Will we know tomorrow or Thursday. If it's later, it seems ridiculous
CodeMonkey Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 I have no reason to doubt JW. But to me, if the Bills start Peterman again this week it is simply because they have realized they are not making the playoffs this season and are in full on evaluation mode to see if they can get by with Peterman on the cheap as the bridge QB for the next year or two. Doing this in back to back away games with hungry defensive lines was probably a rookie HC mistake. But it is what it is at this point.
dave mcbride Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said: This is where I am at. The better player and the better option for this team are not necessarily the same. Something I read in Tim Graham's piece this morning stuck with me. He was speaking with someone in the league office about the situation, and that source told him that Taylor was a very popular player among other players around the league. Judging from how he interacts with other players from opposing teams after games, the fond feelings for him in Baltimore, Richard Sherman's comments, and his own rep as a gamer among his own teammates, I suspect that this is 100 percent true. That gets me to my next point: the current treatment of Taylor -- a far superior player to Peterman -- only makes sense if the decision-makers have a long time horizon to work with. Despite what people think here, I am not at all convinced of that. The problem is that Buffalo has become an even bigger laughing stock than before, and this regime will struggle to attract good players all else being equal (i.e., they have other offers) NEXT YEAR. I can't imagine good players will want to come here for not only the obvious reasons, but because of the stink (in the players' minds at least) of the Taylor decision (remember, other players actually like him). Why is that important? Because of the decisions of McDermott and Beane, this team will go into the 2018 offseason as one of the least talented teams in the league. Their talent level after free agency opens will be HORRIBLE--and again, I expect them to struggle in attracting quality FAs. Because of that, 2-14 is a real possibility next season. Taking a team that collectively went.500 over the previous three seasons to 6-10 (where they'll end up if Peterman starts the rest of the way) to somewhere between 2-14/4-12 is not a good look. If this happens, all talk of a long term for the new regime will go out the window. The fans will be in an uproar. They may well get a third season, but they'll struggle to advance from a really bad record to a really good one. The Rams did it this year, but they're the exception. Most teams that are bad stay bad for a couple of seasons. I'd bet a large amount of money if this regime has three straight losing seasons, they will be out. It's the way of this franchise. Completely cratering next season will not be a good look either. Remember, they will walk into FA with one of the lowest levels of talent in the league. The only decent players who won't be over the hill are as follows: Hyde, White, Shady, and Zay Jones (who does look like he can play). I have no idea what'll happen with Benjamin. He has leg issues and will cost a lot to keep. They don't seem to be committed to Glenn either. Clay is alright, but has knee issues and is basically a JAG at the TE position. Better than some but not great. Poyer is alright too. None of the other players on the team are difference makers. Given that they really have to trade the farm to move up and get a qb (although they may not), their draft pick total will be average by the time of draft day. I'd expect them to have to trade their 2 #1s plus a #2 and, say, a 3rd next year to move up from the 9-10 spot to the #2 spot. Cleveland will take a qb. Edited November 21, 2017 by dave mcbride 2
26CornerBlitz Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 (edited) 14 minutes ago, buffaloboyinATL said: Oh man, this place will go even crazier than it already is. It shouldn't surprise anyone if McDermott demonstrates stubbornness by deciding to double down as if his rookie QB is some prized prospect who's a key to the future of the franchise. Look at how many weeks they ran Tolbert out as the 2nd RB, Ducasse at the RG, and how he insisted the run D would hold up despite evidence to the contrary. Edited November 21, 2017 by 26CornerBlitz
GoBills808 Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 4 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: Something I read in Tim Graham's piece this morning stuck with me. He was speaking with someone in the league office about the situation, and that source told him that Taylor was a very popular player among other players around the league. Judging from how he interacts with other players from opposing teams after games, the fond feelings for him in Baltimore, Richard Sherman's comments, and his own rep as a gamer among his own teammates, I suspect that this is 100 percent true. That gets me to my next point: the current treatment of Taylor -- a far superior player to Peterman -- only makes sense if the decision-makers have a long time horizon to work with. Despite what people think here, I am not at all convinced of that. The problem is that Buffalo has become an even bigger laughing stock than before, and this regime will struggle to attract good players all else being equal (i.e., they have other offers) NEXT YEAR. I can't imagine good players will want to come here for not only the obvious reasons, but because of the stink (in the players' minds at least) of the Taylor decision (remember, other players actually like him). Why is that important? Because of the decisions of McDermott and Beane, this team will go into the 2018 offseason as one of the least talented teams in the league. Their talent level after free agency opens will be HORRIBLE. Because of that, 2-14 is a real possibility next season. Taking a team that collectively went.500 over the previous three seasons to 6-10 (where they'll end up if Peterman starts the rest of the way) to somewhere between 2-14/4-12 is not a good look. If this happens, all talk of a long term for the new regime will go out the window. The fans will be in an uproar. They may well get a third season, but they'll struggle to advance from a really bad record to a really good one. The Rams did it this year, but they're the exception. Most teams that are bad stay bad for a couple of seasons. I'd bet a large amount of money if this regime has three straight losing seasons, they will be out. It's the way of this franchise. Completely cratering next season will not be a good look either. Remember, they will walk into FA with one of the lowest levels of talent in the league. The only decent players who won't be over the hill are as follows: Hyde, White, Shady, and Zay Jones (who does look like he can play). I have no idea what'll happen with Benjamin. He has leg issues and will cost a lot to keep. They don't seem to be committed to Glenn either. Clay is alright, but has knee issues and is basically a JAG at the TE position. Better than some but not great. Poyer is alright too. None of the other players on the team are difference makers. Given that they really have to trade the farm to move up and get a qb (although they may not), their draft pick total will be average by the time of draft day. I'd expect them to have to trade their 2 #1s plus a #2 and, say, a 3rd next year to move up from the 9-10 spot to the #2 spot. Cleveland will take a qb. I think this post is spot on except for the idea that they'll struggle to attract good FAs. I think if you pay them enough they will go anywhere.
MiltonWaddams Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 5 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said: It shouldn't surprise anyone if McDermott demonstrates stubbornness by deciding to double down as if his rookie QB is some prized prospect that's a key to the future of the franchise. Look at how many weeks they ran Tolbert out as the 2nd RB, Ducasse at the RG, and how he insisted the run D would hold up despite evidence to the contrary. You are 100% correct. Fans that are surprised must not have been watching the season. So many confounding transactions, lineups and play calls. We have no choice but to follow the process other than quit being fans (but you're reading this so you won't), but trusting the process has gotten downright impossible over the last three weeks.
buffaloboyinATL Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 11 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said: It shouldn't surprise anyone if McDermott demonstrates stubbornness by deciding to double down as if his rookie QB is some prized prospect who's a key to the future of the franchise. Look at how many weeks they ran Tolbert out as the 2nd RB, Ducasse at the RG, and how he insisted the run D would hold up despite evidence to the contrary. Yeah, I voted that Peterman will start, not necessarily because I think that he gives us a better chance to win, but rather that MCDermott made the decision to start him because of something he saw or hoped to see and I would be surprised if he gave up on that conviction this quickly.
Recommended Posts