Prediction: Nathan Peterman Bills Starting QB Wk. 1 vs. Ravens

[Kirby Jackson]

Just now, cd1 said:

 

Who has gotten LESS than half a game?

 

Regardless of the results, Peterman deserves the opportunity to compete!

 

It is almost like some of you folks are afraid to let him compete because he will have the chance to prove you wrong. 

 

FEAR is a funny thing...

Not afraid, just seen enough. I saw enough of Brian Brohm against Atlanta. I saw enough of Jeff Tuel against KC. I saw enough of Peterman at Pitt and against the Chargers. I don’t want to watch a bad QB, who hasn’t earned a chance, get a chance. I want my team to win. A QB that completes 50% of his passes to his guys and 10% to the opposition does nothing for me.

 

I’ll ask it another way: why are some people so interested in seeing more Peterman? I suspect these are the same people that wanted “anyone but Tyrod.” When Peterman got his chance it failed miserably. These people are holding out hope that everything they thought wasn’t completely wrong. Unfortunately for them Peterman may not take another snap in a meaningful NFL game again. 

 

It’s irrelevant anyways. Allen is going o be the guy as soon as he is ready. McCarron will hold down the fort in the short-term. 

[cd1]

2 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Not afraid, just seen enough. I saw enough of Brian Brohm against Atlanta. I saw enough of Jeff Tuel against KC. I saw enough of Peterman at Pitt and against the Chargers. I don’t want to watch a bad QB, who hasn’t earned a chance, get a chance. I want my team to win. A QB that completes 50% of his passes to his guys and 10% to the opposition does nothing for me.

 

I’ll ask it another way: why are some people so interested in seeing more Peterman? I suspect these are the same people that wanted “anyone but Tyrod.” When Peterman got his chance it failed miserably. These people are holding out hope that everything they thought wasn’t completely wrong. Unfortunately for them Peterman may not take another snap in a meaningful NFL game again. 

 

It’s irrelevant anyways. Allen is going o be the guy as soon as he is ready. McCarron will hold down the fort in the short-term. 

 

Personally, I FEEL that Allen will be our guy. But the Bills will need to find a decent back-up QB. I do not think that McCarron  wants to settle for second best at this point in his carreer.  If Peterman can improve enough, he just might be THAT guy.

[Kirby Jackson]

11 minutes ago, cd1 said:

 

Personally, I FEEL that Allen will be our guy. But the Bills will need to find a decent back-up QB. I do not think that McCarron  wants to settle for second best at this point in his carreer.  If Peterman can improve enough, he just might be THAT guy.

Maybe he can be the long-term backup. That remains to be seen. He isn’t that now. In terms of McCarron, he just hit free agency and signed a small back-up QB contract. He may want to be “the guy” but someone has to want him for that role. It doesn’t look like it’s going to happen at this point. There were TONS of QB needy teams this offseason that added vets and/or young guys. McCarron got paid a fraction of what the other vets did. The league isn’t really even viewing him as a bridge guy at the moment.

Edited May 31, 2018 by Kirby Jackson

[Kirby Jackson]

4 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

If Peterman doesn't start week 1, DO NOT put him on the practice squad. He is going to be snatched up in a hurry......?

If he does get cut I will have to find a new least favorite player. Tolbert was the guy last year. It’s Nate now. Ducasse and Mills will probably battle this preseason to be that guy. In general, my least favorite players are guys that are handed spots, unchallenged, that they don’t deserve. 

[JohnC]

13 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

If he does get cut I will have to find a new least favorite player. Tolbert was the guy last year. It’s Nate now. Ducasse and Mills will probably battle this preseason to be that guy. In general, my least favorite players are guys that are handed spots, unchallenged, that they don’t deserve.

Kirby, just let it go. The juices of resentment will eat you up. A rookie qb had a disastrous performance and now you are essentially disqualifying him from playing in the league. That line of abrupt reasoning makes no sense. What you fail to mention in your haranguing of Peterman is that he got an opportunity to play in the Charger game because for a few consecutive games the fleet footed starter was playing ineptly. He simply couldn't run a pro offense! The act of desperation by the coaching staff was two pronged: Get the starting qb off the field and go to the next option. It didn't work. The move was not a reflection of Peterman's abilities as it was a reflection of Taylor's inabilities. 

 

Most of us agree that some time this season Allen will be the starting qb. Will McCarron start when the season begins? Odds are yes, but maybe not if Allen shows that he can handle the position from the start. I believe that the rookie won't start right away but will take over as the starter during this season. 

 

If Peterman is as bad as you frequently say it will become evident. Let it play out and see how it unfolds. Sometimes when one makes declarative assumptions those assumptions turn out to be not so declarative.

 

Maybe an addendum to our qb saga is when will the Cleveland fans call for Mayfield to start in Cleveland compared to when the Buffalo fans beckon for Allen to take the snaps.?

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, JohnC said:

If Peterman is as bad as you frequently say it will become evident. Let it play out and see how it unfolds. Sometimes when one makes declarative assumptions those assumptions turn out to be not so declarative.

 

 

I think Kirby's view would be that having watched him in pre-season and the three times he saw action last season it is already pretty evident.  I would add that watching his college tape gave me every reason to think he would be as bad as Kirby frequently says.  

 

 

EDIT: On your second point... I suspect that what happens is the Cleveland fans call for Mayfield to start all pre-season then actually Tyrod starts and keeps them reasonably quiet for 5 or 6 games by playing Tyrod ball before they see the limitations of that.  I think the Bills fans will want Allen to start week 1 and then every other week until it happens. Why? Because I think the other two options are pretty bad.... and I was decidedly not a Tyrod fan as you well know.  

Edited May 31, 2018 by GunnerBill

[JohnC]

6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I think Kirby's view would be that having watched him in pre-season and the three times he saw action last season it is already pretty evident.  I would add that watching his college tape gave me every reason to think he would be as bad as Kirby frequently says.  

 

 

EDIT: On your second point... I suspect that what happens is the Cleveland fans call for Mayfield to start all pre-season then actually Tyrod starts and keeps them reasonably quiet for 5 or 6 games by playing Tyrod ball before they see the limitations of that.  I think the Bills fans will want Allen to start week 1 and then every other week until it happens. Why? Because I think the other two options are pretty bad.... and I was decidedly not a Tyrod fan as you well know.  

If Peterman turns out to be bad as many believe then it will play out that way. It's not going to take long to see where the chips fall. I have no criticism for those who don't believe that Peterman is going to make it in this league. I believe that he can be a functional backup in this league. Where I disagree with the critics is that because the rookie was overwhelmed in a game in his rookie year that he should be dismissed as a player. There may be a backup role for him or they may not. I'm willing to give him the opportunity to demonstrate what he is capable of. If he surprises the critics and becomes a backup for the Bills or another team then he will have done well for himself.

 

With respect to Tyrod it won't take long before the Tyrod of Buffalo will become evident in Cleveland. I wouldn't be surprised to see Mayfield on the field sooner than you think. In my mind Rosen was the most pro ready qb and Mayfield was the next ready. When the Cleveland coaches see Taylor missing passes and Mayfield hitting passes in practice they will quickly alter their preconceived plans. 

[Kirby Jackson]

6 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Kirby, just let it go. The juices of resentment will eat you up. A rookie qb had a disastrous performance and now you are essentially disqualifying him from playing in the league. That line of abrupt reasoning makes no sense. What you fail to mention in your haranguing of Peterman is that he got an opportunity to play in the Charger game because for a few consecutive games the fleet footed starter was playing ineptly. He simply couldn't run a pro offense! The act of desperation by the coaching staff was two pronged: Get the starting qb off the field and go to the next option. It didn't work. The move was not a reflection of Peterman's abilities as it was a reflection of Taylor's inabilities. 

 

Most of us agree that some time this season Allen will be the starting qb. Will McCarron start when the season begins? Odds are yes, but maybe not if Allen shows that he can handle the position from the start. I believe that the rookie won't start right away but will take over as the starter during this season. 

 

If Peterman is as bad as you frequently say it will become evident. Let it play out and see how it unfolds. Sometimes when one makes declarative assumptions those assumptions turn out to be not so declarative.

 

Maybe an addendum to our qb saga is when will the Cleveland fans call for Mayfield to start in Cleveland compared to when the Buffalo fans beckon for Allen to take the snaps.?

Nope, I will forever hate bad players that aren’t challenged. Scott Chandler was the guy for a while. He went to New England and everyone thought he’d go to the Pro Bowl. If a guy isn’t good, he isn’t good.

 

I’m just glad someone bet me that Peterman was more likely to start than Allen. I watched Peterman in college and knew that he was never going to be more than a backup. I actually liked the pick at the time. I was wrong. He isn’t an NFL player. 

 

In in terms of Cleveland, the Jets, the Cardinals, the Bills they are all in the same boat. Every fan base that drafts a QB early wants them to play. At least in the Bills case there really isn’t a better option in front of him. Allen may be their best QB now. Tyrod, McCown and Bradford are all functional starters. None of their teams are very good (I think that the Browns are the best of that group). If your team struggles early the calls for the young guy get louder and louder. It’s just what always happens. I’m just encouraged by the reports that Allen has looked great.

 

3 minutes ago, JohnC said:

If Peterman turns out to be bad as many believe then it will play out that way. It's not going to take long to see where the chips fall. I have no criticism for those who don't believe that Peterman is going to make it in this league. I believe that he can be a functional backup in this league. Where I disagree with the critics is that because the rookie was overwhelmed in a game in his rookie year that he should be dismissed as a player. There may be a backup role for him or they may not. I'm willing to give him the opportunity to demonstrate what he is capable of. If he surprises the critics and becomes a backup for the Bills or another team then he will have done well for himself.

 

With respect to Tyrod it won't take long before the Tyrod of Buffalo will become evident in Cleveland. I wouldn't be surprised to see Mayfield on the field sooner than you think. In my mind Rosen was the most pro ready qb and Mayfield was the next ready. When the Cleveland coaches see Taylor missing passes and Mayfield hitting passes in practice they will quickly alter their preconceived plans. 

How long does it need to play out? Did you need to see more starts from Tuel or Brohm to know that they weren’t going to be good? Did they get a raw deal? They were both better in their action than Peterman. 

 

In in terms of Cleveland they need to win. I am with Gunner. Tyrod will play about half of the year and they’ll win some games. At some point they’ll hand the keys to the young guy (or not that young guy in Baker’s case). Rosen will have a chance day 1 in Arizona imo. I think Darnold sits the first 5 games to half a season as well. Allen is the wild card because he faces the easiest “challenge.” With that being said, my assumption has been that Allen was the furthest from ready. Again though, that’s my assumption not necessarily where the Bills stand on it.

[JohnC]

4 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Nope, I will forever hate bad players that aren’t challenged. Scott Chandler was the guy for a while. He went to New England and everyone thought he’d go to the Pro Bowl. If a guy isn’t good, he isn’t good.

 

I’m just glad someone bet me that Peterman was more likely to start than Allen. I watched Peterman in college and knew that he was never going to be more than a backup. I actually liked the pick at the time. I was wrong. He isn’t an NFL player. 

 

In in terms of Cleveland, the Jets, the Cardinals, the Bills they are all in the same boat. Every fan base that drafts a QB early wants them to play. At least in the Bills case there really isn’t a better option in front of him. Allen may be their best QB now. Tyrod, McCown and Bradford are all functional starters. None of their teams are very good (I think that the Browns are the best of that group). If your team struggles early the calls for the young guy get louder and louder. It’s just what always happens. I’m just encouraged by the reports that Allen has looked great.

 

The only difference between our views is that I'm more willing to let it play out. 

 

side note: Canisius signed Sam Rautins the son of Leo Rautins, a former Syracuse player and coach. This kid can shoot and is a good fit for the league. 

 

 

https://www.syracuse.com/orangebasketball/index.ssf/2018/05/syracuse_basketball_legend_leo_rautins_son_commits_to_canisius.html

 

 

 

[ALF]

I would not want to start Allen until the OL is viable and the running game is good. 

 

Find out if AJ or Peterman can be a good backup till then.

[HappyDays]

57 minutes ago, JohnC said:

What you fail to mention in your haranguing of Peterman is that he got an opportunity to play in the Charger game because for a few consecutive games the fleet footed starter was playing ineptly. He simply couldn't run a pro offense! The act of desperation by the coaching staff was two pronged: Get the starting qb off the field and go to the next option. It didn't work. The move was not a reflection of Peterman's abilities as it was a reflection of Taylor's inabilities. 

 

That reasoning doesn't really work though. Benching the starter doesn't do anyone any good if the replacement isn't better. That goes for all positions. The Bills gained nothing by starting Peterman. You can't excuse their decision by saying Tyrod was playing bad. Replacing bad with historically bad is not something that can be excused. It was a poor decision and deserves to be criticized as such.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

18 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

That reasoning doesn't really work though. Benching the starter doesn't do anyone any good if the replacement isn't better. That goes for all positions. The Bills gained nothing by starting Peterman. You can't excuse their decision by saying Tyrod was playing bad. Replacing bad with historically bad is not something that can be excused. It was a poor decision and deserves to be criticized as such.

 

Poor decision is still too generous. I’m hoping it was Rico beating the Peterman drum on that and swayed McDermott grudgingly to give it a shot.  

 

Yes mcprocess is still accountable, but I’m just hoping the impetus for the stupidity wasn’t from the guys still running the show.

 

 

 

 

[BurpleBull]

11 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

are we really doing "due diligence " by sticking with a guy that completes about 1/2 of his passes and fumbles a lot and throws a lot of picks? There are only so many backup QB slots available, actually only one. Is going with Nasty Nate our best bang for the buck?  I would question it, but the brain trust is all in. We'll see. Should be fun

 

 

If by "sticking with" Peterman, you mean affording him the opportunity to participate in an open QB competition during the off-season despite an up and down rookie campaign, then yes, the coaches would be sticking with him and doing their due diligence in the process.

 

If that's not what you meant, then you're likely just very disingenuously, using Peterman's past---his rookie season---where he threw 52 total passes in mostly spot duty, as evidence of where he stands presently and are placing a definitive cap on his potential based on that past, for the sake of rendering the idea of promoting Peterman in the future an illogical one. 

 

If Peterman wins the starting job, it'll no doubt be due to him showing growth from his rookie season and nothing less.  

[Kirby Jackson]

3 minutes ago, BurpleBull said:

 

If by "sticking with" Peterman, you mean affording him the opportunity to participate in an open QB competition during the off-season despite an up and down rookie campaign, then yes, the coaches would be sticking with him and doing their due diligence in the process.

 

If that's not what you meant, then you're likely just very disingenuously, using Peterman's past---his rookie season---where he threw 52 total passes in mostly spot duty, as evidence of where he stands presently and are placing a definitive cap on his potential based on that past, for the sake of rendering the idea of promoting Peterman in the future an illogical one. 

 

If Peterman wins the starting job, it'll no doubt be due to him showing growth from his rookie season and nothing less.  

Maybe this is where the disconnect is? You would call it “up and down.” I would call it “historically bad.” There is a large gap in our perceptions of his play.

[Rocky Landing]

13 hours ago, cd1 said:

How many chances did your guy Tyrod get?

 

You are just being rediculous.

Maybe you didn't notice, but Taylor actually earned the starting spot.

[BurpleBull]

6 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Maybe this is where the disconnect is? You would call it “up and down.” I would call it “historically bad.” There is a large gap in our perceptions of his play.

 

Peterman's first rookie start could fairly be described as "historically bad" but not his entire rookie season.

 

Peterman's ability to move the offense vs. the Saints is what got people really wondering about what the Bills had in him.

 

He produced slightly better than Tyrod Taylor vs. The Bradys and he put points on the board versus the Colts.

 

Peterman was pressing to make things happen. It happened in the LAC game, it happened in the snow game, it happened in the playoffs.

 

Playing better situational football is something that I think he can and will learn to do.

[Rocky Landing]

This conversation reminds me of the EJ years. Except, of course, EJ was a better quarterback, and there was more to argue.

[Rocky Landing]

4 hours ago, JohnC said:

 What you fail to mention in your haranguing of Peterman is that he got an opportunity to play in the Charger game because for a few consecutive games the fleet footed starter was playing ineptly. He simply couldn't run a pro offense! The act of desperation by the coaching staff was two pronged: Get the starting qb off the field and go to the next option. It didn't work. The move was not a reflection of Peterman's abilities as it was a reflection of Taylor's inabilities. 

 

The move? No. 

The results? Yes.

Edited May 31, 2018 by Rocky Landing

[reddogblitz]

3 hours ago, cd1 said:

Who has gotten LESS than half a game?

 

That's about what Brian Brohm and Cardale Jones got.

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

Maybe an addendum to our qb saga is when will the Cleveland fans call for Mayfield to start in Cleveland compared to when the Buffalo fans beckon for Allen to take the snaps.?

 

Bills fans are already calling for Allen to start, so we win

[Kirby Jackson]

1 hour ago, BurpleBull said:

 

Peterman's first rookie start could fairly be described as "historically bad" but not his entire rookie season.

 

Peterman's ability to move the offense vs. the Saints is what got people really wondering about what the Bills had in him.

 

He produced slightly better than Tyrod Taylor vs. The Bradys and he put points on the board versus the Colts.

 

Peterman was pressing to make things happen. It happened in the LAC game, it happened in the snow game, it happened in the playoffs.

 

Playing better situational football is something that I think he can and will learn to do.

He had a good drive, down 40 something, against a team playing vanilla defense. 

 

He was 5-10 for 50 yards in a score vs. the Colts. I realize that the conditions were tough but that’s no better than acceptable.

 

In the playoffs he played like 4 snaps. He threw an INT, fumbled and got called for intentional grounding. That was “making it happen?” 

 

We must have been watching different games. Are people so desperate for a “franchise QB” that they were impressed by that?!? I saw more than enough. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong. I wasn’t wrong about Tuel, Levi Brown or Brohm though.