PromoTheRobot Posted March 14, 2018 Author Posted March 14, 2018 Just now, Kirby Jackson said: No one, but why pay $10-$15M on any bridge guy? That was the point all along. Get Siemian for $1.5M or whatever and your rookie. Wouldn't any veteran QB cost you that much? How do you get Siemian when he's still under contract? Trade for him? Now you're wasting draft capital. Here's an idea. Give Fitz a jingle.
Shaw66 Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 8 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said: Crucify? Seriously? Even if the Bills get, say, Josh Rosen? Yup. Say they get Rosen and start Peterman because he's better in camp. Say Peterman sucks in September. Okay, in comes Rosen, and he really isn't ready. He sucks, too. Bills are 1-8 in November. Cousins Keenum and Mayfield (whom the Bills passed on to take Rosen) or even Taylor are having good years. You think the fans won't be berserk? You think the Pegulas will continue to have total confidence in McBeane? I don't.
Kirby Jackson Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said: Wouldn't any veteran QB cost you that much? How do you get Siemian when he's still under contract? Trade for him? Now you're wasting draft capital. Here's an idea. Give Fitz a jingle. Fitz is under contract. Siemian is like $1.9M I think. You could probably give them your 6th for Siemian and their 7th. Edited March 14, 2018 by Kirby Jackson
Golden*Wheels Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 19 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said: Maybe Hoyer will shake loose after New England signs McCarron. Think that's probably happenin? I'd think he'd want a shot to start but maybe we haven't even approached him. I wouldn't want to see Hoyer have to play but OTOH he's been around the league and would probably be a good resource for the rookie. And could be relied upon to be plainly average for a game here and there.
CaptnCoke11 Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 15 hours ago, Tyrod's friend said: We are going into free agency with $40,000,000. I'm at a loss as to why having a veteran QB around is seen as bad thing. Write the veteran a check, tell your bright shiny new QB he has to beat him out in camp and either he does beat him out in year 1 or he doesn't. On some levels it almost seems like we're going to have a hard time spending to our cap. 40 million not including upcoming roster bonuses and Stars cap hit. Cut that in half probably.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 26 minutes ago, billsredneck1 said: so if tyrod would have still been in the game, that defense would have still had all their starters trying to contain him from mounting a comeback?....and why was tyrod not still in the game? after holding tyrod to 56 yds. after almost 4qtrs. they decided...hey nate's in, let's let him do good and put on a nice scoring drive! i get it now The starters were sitting whether or not Tyrod was still in. Tyrod came out because the Bills coaches declared a loss and wanted to see Peterman. There are several analyses out there pointing out Dennison was slow to recognize and adjust to what the Saints were actually doing in coverage, and that he ran several of the routes Peterman was successful with for the 1st time in the 4th quarter. 7 minutes 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. Siemian actually would not be the worst they could do. He has shown he can at least play 500 ball, which is what you want from your backup, and he's shown flashes of playing decently. 1
Chuck Wagon Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said: That would work for me. I’d like to get higher than 5 but could live with it. Get up to 5 and then go up from there. The Giants or Colts might be MUCH more receptive to trading to 5 since they know they are likely walking out with Nelson or Chubb as worst case scenario. I just don't know I can believe Denver is comfortable with Keenum / Lynch / Osweiler / maybe later draft pick as their QB room. Pick #5 is basically "worth" #12 / #53 / #96, toss in Siemien here with a player going there (we could give them Richie and save $6 mil). Watch Beane really draft day this thing and get up to #2 without giving up #22 or any 2019 picks.
PromoTheRobot Posted March 14, 2018 Author Posted March 14, 2018 12 minutes ago, CaptnCoke11 said: 40 million not including upcoming roster bonuses and Stars cap hit. Cut that in half probably. Yeah. That $40MM doesn't include what we are paying our pre-freeagency signings, then the rookies. We don't have that much cap space left.
Shaw66 Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said: Or.... Since you are planning on drafting a top QB in the draft and expect him to play at some point this season why flush $10-15MM of your limited cap on a QB that is marginally better than what you already have on the roster? Go get Bradford, McCarron, McCown, Bridgewater, Hoyer, etc. But if the list becomes Cutler, Siemian, and similar, why bother? I tend to agree with you, at this point. I think the right move was to get someone with experience and potential. There's not much potential in the market now. If it had been me, I would have spent some money on Keenum. I would have spent a lot on Cousins. These guys seem to be rolling the dice.
PromoTheRobot Posted March 14, 2018 Author Posted March 14, 2018 (edited) Seems I'm not the only one floating the idea. https://t.co/QSgELnecdc?amp=1 Edited March 14, 2018 by PromoTheRobot
DaBillsFanSince1973 Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 Is it possible that Nathan Peterman will be the Bills' opening day quarterback? Sal Maiorana, @salmaioranaPublished 9:57 a.m. ET March 14, 2018 The Bills may be willing to give Nathan Peterman a chance to be their starting quarterback. The other name still floating around western New York is Super Bowl MVP Nick Foles, who might be available from the Eagles via a trade. But if the Bills are going to draft a quarterback high, then giving up assets to acquire Foles doesn’t make much sense. It’s one thing to sign a free agent, that’s just money. Trading for Foles would be costly in terms of money, and what the Bills would have to relinquish in draft picks because the Eagles have all the leverage and are going to play hardball. Beane may sign a veteran Wednesday, and as long as he doesn’t pay a silly sum, no one will argue, just so long as the Bills are able to get the high-end rookie come April 26. But if he continues to sit out the quarterback frenzy, it’s a risk because there’s no guarantee the rookie will be ready to play in Week 1, and there’s certainly no guarantee that Peterman is competent enough to hold down the position while the Bills wait for the rookie to emerge. Push comes to shove, if you asked me what I would do at this stage of the game if I was Beane, I’d lean toward not signing a low-level veteran and roll the dice with Peterman and the rookie. I’ll hang up and listen to your thoughts. 2
Boatdrinks Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 6 minutes ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said: Is it possible that Nathan Peterman will be the Bills' opening day quarterback? Sal Maiorana, @salmaioranaPublished 9:57 a.m. ET March 14, 2018 The Bills may be willing to give Nathan Peterman a chance to be their starting quarterback. The other name still floating around western New York is Super Bowl MVP Nick Foles, who might be available from the Eagles via a trade. But if the Bills are going to draft a quarterback high, then giving up assets to acquire Foles doesn’t make much sense. It’s one thing to sign a free agent, that’s just money. Trading for Foles would be costly in terms of money, and what the Bills would have to relinquish in draft picks because the Eagles have all the leverage and are going to play hardball. Beane may sign a veteran Wednesday, and as long as he doesn’t pay a silly sum, no one will argue, just so long as the Bills are able to get the high-end rookie come April 26. But if he continues to sit out the quarterback frenzy, it’s a risk because there’s no guarantee the rookie will be ready to play in Week 1, and there’s certainly no guarantee that Peterman is competent enough to hold down the position while the Bills wait for the rookie to emerge. Push comes to shove, if you asked me what I would do at this stage of the game if I was Beane, I’d lean toward not signing a low-level veteran and roll the dice with Peterman and the rookie. I’ll hang up and listen to your thoughts. Wow. I would really hate this. NP isn't even good enough to be the backup for this team. If a veteran FA was signed, they would be the starter and NP would be 3rd after the rookie draft pick.
