reddogblitz Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 6 hours ago, McNubbins said: Taylor if they're trying to win now. Peterman if they're trying to win in the future. Why can't we do both? And, does anyone REALLY think Nate Peterpan has any chance of ever being even as good as Kyle Orton or Tannyhill? And those guys are borderline. Go for the win on Sunday and let the chips fall where they may.
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 (edited) 40 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. I am not making excuses, Scott. How many times have I said it was horrible and horrendous? A lot. Taylor IMO would not have won that game (sorry work interruption) - with this defense. Edited November 21, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan
reddogblitz Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 20 minutes ago, CodeMonkey said: 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 With that attitude they certainly won't. Or anytime soon for that matter. A coach that accepts losing is not a good look. "The coach that is rebuilding is rebuilding for the next coach that comes in." --Bill Parcells 1
Bills Pimpin' Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 36 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. Didn't Tyrod have a strip sack fumble for a touchdown in the second half last week? Wasn't it in mop up duty? To think Tyrod is heads and shoulders above Peterman is crazy. They both have different terrible faults at this point, it's just that Tyrods have been there for 3 years in Buffalo and Peterman has played 1 half and can still learn from it. Tyrod is what he is. No more evaluation needed.
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 26 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: Escapability is bogus? Okay Escaping a pass rush can be a good thing in the proper context. It is not a "good thing" when the player puts himself into the situation because he is too hesitant. It is like this - Oh look I escaped from a sack brought on by my biggest weakness
Mrbojanglezs Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 29 minutes ago, buffaloboyinATL said: Oh man, this place will go even crazier than it already is. Im fine with it if true.
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 1 minute ago, Bills Pimpin' said: Didn't Tyrod have a strip sack fumble for a touchdown in the second half last week? Wasn't it in mop up duty? To think Tyrod is heads and shoulders above Peterman is crazy. They both have different terrible faults at this point, it's just that Tyrods have been there for 3 years in Buffalo and Peterman has played 1 half and can still learn from it. Tyrod is what he is. No more evaluation needed. You can't teach an old dog new tricks. Maybe its why they play QB's from the get go.
Kirby Jackson Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said: Escaping a pass rush can be a good thing in the proper context. It is not a "good thing" when the player puts himself into the situation because he is too hesitant. It is like this - Oh look I escaped from a sack brought on by my biggest weakness Except he is the 4th highest rated passer in the league under pressure. When he escapes good things happen. That’s not when he struggles.
TuelTime Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 3 minutes ago, buffaloboyinATL said: 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. One thing that I think McDermott has going for him is that he does appear to admit his mistakes. I do think leaving Peterman in there long enough to throw 5 INTs was rather stubborn, but like others have said, I don't see how you could start Peterman after that showing and not have the entire locker room mail it in. If they are trying to mimic the "Do your job" process that they have over in NE, it will not bode well with players if they contradict themselves by starting a guy that doesn't give the team the best chance to win. 1 minute ago, ShadyBillsFan said: I am not making excuses, Scott. How many times have I said it was horrible and horrendous? A lot. Taylor IMO would not have won that game Maybe not, but he most likely would've kept it close enough to have a shot at the end.
dave mcbride Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 28 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: 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. That is mostly true, but I did add the qualifier "all else being equal." If a player is good (a big qualifier!), he will have multiple suitors willing to pay. 1
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: Except he is the 4th highest rated passer in the league under pressure. When he escapes good things happen. That’s not when he struggles. sorry Kirby. I know you mean well, but what I need to say to that is - YAWN!!!! And no, good things don't always happen when he escapes. This is the NFL where you need to be able to pass the ball. going 12 of 17, is not impressive imo. Even if it was Drew Brees or Tom Brady Edited November 21, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan
GoBills808 Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 Just now, dave mcbride said: That is mostly true, but I did add the qualifier "all else being equal." If a player is good (a big qualifier!), he will have multiple suitors willing to pay. I have to think their strategy in FA next season will be much different from this year...I may be wrong but I think they have a pretty clear 3 year plan in place and the first step was always going to be the most unpopular part of the deal ie jettisoning talented guys like Dareus and Watkins who may not have fit what they envision the core of the team being going forward.
