BuffaloMatt Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 (edited) On 12/23/2017 at 11:36 AM, Kirby Jackson said: I don’t think that anyone believes Peterman should have started. It was a mistake. At the same time there’s no reason to rehash it on the verge of a huge couple of weeks. Let’s move forward and focus on what needs to happen to get into the playoffs. Agreed, but I'd be lying if I didn't say to myself "coaches must have seen something and this kid could be something" and supported their decision. Hindsight is 20/20. The better question is how would the game have gone if KB didn't get hurt? Or what about if it didn't blizzard and NP lit up the Colts? Hypotheticals are so much fun. Edited December 26, 2017 by BuffaloMatt 2
NewEra Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said: The Chargers coaching decision debate has come back again now that it has become relevant in playoffs. Again I am fighting the ludicrous notion that Peterman should have started. Please give me your honest opinion, as I'd like to know if I am in the minority and stop this crusade. And I sincerely apologize if I harp on it too much, I believe my "opinion" is fact and love to argue as such. Move on with your life. Sounds to me like you just like to say “I was right”. Our offense was lacking. Our QB play was meh. Our passing game was nonexistent. Peterman was not ready. I believe the end result would’ve been the same with or without TT. Our defense couldn’t stop them the entire day. They would’ve stopped tyrod. Everyone does. Every week we lost the game and peterman was the starter, so in hindsight, tyrod MAY have won the game, so he should’ve started. Should we have started Peterman vs the saints and pats? Our passing offense was completely shut down in both games. So should we have started Peterman? In hindsight, tyrod lost those games, so we should’ve started Peterman. Coulda, shoulda, woulda Edited December 23, 2017 by NewEra 1
BuffaloBillsGospel Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 Tyrod Taylor had 2 stinker games in a row, it was the right call to make, had it gone right then we wouldn't be having this conversation now but it backfired, I still like the call. 3
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 .....although McD did the "mea culpa my bad" for the decision, who do you guyz/girlz feel was ACTUALLY responsible, McD or Dennison?.................
Mike in Horseheads Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 Amazing when I did a poll on who should start that game it was overwhelming in favor of Peterman. What short memories you all have. 1
CircleTheWagons99 Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 23 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said: No one knows whether the Bills would have won if Taylor started, but Peterman (McDermott) made sure they had absolutely no shot. Boy you are thick and the full on man crush is getting tired. 1
Boatdrinks Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said: Amazing when I did a poll on who should start that game it was overwhelming in favor of Peterman. What short memories you all have. No surprise that fans were grasping for options while the team was in a skid, the offense nonexistent and the season was going down the drain. So was the coaching staff. The teams were going in different directions at the time, and the Bills likely weren't winning the game regardless of the QB. Penciling in a win there when the Bills O couldn't muster wins at CIN or CAR is foolhardy. They seem to have snapped out of the funk with the notable exception of the home game vs NE. Perhaps Taylor will surprise and the road performance will be better than a few weeks ago. If the Bills get edged out in the playoff race, it will be due to lack of offenseive production in a couple of winnable games. The Jets game was 10-7 at the half, but felt more like 28-0. They were a mess during that entire stretch. Edited December 23, 2017 by Boatdrinks 3
CircleTheWagons99 Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 19 minutes ago, NewEra said: Move on with your life. Sounds to me like you just like to say “I was right”. Our offense was lacking. Our QB play was meh. Our passing game was nonexistent. Peterman was not ready. I believe the end result would’ve been the same with or without TT. Our defense couldn’t stop them the entire day. They would’ve stopped tyrod. Everyone does. Every week we lost the game and peterman was the starter, so in hindsight, tyrod MAY have won the game, so he should’ve started. Should we have started Peterman vs the saints and pats? Our passing offense was completely shut down in both games. So should we have started Peterman? In hindsight, tyrod lost those games, so we should’ve started Peterman. Coulda, shoulda, woulda Shhhhh, dont bring up TTs bad games, according to these guys those dont matter, only that Peterman threw Five pics. 1
NewEra Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 11 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said: No one knows whether the Bills would have won if Taylor started, but Peterman (McDermott) made sure they had absolutely no shot. In hindsight......sure. Jordan Mills and Dion Dawkins had a say in that too. 2 picks thrown because both men let Bosa fly in untouched. If either guy would’ve even impeded him for 1 second he doesn’t get hit as he throws and we have 2 less picks, not to mention Dimarco starting it all off.. Peterman looks horrible vs the colts right? He was throwing perfect passes in that wind and snow debacle. If tyrod was healthy and had to throw those passes, I’m not sure we win. The the coaching staff feels that Tyrod can’t run this offense competently. Dennison isn’t an innovative mind. He knows what kubiak taught him. Creating a new offense for his QB wasn’t part of their game plan. They wanted a qb that can identify and be decisive. Tyrods game is built around the exact opposite. Not sure why anyone would question WHY the switch was made, it’s very simple to see. Tyrod wasn’t moving the chains or scoring points, both while not running the offense the way the coaching staff likes, It makes total sense. The result was a failure and we’ll never know if we would’ve won with TT playing. Never knowing if we would’ve won is nothing to hang a hat on. 3 minutes ago, CircleTheWagons99 said: Shhhhh, dont bring up TTs bad games, according to these guys those dont matter, only that Peterman threw Five pics. I think these posters hate the Bills posters that favored the move more than they hate actually hated the decision. 1
Buffalo_Stampede Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 Starting a rookie there made no sense then or now.
