Figster Posted December 20, 2017 Posted December 20, 2017 1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said: So apathy is hate? Good to know. Thanks WEO. I'll mark that down and I'll start using referring to myself as Tyrod apathetic. There is no Peterman Era. Its a figment of the imagination of the Taylor Faithful. Figsters figment of the imagination, I like it... 1
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted December 20, 2017 Posted December 20, 2017 55 minutes ago, Figster said: Figsters figment of the imagination, I like it... Nice to know I was helpful. it has a certain je ne sais quoi ring to it. 1
Mr. WEO Posted December 20, 2017 Posted December 20, 2017 3 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said: So apathy is hate? Good to know. Thanks WEO. I'll mark that down and I'll start using referring to myself as Tyrod apathetic. There is no Peterman Era. Its a figment of the imagination of the Taylor Faithful. You should go back to read the many NP threads started before his fateful game. Refresh your memory...It was not "TT apathy".
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted December 20, 2017 Posted December 20, 2017 26 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: You should go back to read the many NP threads started before his fateful game. Refresh your memory...It was not "TT apathy". For me it is "TT apathy". Its boring and dull and inept and frustrating as hell to watch TT let play after play after play slip past him when the game is on the line. It was so bad that we were willing to see Nate play (that disastrous 1st half). If it continues again this Sunday we will be willing to see Nate throw another 5 INTs against Miami. Any Nate Peterman thread started by SaviorPeterman wasn't worth reading the first time.
Lfod Posted December 20, 2017 Posted December 20, 2017 (edited) 7 hours ago, Bills757 said: So you think it's a good idea, when your team is still in contention, to go to a rookie? He clearly wasn't ready yet McD thinks it'll work out? That's the scary part.....that McD thought he could spark the offense. Is McD that bad of a talent evaluator? What you do is stay the course until the team is eliminated from playoff contention or the chances are so remote you decide to see what you have in a guy like Peterman. You don't flush it down the toilet so early in the playoff run. I'm not saying the Bills would've won that game with Taylor at the helm but I'd be willing to bet it would've been a much closer game and it wouldn't have been a shock if the Bills won. Well I wouldn't say it was a good idea. In fact it turned out to be a bad idea. I wouldn't even say that Taylor loses that Chargers game. I know Taylor doesn't throw 5 interceptions. Starting Nate Peterman got as bad as it could get. I think the head coach had the same feeling I did after the Jets and Saints game. The hot 5-2 start was fading away. It's hard to defend starting Nate Peterman now after the fact. I just can't bring myself to hate it because of reguardless of how it turned out he made a move to shake things up instead of sitting on his hands. It was a calculated risk to get better on offence and it failed. I still think the HC made the move in an attempt to make the team better and he even called it a risk so I am sure he was aware it could fail. I want a head coach like that. A guy that worries about winning more then reputation. A Captain that will run to scoop water out of the sinking ship instead of running for the lifeboats to be safe. The ship was sinking and he ran for a bucket. If everyone is being honest then you have to admit it had a possibility to work. I applaud anyone who predicted Nate Peterman was gonna play poorly. I don't blame anyone for thinking it was a bad move. History proves it. We won't ever know if Taylor would of won. We won't ever have to wonder if Nate Peterman would. The coach left no stone unturned and it cost a game but it was trending that way anyway. That's why I ultimately wouldn't hold it against the coach. It's not the criticism of it that would bother me, it's that I think he deserves a little credit for putting his reputation on the line to make a bold move. Edited December 20, 2017 by Lfod
Mr. WEO Posted December 22, 2017 Posted December 22, 2017 On December 20, 2017 at 3:12 PM, ShadyBillsFan said: For me it is "TT apathy". Its boring and dull and inept and frustrating as hell to watch TT let play after play after play slip past him when the game is on the line. It was so bad that we were willing to see Nate play (that disastrous 1st half). If it continues again this Sunday we will be willing to see Nate throw another 5 INTs against Miami. Any Nate Peterman thread started by SaviorPeterman wasn't worth reading the first time. If the Bills make the playoffs with TT, will you not be watching the Bills' playoff game? Or will the risk of boredom keep you away?
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 I’ll risk the boredom. thanks for asking.
Bing Bong Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 On 12/20/2017 at 2:12 PM, ShadyBillsFan said: It was so bad that we were willing to see Nate play (that disastrous 1st half) I wasn't willing to see Nate play.
Recommended Posts