26TrapDraw Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Attention this topic is being discussed in another thread titled "people that start stupid completely unsubstantiated click bait threads should be beaten with a sock full of soap" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsredneck1 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: My initial scouting report read one word "Yuck." I did go back in the last week before the draft and watch him some more and softened slightly to "UDFA, possible 7th round comp pick." I'd have picked almost any QB that was drafted in 2017 ahead of him. i find it unbelievable how far some of you will go to discredit and put peterman down. did you do tt's scouting report as well? the fact is nate will be on this team next year, tyrod won't. i hope they can get something for him trade wise, but if a deal can't be lined up, they won't pay the bonus. peterman as it stands right now, is the no.1 qb. i don't know what moves will be made but tyrod will not be starting for this team next year. you guys can hate on nate all you want, but right now he's no. 1 in line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 15 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: Ha ha, that’s so wrong. He certainly has minimal upside but managed games. He didn’t make mistakes, and led 2 top 10 scoring offenses. He may not be great but “worst football the league has ever seen?” Get out of here!! We have had 10+ worse QBs in the last decade. Peterman literally did something that no one has done since the merger in his 1st half!! You use hyperbole; I use facts. What isn't hyperbolic is that Peterman is more likely to be on the Bills roster next season while Taylor will not be. The Peterman San Diego fiasco is over with and the stench from that game will not have any carry over on his future here. At best Peterman is a reasonable backup. Considering where he was drafted it was a good investment. The Taylor experiment has played out. He has been given three years to demonstrate what he can do. He is what he is. I don't say that dismissively or derisively. But what is evident is blatantly evident. He has had more than enough time to exhibit some progression to his game. He hasn't done it because his limitations are inherent and can't be grown out of. The adherents of Taylor should be the strongest advocates for letting him go and giving him an opportunity for a fresh start. He is a terrific person who deserves it. And the organization for its own interests should let him go and have a clean break. Both parties in this saga need to go in a different direction and have a fresh start. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 3 minutes ago, billsredneck1 said: i find it unbelievable how far some of you will go to discredit and put peterman down. did you do tt's scouting report as well? the fact is nate will be on this team next year, tyrod won't. i hope they can get something for him trade wise, but if a deal can't be lined up, they won't pay the bonus. peterman as it stands right now, is the no.1 qb. i don't know what moves will be made but tyrod will not be starting for this team next year. you guys can hate on nate all you want, but right now he's no. 1 in line. Tyrod came out before I was trying to evaluate. I am not a Tyrod guy at all. I might be the antithesis of a Tyrod guy. I wanted to dump him for Brian Hoyer or Case Keenum and draft Deshaun Watson last offseason. I just don't let believing Tyrod is not the answer for this team influence my view on Nate Peterman. I didn't like his chances of being a good NFL player before the draft and my mind has not changed since Buffalo picked him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 his name is saviorpeterman and we have 15 pages on this? come on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billschinatown Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 minute ago, JohnC said: What isn't hyperbolic is that Peterman is more likely to be on the Bills roster next season while Taylor will not be. The Peterman San Diego fiasco is over with and the stench from that game will not have any carry over on his future here. At best Peterman is a reasonable backup. Considering where he was drafted it was a good investment. The Taylor experiment has played out. He has been given three years to demonstrate what he can do. He is what he is. I don't say that dismissively or derisively. But what is evident is blatantly evident. He has had more than enough time to exhibit some progression to his game. He hasn't done it because his limitations are inherent and can't be grown out of. The adherents of Taylor should be the strongest advocates for letting him go and giving him an opportunity for a fresh start. He is a terrific person who deserves it. And the organization for its own interests should let him go and have a clean break. Both parties in this saga need to go in a different direction and have a fresh start. I don’t think that either of them is on the roster. Peterman’s best chance is for the Bills to land Cousins and skip a rookie in the draft. If the Bills sign a stop gap vet (like Bradford or Bridgewater) and draft a guy (maybe Rudolph) why would they carry 3? 8 minutes ago, billsredneck1 said: i find it unbelievable how far some of you will go to discredit and put peterman down. did you do tt's scouting report as well? the fact is nate will be on this team next year, tyrod won't. i hope they can get something for him trade wise, but if a deal can't be lined up, they won't pay the bonus. peterman as it stands right now, is the no.1 qb. i don't know what moves will be made but tyrod will not be starting for this team next year. you guys can hate on nate all you want, but right now he's no. 1 in line. Gunner is someone that doesn’t EXTENSIVE work scouting leading up to the draft. He has studied Peterman way more closely than you or I. His evaluation isn’t discrediting, it is informed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 He apparently convinced Bucky Gleason of the idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: I don’t think that either of them is on the roster. Peterman’s best chance is for the Bills to land Cousins and skip a rookie in the draft. If the Bills sign a stop gap vet (like Bradford or Bridgewater) and draft a guy (maybe Rudolph) why would they carry 3? It's a good question. Especially if he was drafted for potential fit with what Dennison wanted to run. I think the Bills would be open minded to keeping Nate and for the sake of appearances might carry him at the start of the year. But if they go bridge vet and rookie 1st rounder I think Nate's place on the roster (and the decision to keep 3 QBs) will entirely depend on how he plays pre-season and even if he makes the 53 he wouldn't necessarily be "safe" all year because when they need an extra spot in an area he will look like a spare part. They only carried 3 QBs this year because one was a core special teamer. Edited January 25, 2018 by GunnerBill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 