CircleTheWagons99 Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, NewEra said: In hindsight......sure. Jordan Mills and Dion Dawkins had a say in that too. 2 picks thrown because both men let Bosa fly in untouched. If either guy would’ve even impeded him for 1 second he doesn’t get hit as he throws and we have 2 less picks, not to mention Dimarco starting it all off.. Peterman looks horrible vs the colts right? He was throwing perfect passes in that wind and snow debacle. If tyrod was healthy and had to throw those passes, I’m not sure we win. The the coaching staff feels that Tyrod can’t run this offense competently. Dennison isn’t an innovative mind. He knows what kubiak taught him. Creating a new offense for his QB wasn’t part of their game plan. They wanted a qb that can identify and be decisive. Tyrods game is built around the exact opposite. Not sure why anyone would question WHY the switch was made, it’s very simple to see. Tyrod wasn’t moving the chains or scoring points, both while not running the offense the way the coaching staff likes, It makes total sense. The result was a failure and we’ll never know if we would’ve won with TT playing. Never knowing if we would’ve won is nothing to hang a hat on. I think these posters hate the Bills posters that favored the move more than they hate actually hated the decision. We, yeah. It hurt their TT love pride. Edited December 23, 2017 by CircleTheWagons99 1
LABILLBACKER Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 (edited) News flash boys and girls Either qb would've lost Now can some of you OCD posters drop it.... PS..if you must get mad at anyone blame DiMarco and our oline Edited December 23, 2017 by LABILLBACKER 1
Big Turk Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 2 hours ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said: The Chargers coaching decision debate has come back again now that it has become relevant in playoffs. Again I am fighting the ludicrous notion that Peterman should have started. Please give me your honest opinion, as I'd like to know if I am in the minority and stop this crusade. And I sincerely apologize if I harp on it too much, I believe my "opinion" is fact and love to argue as such. Wouldnt habe mattered our D was atrocious...no way we could have kept up on the scoreboard 1
BADOLBILZ Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 1 hour ago, CircleTheWagons99 said: Does the offense go into a shell because of OC or QB? I dont see that drastic of a change that everyone on here sees from the first to second half of games, in terms of play calling. What I see is more “safe/error” throws from the QB, and yes with a lead most Head Coachs dont want to have TOs so the ball is thrown less, but that means you must make the MOST out of the passing plays called, our QB cannot do that. And before a certain someone comes and claims I’m rooting for peterman, no its about that. I’m just stating a question, not attacking. It's mostly coaching. We all want him to "make the MOST out of passing plays called" and he misses some opportunities...... but he also makes A LOT of plays where there was nothing there to be had.......totally defeating well defensed football with plays maybe only Russell Wilson could also make. That's how he can be 6 of 8 on third down while a Tom Brady could be 0-11 against the same defense.
twoandfourteen Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 (edited) 49 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said: Marginally better. Another QB guru has arrived on TSW. Comparing Taylor and Edelman says it all with regard to your acumen. You might actually have a point there. Edelman has had a far more accomplished and successful career. He will ultimately be remembered as a key component of all-time football dynasty. Tyrod will always have those 3 TDs for every 1 INT that he threw, though. Hmmm, he doesn't really throw very many INTs.... Edited December 23, 2017 by twoandfourteen
CircleTheWagons99 Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 2 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said: It's mostly coaching. We all want him to "make the MOST out of passing plays called" and he misses some opportunities...... but he also makes A LOT of plays where there was nothing there to be had.......totally defeating well defensed football with plays maybe only Russell Wilson could also make. That's how he can be 6 of 8 on third down while a Tom Brady could be 0-11 against the same defense. Some is an understatement and the only reason he has those so called “plays” is because he is holding onto the ball too long and not throwing it like a QB does.....I will go 75% of his BIG plays are because he could not see the field as a QB and ran a lot.
stinky finger Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 2 hours ago, Boyst62 said: dave. i have never seen him run a route, but i am pretty sure he'd look stiff. These days, he gets under the coverage. Short gains usually - 2 yards. 1
The Now Moment Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 Does anyone think that starting Nate gave Tyrod a little motivation when he started again the following week? He looked awfully comfortable with his garbage performance against the Saints...maybe that motivation helped him play better??? Who knows 1
26CornerBlitz Posted December 23, 2017 Posted December 23, 2017 24 minutes ago, CircleTheWagons99 said: Boy you are thick and the full on man crush is getting tired. The only one who's thick here is you. Somehow a statement of the obvious equates to a man crush. 25 minutes ago, NewEra said: In hindsight......sure. Jordan Mills and Dion Dawkins had a say in that too. 2 picks thrown because both men let Bosa fly in untouched. If either guy would’ve even impeded him for 1 second he doesn’t get hit as he throws and we have 2 less picks, not to mention Dimarco starting it all off.. Peterman looks horrible vs the colts right? He was throwing perfect passes in that wind and snow debacle. If tyrod was healthy and had to throw those passes, I’m not sure we win. The the coaching staff feels that Tyrod can’t run this offense competently. Dennison isn’t an innovative mind. He knows what kubiak taught him. Creating a new offense for his QB wasn’t part of their game plan. They wanted a qb that can identify and be decisive. Tyrods game is built around the exact opposite. Not sure why anyone would question WHY the switch was made, it’s very simple to see. Tyrod wasn’t moving the chains or scoring points, both while not running the offense the way the coaching staff likes, It makes total sense. The result was a failure and we’ll never know if we would’ve won with TT playing. Never knowing if we would’ve won is nothing to hang a hat on. I think these posters hate the Bills posters that favored the move more than they hate actually hated the decision. It wasn't hindsight for me.
Recommended Posts