buffalo2218 Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:32 PM, SaviorPeterman said: Yes and that's when the true Peterman era will begin. Despite all the talk of trading up for a franchise QB, I still get the sense that Beane and McD love NP and will build around him in the offseason. This doesn't mean we won't bring in another veteran or draft another QB in the mid rounds though. Expand I seriously doubt if the Bills have a chance to get one of these guys in the draft, they'd pass them up just to build around Peterman. Peterman has a very long way to go in terms of development.
Rocky Landing Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:20 PM, buffalo2218 said: Yeah starting Peterman really decresed the Bills chances of winning against a hot San Diego team on the road. Given how Taylor played against the Saints the week before, it's possible he could have been worse against the Chargers Expand The entire team played better in the second half with Taylor under center. I don't think that's a coincidence.
buffalo2218 Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:35 PM, Rocky Landing said: The entire team played better in the second half with Taylor under center. I don't think that's a coincidence. Expand What was the score in the second half?
Royale with Cheese Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:29 PM, KingRex said: The problem was it was a stupid player development strategy. There is a good reason why virtually all rookies do not play unless forced by injury. They are not ready. At the very least, McD should have waited until late in the week to officially announce the switch as SD's D would have prepared for tyrod rather than working to disguise coverages to rape a rookie. Whether your focus was the present or the future, this was a bad move poorly done. Expand Not as much today. More rookies are starting today. https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/andrew-luck-robert-griffin-iii-why-more-rookie-qbs-are-starting-wednesdays-with-billick-091212
LABILLBACKER Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:24 PM, bobobonators said: The mistake to start Peterman, while certainly a mistake, is wildly overblown. The offense was pretty bad in the games leading up to that Chargers game. The team was looking for a spark. My spark wouldnt have been to bench TT. It wouldve been to fire castillo and Rico at the same time and call plays based off of a Madden simulation; cant do any worse than Rico’s in-game adjustments and playcalling thats for sure. Expand McD rolling the dice for 1 game and sending Peterman to the wolves on the road was hardly the worst thing our team did this year. Keeping Dennison, Castillo, Tolbert and Ducasse is much more heinous.
26CornerBlitz Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:35 PM, buffalo2218 said: What was the score in the second half? Expand 17-17 http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017111907/2017/REG11/bills@chargers?icampaign=GC_schedule_rr#menu=gameinfo&tab=recap 2
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:35 PM, Rocky Landing said: The entire team played better in the second half with Taylor under center. I don't think that's a coincidence. Expand I have been trying to tell people this for a while now. Starting Nate was a kick in the ass message to get your asses moving ore be ready to be benched/ cut.
Ray Finkel Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:29 PM, The_Dude said: The real mistake was bringing Tyrod back. We could have easily done better for less. Expand On 1/2/2018 at 11:29 PM, The_Dude said: The real mistake was bringing Tyrod back. We could have easily done better for less. Expand Absolutely!
Seanbillsfan2206 Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 I was all about Peterman starting. I even tried ordering his jersey immediately after the announcement. Glad that order didn’t go through....
buffalo2218 Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:35 PM, Rocky Landing said: The entire team played better in the second half with Taylor under center. I don't think that's a coincidence. Expand Geez dude, the Chargers were up 37-7 at the start of the second half, did the Bills play better or did the Chargers play soft with a huge lead? 1
Woodman19 Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 The Irony is that Peterman will be here long after Tyrod is gone.
Bills757 Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:20 PM, buffalo2218 said: Yeah starting Peterman really decresed the Bills chances of winning against a hot San Diego team on the road. Given how Taylor played against the Saints the week before, it's possible he could have been worse against the Chargers Expand A guy who rarely throws INT's could do worse than 5 picks in one half? Um...okay, yea, right. I'm not sure Taylor could've been worse if he tried. 1
Rocky Landing Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:39 PM, buffalo2218 said: Geez dude, the Chargers were up 37-7 at the start of the second half, did the Bills play better or did the Chargers play soft with a huge lead? Expand There's really no question in my mind. They played better on both sides of the ball in the second half, especially the offense.
buffalo2218 Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:41 PM, Bills757 said: A guy who rarely throws INT's could do worse than 5 picks in one half? Um...okay, yea, right. I'm not sure Taylor could've been worse if he tried. Expand As opposed to Taylor's performance against the Saints? On 1/2/2018 at 11:42 PM, Rocky Landing said: There's really no question in my mind. They played better on both sides of the ball in the second half, especially the offense. Expand Of course they did if the Chargers let off the gas with a 30 point lead 1
SaviorPeterman Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:41 PM, Woodman19 said: The Irony is that Peterman will be here long after Tyrod is gone. Expand Yes and hopefully for many years to come. A lot of folks obviously aren't going to be happy when he's the starter next year.....
Rocky Landing Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:41 PM, Woodman19 said: The Irony is that Peterman will be here long after Tyrod is gone. Expand This seems to be the conventional wisdom, but I'm not so sure. If we draft a QB high, which seems likely, would it be better to have Taylor, whichever vet journeyman is available, or Peterman/Webb?
Bills757 Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 On 1/2/2018 at 11:42 PM, buffalo2218 said: As opposed to Taylor's performance against the Saints? Of course they did if the Chargers let off the gas with a 30 point lead Expand So one of the worst halves in NFL history and Taylor would do worse? You're reaching....a lot. In all seriousness, McD could've picked a different team to have Peterman start. The Chargers' pass rush was brutal and not a good matchup for Peterman.
suorangefan4 Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 Is the entire media so ignorant to the fact that Nathan Peterman won against the Colts afterwards?
Bad Things Posted January 2, 2018 Posted January 2, 2018 Bollocks. This is just hindsight being 20/20. Hot-Rod was playing uninspired, crappy football at the time and the coaching staff wanted to see what their other QB could do. I had no problem with them doing that. 2
Recommended Posts