Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 minutes ago, Wily Dog said:

 

That is non- sensical because the die would have been cast before he was even on the field. 

Did you ever hear of the bickering Bills ??

 

Have you heard of Sean McDermott?  Do you even remotely think that his teams have that kind of discord?  That plain answer is a resounding no.  You should stop this foolishness. 

Posted

Talk about bi-polar thread. 

 

Anyone who thinks Peterman should start is just playing devils advocate. It’s so obvious. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Have you heard of Sean McDermott?  Do you even remotely think that his teams have that kind of discord?  That plain answer is a resounding no.  You should stop this foolishness. 

I would hope he would have gotten rid of those responsible.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Wily Dog said:

 

That is non- sensical because the die would have been cast before he was even on the field. 

 

This is a bizarre statement. Really, you're just deflecting because you don't want to answer the question. So, I'll ask it again: If you think the O-line gave up on Peterman (regardless of when "the die was cast") is that not a failure of leadership?

Posted
1 minute ago, Rocky Landing said:

This is a bizarre statement. Really, you're just deflecting because you don't want to answer the question. So, I'll ask it again: If you think the O-line gave up on Peterman (regardless of when "the die was cast") is that not a failure of leadership?

 

What is going to lead if the players are not rebelling against him but the decision to start him. That clear enough

Posted
Just now, Wily Dog said:

 

What is going to lead if the players are not rebelling against him but the decision to start him. That clear enough

No, not really...

 

This is what I meant when I said you were painting yourself into a corner with your narrative.

So, I'll just step all over your freshly painted floor:

If Nathan Paterman, a quarterback for the Buffalo Bills, is so disregarded by his own offensive line that they would intentionally (or even unintentionally, for that matter) not protect him against the likes of Joey Bosa, during an NFL game in which the Bills were still in playoff contention, because they were unhappy with LITERALLY ANY DECISION THE COACHING STAFF MIGHT MAKE, then that very fact represents a SERIOUS FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP on the part of NATHAN PETERMAN.

 

Is this really the narrative you want to pursue???

Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Rocky Landing said:

No, not really...

 

This is what I meant when I said you were painting yourself into a corner with your narrative.

So, I'll just step all over your freshly painted floor:

If Nathan Paterman, a quarterback for the Buffalo Bills, is so disregarded by his own offensive line that they would intentionally (or even unintentionally, for that matter) not protect him against the likes of Joey Bosa, during an NFL game in which the Bills were still in playoff contention, because they were unhappy with LITERALLY ANY DECISION THE COACHING STAFF MIGHT MAKE, then that very fact represents a SERIOUS FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP on the part of NATHAN PETERMAN.

 

Is this really the narrative you want to pursue???

 

It would also reflect negatively on the leadership of McDermott if it were a real thing. 

Edited by 26CornerBlitz
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

It would also reflective negatively on the leadership of McDermott if it were a real thing. 

That goes without saying. But, of course, it is not a real thing.

 

I will say, also-- the accusation towards veteran Bills players, and their coach (and Peterman, for that matter) is offensive.

Edited by Rocky Landing
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Wily Dog said:

You mean that you have to Agree with CB , Kirby and RDB, not by a damn site .I state my opinions only to have them dismissed by Kirby's facts which do not amount to anything in reality of known facts. If this is the what TBD has become , and I doubt it, you have others who are reasonable , such as John C. who  has been on the end of the know it all , know it alls. I guess they believe if you state something is true often enough it will be true.

John C. is a great poster (and a Canisius guy). FWIW, you just said “facts do not amount to anything.” Think about that. 

1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Will this be like your excuse that the O line this season will get Allen killed????

 

Nope, unfortunately Shady they just suck. That’s the problem. There are no conspiracies. It is just a really bad OL. 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Nope, unfortunately Shady they just suck. That’s the problem. There are no conspiracies. It is just a really bad OL. 

We’ll see what comes Sunday and then again for for real 2 weeks after that.  

 

Posted
15 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

We’ll see what comes Sunday and then again for for real 2 weeks after that.  

 

Yeah, I’m pretty nervous about that group. I think that they need an OG and a RT. It’s a bad group. This is a 3 year “process” though. Next year they add to the OL and pass catchers.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Rocky Landing said:

No, not really...

 

This is what I meant when I said you were painting yourself into a corner with your narrative.

So, I'll just step all over your freshly painted floor:

If Nathan Paterman, a quarterback for the Buffalo Bills, is so disregarded by his own offensive line that they would intentionally (or even unintentionally, for that matter) not protect him against the likes of Joey Bosa, during an NFL game in which the Bills were still in playoff contention, because they were unhappy with LITERALLY ANY DECISION THE COACHING STAFF MIGHT MAKE, then that very fact represents a SERIOUS FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP on the part of NATHAN PETERMAN.

 

Is this really the narrative you want to pursue???

 

I really do not know how to explain it to you because whether or not it was peterman there or joe  blow he would have had no chance for leadership  in the circumstances. he or joe blow were immaterial . if you can not understand that  , i can't explain it to you.

Posted
1 minute ago, Wily Dog said:

 

I really do not know how to explain it to you because whether or not it was peterman there or joe  blow he would have had no chance for leadership  in the circumstances. he or joe blow were immaterial . if you can not understand that  , i can't explain it to you.

Joe Blow is a true leader of men. Our offensive line would NEVER have done that to Joe Blow! 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

Joe Blow is a true leader of men. Our offensive line would NEVER have done that to Joe Blow! 

 

You still don't get it.  it is embarrassing

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Wily Dog said:

 

You still don't get it.  it is embarrassing

Well, let's break it down:

Your premise is:

1) The O-line loves, and respects Tyrod Taylor, and believe that he should start vs. the Chargers.

2) McDermott benches TT in favor of Peterman.

3) The O-line is angered by this decision, and decides to not offer Peterman the protection that their jobs require. (Hey, they don't care WHO starts. It could be JOE BLOW for all they care! As long as it's not Taylor, they're not going to do their jobs!)

4) The game starts, and to plan, they ignore Peterman's leadership, and go ahead and let Joey Bosa, and the Chargers' defense destroy Peterman's first NFL start.

 

And, you don't think this reflects poorly on Peterman's leadership in any way? For real???

Talk about embarrassing! Do you not see how astonishingly stupid this narrative is???

 

(Jesus, am I a fish on a hook, or what?)

 

  • Haha (+1) 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

 

Nope, unfortunately Shady they just suck. That’s the problem. There are no conspiracies. It is just a really bad OL. 

 

I'm not sure we can use the Cleveland game as a gague. They're wrecking Philly's #1 OL

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...