Captain Hindsight Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 17 hours ago, PromoTheRobot 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. You mean when he didnt have to play? Yeah he was great
xRUSHx Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 (edited) 14 minutes ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said: Is it possible that Nathan Peterman will be the Bills' opening day quarterback? Sal Maiorana, @salmaioranaPublished 9:57 a.m. ET March 14, 2018 The Bills may be willing to give Nathan Peterman a chance to be their starting quarterback. The other name still floating around western New York is Super Bowl MVP Nick Foles, who might be available from the Eagles via a trade. But if the Bills are going to draft a quarterback high, then giving up assets to acquire Foles doesn’t make much sense. It’s one thing to sign a free agent, that’s just money. Trading for Foles would be costly in terms of money, and what the Bills would have to relinquish in draft picks because the Eagles have all the leverage and are going to play hardball. Beane may sign a veteran Wednesday, and as long as he doesn’t pay a silly sum, no one will argue, just so long as the Bills are able to get the high-end rookie come April 26. But if he continues to sit out the quarterback frenzy, it’s a risk because there’s no guarantee the rookie will be ready to play in Week 1, and there’s certainly no guarantee that Peterman is competent enough to hold down the position while the Bills wait for the rookie to emerge. Push comes to shove, if you asked me what I would do at this stage of the game if I was Beane, I’d lean toward not signing a low-level veteran and roll the dice with Peterman and the rookie. I’ll hang up and listen to your thoughts. I would be fine with one of the top 3 QBs from this draft and Peterman this year over a low end vet but I would also draft another this year like Washington did the year they drafted RG3 and Cousins. Having 3 rookie QBs is cheap and could also bring in a trade of one in a few seasons of grooming. IMO Might get lucky and end up with Rosen,Peterman,Rudolph Edited March 14, 2018 by xRUSHx 1
Hapless Bills Fan Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said: Wouldn't any veteran QB cost you that much? How do you get Siemian when he's still under contract? Trade for him? Now you're wasting draft capital. Here's an idea. Give Fitz a jingle. Fitz is under contract. Re-signed with Tampa Bay on Friday per report. 20 minutes ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said: Is it possible that Nathan Peterman will be the Bills' opening day quarterback? Sal Maiorana, @salmaioranaPublished 9:57 a.m. ET March 14, 2018 The Bills may be willing to give Nathan Peterman a chance to be their starting quarterback. (....) Beane may sign a veteran Wednesday, and as long as he doesn’t pay a silly sum, no one will argue, just so long as the Bills are able to get the high-end rookie come April 26. My thoughts are that if you listen to Beane carefully, he will usually tell you something. In this case, he has said repeatedly that they want a vet, and something to the effect of "it's desireable to have a vet in the QB room". I think that means they plan to sign a vet signal caller, but they aren't planning to go for someone they see as wanting or desireable to start. Edited March 14, 2018 by Hapless Bills Fan 1
Go-Bills Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 17 hours ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said: ...nice assessment.....Peterman and the rook QB draftee would never be ready.......with the Kolb disaster, EJ got thrown to the wolves (so did Losman when Tom Terrific tried to cover his sorry azz) and both moves worked "wonders".......... And Peterman didn't get thrown to the wolf's? Peterman is better than everyone gives credit for! The snow game every pass was in the receivers hands... ROLL WITH PETERMAN!
Elite Poster Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 "Hey let's trade Tyrod and let's start Nathan Pickerman, also, let's make sure we re-sign a 6M DT to a one year deal so he can come crashing right back down into the valley of piss poor football." - Beane "DNA DNA DNA DNA" - McDermott
Yav Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 Don't forget Webb. He's still on the roster and is a QB.
Wily Dog Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 Peterman will be the starter, the rookie will get a chance to learn from a veteran QB , not a perceived starter , and depending on what the rookie and Peterman do , we will see who the Qb is after a few games.
The Avenger Posted March 14, 2018 Posted March 14, 2018 I'd be very concerned with just Peterman and a rookie. Few rookies, even those at the top, can really come out and play well as a rookie (we could get lucky). That said, I've seen a ton of talented QBs get thrown into action as rookies and just get destroyed - they have their development stunted or destroyed because they haven't had time to adjust to the NFL and the weight or the world is on them as a very high draft pick. Unless Peterman has made tremendous strides you can start him all you want but if he does poorly they'll be too much pressure not to play the rookie and that could ruin him. I'm not saying you have to go sign Foles, just get someone who will be adequate so you can protect and develop your rookie.
Recommended Posts