minute ago, GunnerBill said: It's a good question. Especially if he was drafted for potential fit with what Dennison wanted to run. I think the Bills would be open minded to keeping Nate and for the sake of appearances might carry him at the start of the year. But if they go bridge vet and rookie 1st rounder I think Nate's place on the roster (and the decision to keep 3 QBs) will entirely depend on how he plays pre-season and even if he makes the 53 he wouldn't necessarily be "safe" all year because when they need an extra spot in an era he will look like a spare part. They only carried 3 QBs this year because one was a core special teamer. I agree and think that he has a chance. This holds especially true if the rookie they draft is more of a high ceiling, low floor type of guy than a more finished product. If it is a guy that they don’t think can play week 2 Peterman probably stays. If they are comfortable with that rookie playing that early the guy probably goes. This holds especially true, ironically enough, if they keep Webb. It is like having 2.5 QBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Misleading thread title. "Source" makes it seem legit, so I opened it...please edit the title to reflect the truth. I'd suggest something like "Since I'm bored and 25% of y'all are suckers- Bills all in on......" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grb Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 54 minutes ago, Steptide said: People also seem to forget that he played very well in pre season, the saints game and also the first Patriots game when Tyrod got injured. I'll even put the Colts game in there as he threw some nice passes in putrid weather. Peterman in the first Patriots game : 6-15, 40% completion rate, 50yds, 3.3 yards per attempt, QBR : 3.4, Passer Rating : 49.3 I doubt if even Nate's mother would claim "he played well" in that game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prissythecat Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 5 minutes ago, grb said: Peterman in the first Patriots game : 6-15, 40% completion rate, 50yds, 3.3 yards per attempt, QBR : 3.4, Passer Rating : 49.3 I doubt if even Nate's mother would claim "he played well" in that game. Just drink a few beers and put on some rose colored goggles. Those stats will look better then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steptide Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 minute ago, grb said: Peterman in the first Patriots game : 6-15, 40% completion rate, 50yds, 3.3 yards per attempt, QBR : 3.4, Passer Rating : 49.3 I doubt if even Nate's mother would claim "he played well" in that game. You seem to forget his recievers were not helping him at all. He hit recievers hands and they were dropping passes. Also when the bills got down to the goal line with Peterman, they threw 3 fade passes. I assume Dennison made those calls. Look I'm not saying hes the answer at qb. BUT, if we had to go into the 2018 season with him as our starter I'd be OK with that (for now). A full off season and camp as the starter, plus a full year under his belt already, I think he would have a chance to be really good. I am all for drafting a qb, and drafting one high if we can trade up, but even if we get Mayfield, there's no gaurentee he's the future. He could be an absolute bust. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 I don't know where this thread is going, but I'm pretty sure it ends with SaviorPeterman buying up half of Erie county. Nobody better say nothing!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blokestradamus Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 52 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: My initial scouting report read one word "Yuck." I did go back in the last week before the draft and watch him some more and softened slightly to "UDFA, possible 7th round comp pick." I'd have picked almost any QB that was drafted in 2017 ahead of him. We had a very similar grade on him. I tend to like watching a QB all at once, in chronological order, but I had to do Peterman's in 3 different sittings. He was painful to watch and my notes started to slip into a string of expletives. The kid didn't deserve what the team did to him against the Chargers but I've seen absolutely nothing that has changed my stance on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 I have just been through the QBs in last year's class and I had no grade at all on Josh Dobbs because I hadn't watched him but beyond that of those that were actually drafted Peterman was my lowest grade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 10 minutes ago, Steptide said: You seem to forget his recievers were not helping him at all. He hit recievers hands and they were dropping passes. Also when the bills got down to the goal line with Peterman, they threw 3 fade passes. I assume Dennison made those calls. Look I'm not saying hes the answer at qb. BUT, if we had to go into the 2018 season with him as our starter I'd be OK with that (for now). A full off season and camp as the starter, plus a full year under his belt already, I think he would have a chance to be really good. I am all for drafting a qb, and drafting one high if we can trade up, but even if we get Mayfield, there's no gaurentee he's the future. He could be an absolute bust. Asking again, what specifically encourages you about him? What is giving you the comfort to be “okay” with him as the starting QB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaviorPeterman Posted January 25, 2018 Author Share Posted January 25, 2018 Just an FYI, Bucky Gleason who's well connected in Orchard Park circles wrote a piece on the Buffalo news today pretty much saying that reading between the lines he expects Nathan Peterman to be the starter in 2018. You have to be a paying member to read but here's the link: http://buffalonews.com/2018/01/24/bucky-gleason-looking-for-bills-next-starting-qb-he-could-be-under-your-nose/ "Looking for the next starting QB? He could be right under your nose" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan130 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 17 minutes ago, Steptide said: You seem to forget his recievers were not helping him at all. He hit recievers hands and they were dropping passes. Also when the bills got down to the goal line with Peterman, they threw 3 fade passes. I assume Dennison made those calls. Look I'm not saying hes the answer at qb. BUT, if we had to go into the 2018 season with him as our starter I'd be OK with that (for now). A full off season and camp as the starter, plus a full year under his belt already, I think he would have a chance to be really good. I am all for drafting a qb, and drafting one high if we can trade up, but even if we get Mayfield, there's no gaurentee he's the future. He could be an absolute bust. You are comfortable going into the season with a 5th rounder who looked completely lost, combined with the fact he has a very limited skill set? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts