Jump to content

Would going into 2018 with Peterman & top rookie be that bad?


Recommended Posts

Well I'm looking what's out there in FA, Jay Cutler and Mike Glennon would to me be the only possible starters if we felt compelled to sit our QB, Glennon is borderline but of the rest of the FA he is a better option imo. McCaron has done nothing to warrant being a starter, he couldn't beat out a very average Andy Dalton so he doesn't seem to be much more than a career backup at this stage. Seeing what's left I think we should take the Washington Redskins approach and draft our QB but also pickup say a 4th or 5th round prospect like a Kyle Lauletta. Get a top QB coach to coach these guys up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

 

Hey, get your own line

 

 

No one said that.  You said: " I don't want the Bills scraping the QB barrel and spending $10-15MM on whatever's left. Why not just roll with Nate Peterman and whoever we draft, with Joe Webb III your #3? The SD game aside, I thought NP was okay."

 

There are miles of difference between "you only get one half to prove yourself" and "you played a record-setting bad half of football and we'll put it aside when evaluating you"

 

 

Sorry, it's the OP that was silly.  Peterman played OK in the 4th Q of what some call "garbage time" vs NO and NE.  You don't have to define him by the 1st half of the Chargers game.  But you don't get to put it aside either.

 

Apologies to you.      I should have said silly the first time and dumb the second time  by  someone other than the the person who first posted it (you)  

 

I'm just a bit frazzled by all the crazy postings going on trying to sort through the trolling (which I know you are as well ) 

 

Starting Nate is a risk. Starting a new rookie could be a bigger risk.  I'm trusting the process and whatever McDermott does I', OK with it.  

 

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Fitz is under contract. Siemian is like $1.9M I think. You could probably give them your 6th for Siemian and their 7th. 

Come on Kirby...  Lets be reasonable.   I'd rather not waste the  any time thinking about Siemian  who would contribute very little 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the Bills would get in on one of the free agent QB's early-- the market really dried up long before the "beginning" of free agency. Now they have to hope for a veteran like Moore or McCarron--- not ideal. It really hurt that the Jets signed the two guys I would have liked (how many QB's are on their roster now?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Figured you might be, but he's in high demand on the market.  Multiple pending offers based on him outperforming Peterman in the Colts' snow game. 

I haven't been following a lot of the FA crap. Makes my head hurt. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Apologies to you.      I should have said silly the first time and dumb the second time  by  someone other than the the person who first posted it (you)  

 

I'm just a bit frazzled by all the crazy postings going on trying to sort through the trolling (which I know you are as well ) 

 

Starting Nate is a risk. Starting a new rookie could be a bigger risk.  I'm trusting the process and whatever McDermott does I', OK with it.  

 

Come on Kirby...  Lets be reasonable.   I'd rather not waste the  any time thinking about Siemian  who would contribute very little 

 

Siemian would contribute as much as most of the bridge guys that we are talking about but at 10% of the cost. He’s 13-11 with 30 TDs and 24 INTs. No one thinks that he is the answer but I’d much rather pay $1.9M to Siemian than $12M to McCarron. I don’t see McCarron as 6x better.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't care if it were $500,000.00 Siemian's got nothing to offer.   13-11 is about as stellar as Tyrod Taylors 22-10 record.    $1.9M - You get what you pay for. 

 

30 TDs and 24 INTs?  and yet Nate sucks?   

 

You can do better that that Kirby.  At least make it believable.  

 

Edited by ShadyBillsFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Apologies to you.      I should have said silly the first time and dumb the second time  by  someone other than the the person who first posted it (you)  

I'm just a bit frazzled by all the crazy postings going on trying to sort through the trolling (which I know you are as well ) 

 

No worries, we're good.

 

58 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Starting Nate is a risk. Starting a new rookie could be a bigger risk.  I'm trusting the process and whatever McDermott does I', OK with it. 

Come on Kirby...  Lets be reasonable.   I'd rather not waste the  any time thinking about Siemian  who would contribute very little

 

We can disagree.  I think Beane says what he means and means what he says sometimes (has to be listened to for caveats).  He has said they want a vet for a number of reasons and mentioned having a "vet in the room".  I don't think they want a vet to start, except in case of emergency.  But I think they want a vet.

 

I think Siemian might contribute some things they want in a vet QB:

- demonstrated he can at least play .500 ball starting games in the NFL, over a stretch of games (13-11 over 2 years)

- has played in E-P system, so some familiarity (just one year, under McCoy)

- hard worker, knows how to train and prepare at the NFL level, would set good example for rookie

- doesn't expect to be a starter

- reasonable cost (<$5M/yr)

 

Trading a late pick for Siemian wouldn't bother me.

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

No worries, we're good.

 

 

We can disagree.  I think Beane says what he means and means what he says sometimes (has to be listened to for caveats).  He has said they want a vet for a number of reasons and mentioned having a "vet in the room".  I don't think they want a vet to start, except in case of emergency.  But I think they want a vet.

 

I think Siemian might contribute some things they want in a vet QB:

- demonstrated he can at least play .500 ball starting games in the NFL, over a stretch of games (13-11 over 2 years)

- has played in E-P system, so some familiarity (just one year, under McCoy)

- hard worker, knows how to train and prepare at the NFL level, would set good example for rookie

- doesn't expect to be a starter

- reasonable cost (<$5M/yr)

 

Trading a late pick for Siemian wouldn't bother me.

 

I am well aware of the "truths" told during this time of the year.    You noted as much when I quoted Beane saying that he had "no plans from moving on from Tyrod " 1 week prior to the trade. 

 

Siemian  was benched in favor of a guy I loved watching and that I knew was a fraction of himself - Peyton Manning and the best defense in the league. 

 

.500 ball.  nearly a 50/50 INT split  -  30 TDs and 24 INTs .    A 3 year vet that has played half time over 2 seasons doesn't have the experience to properly teach a 1st or 2nd year guy imo. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

I wouldn't care if it were $500,000.00 Siemian's got nothing to offer.   13-11 is about as stellar as Tyrod Taylors 22-10 record.    $1.9M - You get what you pay for. 

 

30 TDs and 24 INTs?  and yet Nate sucks?   

 

You can do better that that Kirby.  At least make it believable.  

 

Nate Peterman is 25-52 for 266 yard (5.1 YPA) and has thrown 2 TDs and 6 INTs. He also fumbled at least once that I remembered and took an ogregious intentional grounding call. He accomplished all of that in about 10 drives. I try to NEVER say this on here but anyone that thinks Nate Peterman is a viable starting QB option is an idiot. There is no way around it. They are an idiot.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

I am well aware of the "truths" told during this time of the year.    You noted as much when I quoted Beane saying that he had "no plans from moving on from Tyrod " 1 week prior to the trade. 

 

Difference is, all the Tyrod stuff had caveats "at this time".  Stuff about how he wants a vet in the QB room for a number of reasons, no caveats.

 

Quote

Siemian  was benched in favor of a guy I loved watching and that I knew was a fraction of himself - Peyton Manning and the best defense in the league. 

 

Um, No.  Manning's last year was 2015.  Siemian was a rookie in 2015 and played 1 (one) snap, a kneeldown.  Since he didn't play, he couldn't have been benched.

You may be thinking of Brock Osweiler

 

Quote

.500 ball.  nearly a 50/50 INT split  -  30 TDs and 24 INTs .    A 3 year vet that has played half time over 2 seasons doesn't have the experience to properly teach a 1st or 2nd year guy imo.  

 

I'm not following this logic - a 3 year vet doesn't have the experience, so you're OK with 2nd year QB with zippo experience in the offensive system and a rookie?  Is that what the argument is?  A guy who has actually shown he can play 0.500 ball and throw more TD than INT adds "nothing", but Peterman adds something, or more?

 

Very strange logic.

 

Is a guy who has actually been in the NFL and played significant parts of 2 years as desireable as a Hasselbeck type, No.  But does he bring something more than "very little" or "nothing"?  Yes.  As far as the INTs that worry you, it's pretty common for guys in their 1st couple of years to get fooled by coverage.  If he's smart and understands what the mistake was, that doesn't preclude him from being helpful in the room. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Siemian would contribute as much as most of the bridge guys that we are talking about but at 10% of the cost. He’s 13-11 with 30 TDs and 24 INTs. No one thinks that he is the answer but I’d much rather pay $1.9M to Siemian than $12M to McCarron. I don’t see McCarron as 6x better.

 

I'm with Kirby here, I'd rather see Siemian for $1.9M than McCarron for whatever he's going to sign for, who has not really shown he can play in the NFL yet.  Yes, he has better TD/INT, but he also only threw for <30 attempts and <190 ypg in his 3 starts.   

 

I'm not "banging on the table" for Siemian, but if we got him, I wouldn't cry about it either.

Edited by Hapless Bills Fan
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

Um, No.  Manning's last year was 2015.  Siemian was a rookie in 2015 and played 1 (one) snap, a kneeldown.  Since he didn't play, he couldn't have been benched.

You may be thinking of Brock Osweiler

Osweiler   OOPs....  My bad ...  

