77% were wrong believing our HC wouldn't be fooled by the mirage of preseason, but the Allen Era begins week 2!

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

51 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Look who's already in mid-season form:

 

Brent Musburger‏Verified account @brentmusburger Sep 2

 

Welcome A.J. McCarron to the Raider family. Can’t wait for the “beautiful “ Mrs. McCarron to join us in Oakland .

9:10 PM - 2 Sep 2018

 

BWAHAHHAA

 

[jrober38]

8 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

With the bold, you were correct.

 

The rest of your post is your opinion. I don't think it's accurate, primarily because of the addition of Dabol.

 

We scored 18.9 points per game last year. 

 

You really think we're going to match that with a worse QB situation, worse line and still awful group of receivers. 

 

I don't see any reason to believe we'll be better than one of the 3 worst offenses in the NFL this year. Our players simply aren't good enough. 

[transplantbillsfan]

1 hour ago, Like A Mofo said:

This thread proves one thing. Some fans priority isn't the team and the success of our team. It is about 'look at me I was right'

 

Really?

 

How so.

 

I think everyone had the guy they wanted, but it was because they thought that guy would be best for the TEAM.

 

Has anyone wished injury or another 5 Interception half on Peterman?

1 hour ago, Like A Mofo said:

 

 

Of course...77% of us were WRONG!  THAT is the craving. Not the success of the team.

 

Huh?

 

You think my life revolves around being right here? I was just having fun with this thread over the Summer trying to give the rest of us some extra dialogue and some extra things to watch for.

 

[Thurman#1]

22 hours ago, Fadingpain said:

I'm sticking with what I have said all along.  The starter SHOULD be Allen.

 

 

 

Of course you're sticking with what you have said all along. You stuck with Tyrod right up to the end too. That's who you are. That's what you do ... to paraphrase Terminator. You pick a guy and think too much of him ... with absolute unwavering consistency.

 

And yeah, Bills fans wanted Allen. That's what most fans do. They pick the heralded new guy and want to see him immediately. They choose the short term over the long term. They take the perspective of a person wanting entertainment rather than the perspective of a guy whose job prospects depend on the long-term success of the team and the QB in particular.

 

And as for Allen not starting the first game, one word ...

 

Duh.

Edited September 4, 2018 by Thurman#1

[transplantbillsfan]

13 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Of course you're sticking with what you have said all along. You stuck with Tyrod right up to the end too. That's who you are. That's what you do ... to paraphrase Terminator. You pick a guy and think too much of him ... with absolute unwavering consistency.

 

And yeah, Bills fans wanted Allen. That's what most fans do. They pick the heralded new guy and want to see him immediately. They choose the short term over the long term. They take the perspective of a person wanting entertainment rather than the perspective of a guy whose job prospects depend on the long-term success of the team and the QB in particular.

 

And as for Allen not starting the first game, one word ...

 

Duh.

 

Wow, this is just dumb.

 

Duh?

 

Duh to Allen not starting week 1?

 

Or was that actually the sound of relief you make with close calls... after all, you didn't think Allen would start. You barely thoughthe had a shot.

 

That's actually exactly how I felt about Peterman as OTAs began. I don't run away from thinking that. It took Peterman being lights out in preseason to make this happen. If you think that was inevitable or virtually inevitable, you're insane.

 

Allen being on the bench certainly doesn't warrant a "duh" except for near-sighted people--apparently like yourself--who care more about predictions being right than his/her reasoning being right.

 

You were right that Allen wouldn't start.

 

Congratulations.

 

All of your reasoning was off.

 

This is clearly not a "duh" moment because it was obviously very close in spite of that 5 sack half in the 3rd preseason game.

 

Imagine if the Bills had a remotely adequate OL in that game.

 

McCarron was clearly traded because Allen is very close.

 

Duh.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can't wait for the inevitable "you're so consistently wrong on QBs response from the ever-reliably predictable Thurm.

[Zerovoltz]

On 6/29/2018 at 5:18 AM, Zerovotlz said:

My worthless 2 cents.  I think it will be Peterman.  ....it could be McCaron, but the important thing here is that the question being asked should be Allen or someone else.  The someone else part doens't really matter what their name is or who they are.  Some of you posting here have mentioned that Allen was drafted, knowing that there will need to be some time to develop.  that has not changed.  he's been mostly running with the 3's.  He's also lived up to his scouting report.  Big arm, athletic.  smart.  looks like the god of QB's in a no pressure practice type situation (like he always has)  I'd venture to say that at some point in the season he will start, but not game one...here is why:

 

1.  The Bills opening 8 games are so are brutal.  Let one of your low dollar, not in the future plans, scrub QB's take those hits and losses.  No need to expose Allen to the brutal speed and harshness of the NFL over these first 8 games.

 

2.  The Bills offensive roster isn't very good.  I'm not a Bills fan as you all know....just objectively looking at your roster on the offensive side of the ball...it's frankly pretty bad.  Again, let the other QB's come in and have to work with this less than optimal talent level to start with.  Perhaps after 8 games, the talent level won't be much better but at least there will have been some time for the O-line to develop some cohesiveness and maybe some guys emerge here and there.  

 

3.  There should be no illusions that this is a playoff team, and certainly not a contender at this point.  Let the other QB's take the wrath of the fans and media while Allen remains the golden boy in waiting, the great hope of the future, unstained by what will probalby be a pretty miserable opening to the season.  Bring him in when the fans and media no longer are clinging to any hope that this team is has any realistic post season asperiations.....Then the focus can be on watching Allen and seeing how he does game to game..hopefully finding tangible evidence of improvment until the end of the season....giving you something to be hopeful about in 2019 when they can also spend to improve his weaponry, his o line...another draft...etc.  

 

You all like to point at "the process".  Starting week 1 would be kind of anti process.  sacrifice Peterman and McCaron so that Allen can have the best shot at sustained success (if he is ever to have it) 

 

Week 1.  Someone not named Josh Allen.

 

 

I stand by this.

[Thurman#1]

11 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Wow, this is just dumb.

 

Duh?

 

Duh to Allen not starting week 1?

 

Or was that actually the sound of relief you make with close calls... after all, you didn't think Allen would start. You barely thoughthe had a shot.

 

That's actually exactly how I felt about Peterman as OTAs began. I don't run away from thinking that. It took Peterman being lights out in preseason to make this happen. If you think that was inevitable or virtually inevitable, you're insane.

 

Allen being on the bench certainly doesn't warrant a "duh" except for near-sighted people--apparently like yourself--who care more about predictions being right than his/her reasoning being right.

 

You were right that Allen wouldn't start.

 

Congratulations.

 

All of your reasoning was off.

 

This is clearly not a "duh" moment because it was obviously very close in spite of that 5 sack half in the 3rd preseason game.

 

Imagine if the Bills had a remotely adequate OL in that game.

 

McCarron was clearly traded because Allen is very close.

 

Duh.

 

Can't wait for the inevitable "you're so consistently wrong on QBs response from the ever-reliably predictable Thurm.

 

 

 

My reasoning was wrong? That's a laugh. In TransieWorld, it's dumb to be right? Apparently we should listen to the guy who continues his spotless record of being absolutely wrong about QBs, wrong without exception, continuously, relentlessly wrong. You thought I was ridiculously wrong when I said he had a very small chance to start. And yet ... I was right. As per always in my arguments with you. Remember when you said Tyrod was "near-elite"? Yeah, me too.

 

Exactly the response you predicted in your last sentence, right? There's two reasons for that. First, because I was right and you were wrong. Again. But second, I wanted you to feel that you'd been right in at least one prediction. Get you the feeling, since it will be a new one for you. Maybe if you enjoyed it, you could ease up on the massive doses of Kool-Aid.

 

Nah, didn't think so. I asked too much.

 

For all those times you were wrong, who was on the other side? Me, among many many sensible others. You're not getting it, but the reason that you're wrong is that your reasoning is wrong. Consistently, relentlessly. It's come to be a self-evident truth that when you tell someone their reasoning is off, it's a fantastic sign that that person is on the exact right track.

 

McCarron was traded because he wasn't as good as Peterman. Or Allen. McCarron underachieved and they were able to get a 5th for him. That's why he was traded. Duh indeed. 

 

As usual you're taking data points and applying massive dollops of confirmation bias until it looks to you like they mean what you believe. You could say the same thing about me except for one thing. I'm the guy who's been relentlessly consistently right. And not because I'm some genius. I'm not. I simply don't take positions that aren't fairly obvious. Which is the way to go if you want a realistic viewpoint. Which you clearly don't.

 

It's been fairly obvious that they wanted to give Allen time to develop, unless he'd improved massively. And he'd clearly improved but not enough. That quote from  him after game three when he talked about going to the line and not understanding what the (preseason vanilla) defence was showing was one of many tipoffs that he needs more time, but again, it was obvious from before the draft, back when you insisted - again, relentlessly - that Allen was a loser who would never be a decent starting QB. Remember that, Transy? It's also been fairly obvious that Allen was simply not winning the QB contest, from way back in offseason workouts.

 

I'm not making any statements on when Allen starts. For the simplest of reasons ... it's wildly unpredictable. The Week One starter was the opposite, extremely predictable. But when or if Allen starts is not easy to predict. Peterman could suck or be great, or more likely be good for several weeks until teams start to figure out how to defense him and he has to learn to adapt and he either does or - like Tyrod - doesn't. Peterman could be injured. Allen could develop slower or faster than expected. Too many unknowns, so I'm not taking any stance beyond acknowledging the unpredictability of it. Could be three or four weeks. Could be next season. Again, though, the Week One starter not being Allen was predictable as hell. It was absolutely zero surprise. In fact, the operative word was ...

 

Duh, Transie.

 

 

 

Edited September 5, 2018 by Thurman#1

[Warcodered]

6 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

My reasoning was wrong? That's a laugh. In TransieWorld, it's dumb to be right? Apparently we should listen to the guy who continues his spotless record of being absolutely wrong about QBs, wrong without exception, continuously, relentlessly wrong. You thought I was ridiculously wrong when I said he had a very small chance to start. And yet ... I was right. As per always in my arguments with you. Remember when you said Tyrod was "near-elite"? Yeah, me too.

 

Exactly the response you predicted in your last sentence, right? There's two reasons for that. First, because I was right and you were wrong. Again. But second, I wanted you to feel that you'd been right in at least one prediction. Get you the feeling, since it will be a new one for you. Maybe if you enjoyed it, you could ease up on the massive doses of Kool-Aid.

 

Nah, didn't think so. I asked too much.

 

For all those times you were wrong, who was on the other side? Me, among many many sensible others. You're not getting it, but the reason that you're wrong is that your reasoning is wrong. Consistently, relentlessly. It's come to be a self-evident truth that when you tell someone their reasoning is off, it's a fantastic sign that that person is on the exact right track.

 

McCarron was traded because he wasn't as good as Peterman. Or Allen. McCarron underachieved and they were able to get a 5th for him. That's why he was traded. Duh indeed. 

 

As usual you're taking data points and applying massive dollops of confirmation bias until it looks to you like they mean what you believe. You could say the same thing about me except for one thing. I'm the guy who's been relentlessly consistently right. And not because I'm some genius. I'm not. I simply don't take positions that aren't fairly obvious. Which is the way to go if you want a realistic viewpoint. Which you clearly don't.

 

It's been fairly obvious that they wanted to give Allen time to develop, unless he'd improved massively. And he'd clearly improved but not enough. That quote from  him after game three when he talked about going to the line and not understanding what the (preseason vanilla) defence was showing was one of many tipoffs that he needs more time, but again, it was obvious from before the draft, back when you insisted - again, relentlessly - that Allen was a loser who would never be a decent starting QB. Remember that, Transy? It's also been fairly obvious that Allen was simply not winning the QB contest, from way back in offseason workouts.

 

I'm not making any statements on when Allen starts. For the simplest of reasons ... it's wildly unpredictable. The Week One starter was the opposite, extremely predictable. But when or if Allen starts is not easy to predict. Peterman could suck or be great, or more likely be good for several weeks until teams start to figure out how to defense him and he has to learn to adapt and he either does or - like Tyrod - doesn't. Peterman could be injured. Allen could develop slower or faster than expected. Too many unknowns, so I'm not taking any stance beyond acknowledging the unpredictability of it. Could be three or four weeks. Could be next season. Again, though, the Week One starter not being Allen was predictable as hell. It was absolutely zero surprise. In fact, the operative word was ...

 

Duh, Transie.

 

 

 

For it being so completely obvious he came awfully close to pulling it off.

[Thurman#1]

9 hours ago, Zerovotlz said:

I stand by this.

 

 

As you should. It was really smart on 6/29, three days into camp, and still holds up. Great post.

 

8 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

For it being so completely obvious he came awfully close to pulling it off.

 

 

I see, so being wrong is OK if you can argue that you may possibly have been "awfully close" to being right? Got it.

 

Hey, if you think that 55% completions vs. 80% completions is "awfully close," I guess that's your business.

[Warcodered]

8 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

As you should. It was really smart on 6/29, three days into camp, and still holds up. Great post.

 

 

 

I see, so being wrong is OK if you can argue that you may possibly have been "awfully close" to being right? Got it.

 

Hey, if you think that 55% completions vs. 80% completions is "awfully close," I guess that's your business.

Yes that is true.

 

Wasn't Allen the QB that got the most time with the 1s in the preseason games? Must of been way behind for them to do that.

[Chandler#81]

77% of us thought McDermott knew what he was doing. That number has dropped considerably..

[Buffaloflash]

On 9/2/2018 at 3:33 PM, Boatdrinks said:

I understand the reason. Neither QB is good enough right now. 

Says who? I'll said they are,now what!

[transplantbillsfan]

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

My reasoning was wrong? That's a laugh. In TransieWorld, it's dumb to be right? Apparently we should listen to the guy who continues his spotless record of being absolutely wrong about QBs, wrong without exception, continuously, relentlessly wrong. You thought I was ridiculously wrong when I said he had a very small chance to start. And yet ... I was right. As per always in my arguments with you. Remember when you said Tyrod was "near-elite"? Yeah, me too.

 

Exactly the response you predicted in your last sentence, right? There's two reasons for that. First, because I was right and you were wrong. Again. But second, I wanted you to feel that you'd been right in at least one prediction. Get you the feeling, since it will be a new one for you. Maybe if you enjoyed it, you could ease up on the massive doses of Kool-Aid.

 

Nah, didn't think so. I asked too much.

 

For all those times you were wrong, who was on the other side? Me, among many many sensible others. You're not getting it, but the reason that you're wrong is that your reasoning is wrong. Consistently, relentlessly. It's come to be a self-evident truth that when you tell someone their reasoning is off, it's a fantastic sign that that person is on the exact right track.

 

McCarron was traded because he wasn't as good as Peterman. Or Allen. McCarron underachieved and they were able to get a 5th for him. That's why he was traded. Duh indeed. 

 

As usual you're taking data points and applying massive dollops of confirmation bias until it looks to you like they mean what you believe. You could say the same thing about me except for one thing. I'm the guy who's been relentlessly consistently right. And not because I'm some genius. I'm not. I simply don't take positions that aren't fairly obvious. Which is the way to go if you want a realistic viewpoint. Which you clearly don't.

 

It's been fairly obvious that they wanted to give Allen time to develop, unless he'd improved massively. And he'd clearly improved but not enough. That quote from  him after game three when he talked about going to the line and not understanding what the (preseason vanilla) defence was showing was one of many tipoffs that he needs more time, but again, it was obvious from before the draft, back when you insisted - again, relentlessly - that Allen was a loser who would never be a decent starting QB. Remember that, Transy? It's also been fairly obvious that Allen was simply not winning the QB contest, from way back in offseason workouts.

 

I'm not making any statements on when Allen starts. For the simplest of reasons ... it's wildly unpredictable. The Week One starter was the opposite, extremely predictable. But when or if Allen starts is not easy to predict. Peterman could suck or be great, or more likely be good for several weeks until teams start to figure out how to defense him and he has to learn to adapt and he either does or - like Tyrod - doesn't. Peterman could be injured. Allen could develop slower or faster than expected. Too many unknowns, so I'm not taking any stance beyond acknowledging the unpredictability of it. Could be three or four weeks. Could be next season. Again, though, the Week One starter not being Allen was predictable as hell. It was absolutely zero surprise. In fact, the operative word was ...