Kirby Jackson Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 3 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said: sorry Kirby. I know you mean well, but what I need to say to that is - YAWN!!!! And no good things don't always happen when he escapes. This is the NFL where you need to be able to pass the ball. going 12 of 17, is not impressive. So you are going to ignore a fact because it goes against what you thought was true? You can’t just say something is true when it isn’t without being challenged on it. If you want to say “so what” I’m cool with it. If you want to pretend that it isn’t true you have to defend that. If you want to argue with numbers and facts go for it but it’s tough sledding.
dave mcbride Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 4 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said: Interesting on the second tweet Vis a vis Roman/Lynn: square peg and round hole.
Scott7975 Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 (edited) 36 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said: I am not making excuses, Scott. How many times have I said it was horrible and horrendous? A lot. Taylor IMO would not have won that game (sorry work interruption) - with this defense. It was what you are doing though. You are trying to justify the Ints. Like Kirby said Taylor would be crucified. He gets crucified for taking a sack or being off a hair in a 60 yard pass. Yet here we are explaining away interceptions. I don't think we would have win with Taylor either. But I do think we would have had a better chance. I don't care what they do at this point just pick a direction and stick with it. Don't bench a loyal hard working guy that the teammates love then ask him to bail out the embarrassment of the guy he got benched for. If they want the best chance to win start Taylor. If they gave up on the season start Peterman. But be decisive and stick with it and be honest. Edited November 21, 2017 by Scott7975
26CornerBlitz Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 As you may have heard, the Buffalo Bills made a switch at quarterback. It did not go well, nor did it last long. It's what most of the football world was talking about on Sunday, and even into Monday morning. It's a good chunk of what we were talking about too. Hardly anyone, however, is talking about the wide receiver who played against Buffalo, whose very good day was overshadowed by the Bills quarterback's very bad day. In some ways, though, that receiver's day was even more historic, and for obviously more favorable reasons. But we'll begin with that Bills quarterback. Nathan Peterman played two years at the University of Tennessee, then transferred to Pittsburgh, where he was a two-year starter for the Panthers. In his senior year of 2016, he led the Atlantic Coast Conference in yards per pass and NCAA passer rating, ahead of future first-round draft picks Mitchell Trubisky and Deshaun Watson. Still, QBASE was skeptical of his chances for NFL success. That was partly due to the weak schedule of defenses he faced, and partly because his stats were inflated by the talents of the teammates around him. (Pitt linemen Dorian Johnson and Adam Bisnowaty were both drafted, though neither has played in a game yet -- Johnson was drafted by Arizona, but failed to make the team and is now with Houston.)
Southtown Tommy Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 36 minutes ago, Bills Pimpin' said: Didn't Tyrod have a strip sack fumble for a touchdown in the second half last week? Wasn't it in mop up duty? To think Tyrod is heads and shoulders above Peterman is crazy. They both have different terrible faults at this point, it's just that Tyrods have been there for 3 years in Buffalo and Peterman has played 1 half and can still learn from it. Tyrod is what he is. No more evaluation needed. Well said and very true.
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Scott7975 said: It was what you are doing though. You are trying to justify the Ints. Like Kirby said Taylor would be crucified. He gets crucified for taking a sack or being off a hair in a 60 yard pass. Yet here we are explaining away interceptions. I don't think we would have win with Taylor either. But I do think we would have had a better chance. I don't care what they do at this point just pick a direction and stick with it. Don't bench a loyal hard working guy that the teammates love then ask him to bail out the embarrassment of the guy he got benched for. If they want the best chance to win start Taylor. If they gave up on the season start Peterman. But be decisive and stick with it and be honest. Scott. The are no more excuses valid or not. The FO / HC made a decision when they benched TT. To me that indicates that TT is done in Buffalo. It's not about who is better and who sucks Edited November 21, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan
Kirby Jackson Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 5 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said: Scott. The are no more excuses valid or not. The FO / HC made a decision when they benched TT. To me that indicates that TT is done in Buffalo. It's not about who is better and who sucks I don’t think that anyone disagrees with this. The Bills have to get their guy in this draft. No one is arguing that. Don’t try to lie to us though and tell us that you are trying to win now. It’s impossible that McDermott believes (or believed) that Peterman gave them a better chance to win. He’s either completely and utterly incompetent or a liar. Pick your poison
Recommended Posts