 

Siemian  - per Wikipedia

NFL statistics[edit]

Year Team Games Passing Rushing Sacked Fumbles Team record
G GS Cmp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Rtg Att Yds Avg TD Fum Lost W/L (as starter)
2015 DEN 1 0 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 1 -1 -1.0 0 0 0 0 0–0
2016 DEN 14 14 289 486 59.5 3,401 7.0 18 10 84.6 28 57 2.0 0 31 4 2 8–6
2017 DEN 11 10 206 349 59.0 2,285 6.5 12 14 73.3 31 127 4.1 1 33 5 2 5–5
Career 26 24 495 835 59.3 5,686 6.8 30 24 79.9 60 183 3.0 1 64 9 4 13–11

damn the TD to INT ratio looks really bad in that table!!

 

45 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

I'm not following this logic - a 3 year vet doesn't have the experience, so you're OK with 2nd year QB with zippo experience in the offensive system and a rookie?  Is that what the argument is?  A guy who has actually shown he can play 0.500 ball and throw more TD than INT adds "nothing", but Peterman adds something, or more?

Let me try to be clearer (hopfully) 

I'm not sure a guy in the league for 3 years  with nearly 1 full season over the last 2  seasons can teach a 2nd year guy much of anything.  jmo

 

Peterman and the rookie (if / when drafted) needs mentoring.  A guy one year older doesn't have enough experience. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Osweiler   OOPs....  My bad ...  

 

Siemian  - per Wikipedia

NFL statistics[edit]

Year Team Games Passing Rushing Sacked Fumbles Team record
G GS Cmp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Rtg Att Yds Avg TD Fum Lost W/L (as starter)
2015 DEN 1 0 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 1 -1 -1.0 0 0 0 0 0–0
2016 DEN 14 14 289 486 59.5 3,401 7.0 18 10 84.6 28 57 2.0 0 31 4 2 8–6
2017 DEN 11 10 206 349 59.0 2,285 6.5 12 14 73.3 31 127 4.1 1 33 5 2 5–5
Career 26 24 495 835 59.3 5,686 6.8 30 24 79.9 60 183 3.0 1 64 9 4 13–11

damn the TD to INT ratio looks really bad in that table!!

 

Let me try to be clearer (hopfully) 

I'm not sure a guy in the league for 3 years  with nearly 1 full season over the last 2  seasons can teach a 2nd year guy much of anything.  jmo

 

Peterman and the rookie (if / when drafted) needs mentoring.  A guy one year older doesn't have enough experience. 

 

It's not uncommon for a 2nd year guy to throw a lot of picks.  He starts to get more confident in what he sees, starts to react faster and ... oops.  Your fave Peyton threw 2 more INT than TD his first season, took 3 seasons to bring the ratio down under 2.  Please don't mistake - not saying that Siemian fit to carry Peyton's undies, just that for a guy intended to be a backup, I believe Siemian adds something.

 

If you want to make the argument that a more experienced guy would be a better mentor, I certainly wouldn't disagree!  The problem is 1) who? 2) could he play 500 ball and keep the picks down if he plays?  I'd be chill with signing a more experienced guy like Matt Moore or Derek Anderson, too, but both of them threw more INTs than TDs last time they started some games - I think it's their eyes spotting a throw that their arms can no longer deliver, in that case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

It's not uncommon for a 2nd year guy to throw a lot of picks.  He starts to get more confident in what he sees, starts to react faster and ... oops.  Your fave Peyton threw 2 more INT than TD his first season, took 3 seasons to bring the ratio down under 2.  Please don't mistake - not saying that Siemian fit to carry Peyton's undies, just that for a guy intended to be a backup, I believe Siemian adds something.

 

If you want to make the argument that a more experienced guy would be a better mentor, I certainly wouldn't disagree!  The problem is 1) who? 2) could he play 500 ball and keep the picks down if he plays?  I'd be chill with signing a more experienced guy like Matt Moore or Derek Anderson, too, but both of them threw more INTs than TDs last time they started some games - I think it's their eyes spotting a throw that their arms can no longer deliver, in that case.

Don’t know who fits that bill currently as the options are limited.  

 

You post brings us back to 5 pick Nate.  It ain’t easy being QB in the NFL.   

We shouldn’t throw him to the wolves on that one bad game.   

Edited by ShadyBillsFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, xRUSHx said:

I would look for a cheap replacement to Webb but I am fine with Rosen/Darnold/Mayfield or even Rudolph and then Peterman as one and two. The 3rd needs to be someone other then Webb IMO, Webb is not a pocket QB he should have went in the package with Tyrod.

 

Webb is a FA.  He's not even on the team.

 

As to the original question, it would be really dumb, but not surprising.

Edited by reddogblitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...