 

Duh, Transie.

 

Wow.

 

I don't know if I've ever read a bigger pile of steaming horsecrap in my life.

 

 

In the future, you should really consider living by the words of our 16th president:

 

Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

 

[COTC]

Blame the coach, not the fans. We were right!!

 

mcD is clueless.  

[Thurman#1]

13 hours ago, Warcodered said:

Yes that is true.

 

Wasn't Allen the QB that got the most time with the 1s in the preseason games? Must of been way behind for them to do that.

 

 

There's no particular reason to think that there's a direct relationship between time with the 1s and how far ahead or behind a guy is. In fact, how confident are you that Allen had the most time with the 1s? McCarron started game 2 and game 4. 

 

Not that that matters anyway. Plenty of coaches put other guys in once they know which guy will start. Lamar Jackson got the most time in Baltimore. Was he real close too? Mayfield got a lot more time than Tyrod. I could go on.

Edited September 6, 2018 by Thurman#1

[BigDingus]

Ha ha, I was right, you were all wrong, nah nee nah nee boo boo, stick your head in wood chipper (I think that's how it goes).

[Thurman#1]

14 hours ago, COTC said:

Blame the coach, not the fans. We were right!!

 

mcD is clueless.  

 

 

Thang is we don't know yet whether what is due is blame or credit or whether the fans were right or wrong.

 

We do know that McD has a ton more info on the situation than we do.

Edited September 6, 2018 by Thurman#1

[transplantbillsfan]

7 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

There's no particular reason to think that there's a direct relationship between time with the 1s and how far ahead or behind a guy is. In fact, how confident are you that Allen had the most time with the 1s? McCarron started game 2 and game 4. 

 

Not that that matters anyway. Plenty of coaches put other guys in once they know which guy will start. Lamar Jackson got the most time in Baltimore. Was he real close too? Mayfield got a lot more time than Tyrod. I could go on.

 

There's a particular reason to think it mattered for Allen because he was the only one of the 3 to be announced the week before his start AND get all the reps with the 1s in practice that entire week for the game everyone uses as the dress rehearsal game.

 

The comparison of Allen's situation in the QB competition this Summer to Jackson's and Mayfield's situation is just insane and I think you're just trolling at this point.

[Alphadawg7]

LMAO...can we stop with this childish "I was right, you were wrong" nonsense already all over this board.  Some of you act like you possess some superior level of knowledge because you GUESSED correctly ignoring the plethora of other times you were completely wrong.  Hell most of you were certain we were taking Rosen...and because you GUESSED correctly that Peterman would win the week 1 start you have some complex now and its hilariously stupid.  

 

Its also true for those still insisting they are RIGHT and McD is WRONG in starting NP.  The coaches know what they are doing, thats why they are coaches.  They feel the best move right now is to start NP early before handing the reigns to Allen, who we all know is the future.  So running around doubling down on how McD is stupid and you are right is even dumber than the guys gloating on guessing right on NP.  

 

Nobody is right all the time, but this boards obsession with trying to glorify themselves on the rare occasion they guessed right is freaking comical.  I have said for years that many on this board care more about being right about an agenda then they do about the Bills success, and its rearing its head in this Peterman stuff.  Funniest part about this NP basking in the glory crowd, is that MOST of them picked NP because they HATED the Allen pick, not because they really had any insight on NP.  I mean you had a 1 in 3 chance to guess right, its not like you correctly predicted the lotto.   

 

TRUTH IS:  Not one person here really knew what ANY of the 3 QB's would do, they had no real NFL resumes, they were all unproven, and everyones thoughts were just that...thoughts and guesses, not some special mind of insight.  Its football time, get over it...I promise you that you will be wrong on more things than you will be right, so stop acting like a baby when you guess right and stop acting like a baby when you guessed wrong.  

 

Bottom line:  NP worked his ass off to beat out AJM...its his time now and we should ALL want him to do well because he is both a Buffalo Bill and also can create a valuable trade asset for us if he shows well when we are ready to turn the reigns over to Allen.  

 

GO BILLS.  

[Royale with Cheese]

Trans/Thurman when they hear an alert and think it could be one of them responding.