lookylookyherecomescookie Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 4 hours ago, GunnerBill said: Sure. The summary is I think he has a limited arm and as a result benefited from the cliche that seems to follow limited arm strength Quarterbacks "he is smart and accurate". But I don't think a proper evaluation of his college tape really demonstrates that accuracy. He played in a gimmick offense, his ball placement was bad, his arm strength not NFL level and he panicked under pressure, tends to stare down the rush and let the ball go. The INT he threw over the middle in the Chargers game that is behind his receiver and sailed.... that throw is on his college tape multiple times. I think they were 100% and totally wrong to draft Nathan Peterman, yes. But that doesn't mean I hope he throws 5 picks every game to prove me right. I have zero interest in being right. But this is a forum for opinions. I gave my opinion on Peterman before the 2017 draft happened, before he was a Bill. It is up to him to do something to change it. Even his biggest supporter would have to accept that a good OTA and mini camp is not that. thanks 1
cd1 Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 12 hours ago, Kelly the Dog said: That's somewhat of the same reason or mindset of the McDermott/Peterman bromance. McD absolutely loves Peterman but a huge chunk of it if not the majority of it is what kind of guy and teammate that Nate is. Same with Tyrod. He plays Nate with the ones more because it is a message to the team that anyone who does all the right things has a chance to start than because he has the talent to start. He's still going to be cut on the eve of the season barring injury and then put on the PS. The good thing about painting oneself into a corner is that paint eventually drys...
Kirby Jackson Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 12 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said: And 90% of us already know TT was not our best option. And we are all glad he’s gone. 100% of us didn’t think Tyrod was our long-term option. More than 10% of us believe he is better than Peterman and McCarron (which was your claim). 12 hours ago, HappyDays said: We were 4-2 when we traded Dareus and our run defense at that time was 4th in YPC. McDermott made every decision last year without worrying about its immediate impact on wins, and I commend him for it. So I can excuse his decision to start Peterman because all he really needed to know in that moment was if Dennison was worth keeping around, and if Peterman could show a flash of starter material. That’s a fair point on Dareus.
cd1 Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 3 hours ago, GunnerBill said: No. He would have to produce at a level of a serviceable NFL quarterback. Not necessarily look like an established starter... just produce at a level that makes me think "he could make a reliable backup". That has to happen on the field in real games with real live bullets. He could go some way by doing it in real games in pre-season, but ultimately to change my mind that he has no place in the NFL he has to show on the field that he has a place in the NFL. And my opinion isn't fixed in 2016.... it is based on his 2017 pre-season (50% passer despite playing against the backups in every game) and his 2017 regular season performances (plenty said already). I don't understand where the optimism for this guy comes from.... because it isn't based on anything he has put on tape at either the college or the NFL level. If it were up to you, Nate would never take the field again. So, how could he possibly jump those through those hoops "on the field in real games with real live bullets". Truth be told, when someone goes to these lengths to defend their opinions - they surely don't want any chance that they can be proven WRONG. NOTE: The farther you go out on a limb - the weaker the branch gets.
Kirby Jackson Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 3 minutes ago, cd1 said: If it were up to you, Nate would never take the field again. So, how could he possibly jump those through those hoops "on the field in real games with real live bullets". Truth be told, when someone goes to these lengths to defend their opinions - they surely don't want any chance that they can be proven WRONG. NOTE: The farther you go out on a limb - the weaker the branch gets. The irony of this is Gunner has watched, as much, or more, of Peterman than every person here. His opinion is based on what he SAW. He gave a detailed answer of why he thinks that Peterman won’t succeed. You are not debating any of his assertions. You are just saying “you’d rather be right.” If you don’t agree with his analysis what is it that you are seeing that differs? If a practice in shorts and a t-shirt erases his last few years of gametape in your mind, say that. At the moment though you aren’t even disagreeing with his assessment. We all HOPE that he is Aaron Rodgers or better. We all don’t THINK that is the case. 2
cd1 Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: 12 minutes ago, cd1 said: If it were up to you, Nate would never take the field again. So, how could he possibly jump those through those hoops "on the field in real games with real live bullets". Truth be told, when someone goes to these lengths to defend their opinions - they surely don't want any chance that they can be proven WRONG. NOTE: The farther you go out on a limb - the weaker the branch gets. The irony of this is Gunner has watched, as much, or more, of Peterman than every person here. His opinion is based on what he SAW. He gave a detailed answer of why he thinks that Peterman won’t succeed. You are not debating any of his assertions. You are just saying “you’d rather be right.” If you don’t agree with his analysis what is it that you are seeing that differs? If a practice in shorts and a t-shirt erases his last few years of gametape in your mind, say that. At the moment though you aren’t even disagreeing with his assessment. We all HOPE that he is Aaron Rodgers or better. We all don’t THINK that is the case. He was asked a very specific question as to what Peterman would have to do to change his opinion about Peterman. His reply was to perform IN A GAME with "real bullets flying" of which Gunner would NEVER want Peterman to step foot in said game ever again. How ironic. Some of this is simply ridiculous. You guys are obviously wasting time posting on message boards when you could be making BIG $$$$ in working somewhere in the NFL. 2 minutes ago, ScottLaw said: Anyone that thinks Peterman is better than Tyrod doesn't have a clue what they are watching.... basically way too much of this board. Peterman is not better than Tyrod, he is different than Tyrod. The Bills drafted a pure pocket passer. Why on earth would an OC want to have to develop a system that would be suitable to two very different talents. Let the new OC develop an offence that will suit your current "placeholders" and will be well established by the time your new rookie QB is ready to take the reins. Tyrod is gone because the team was going in a different direction.
GunnerBill Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 18 minutes ago, cd1 said: If it were up to you, Nate would never take the field again. So, how could he possibly jump those through those hoops "on the field in real games with real live bullets". Truth be told, when someone goes to these lengths to defend their opinions - they surely don't want any chance that they can be proven WRONG. If it were up to me whether he sees the field again would depend entirely on him earning the right to see the field again. If he is the best Quarterback in camp when camp opens he will earn the opportunity to play with the starters more in pre-season and if he is the best quarterback in pre-season he will earn the right to start day 1 of the season. I am not pigheaded about this - if Peterman is clearly the best guy he should play. I just sincerely doubt that situation will play out. And what lengths have I gone to? Explaining the basis on which I don't rate him? Would you rather I made decisions on the merits of players without having watched them and taken a view on their game film? Football is for the most part a meritocracy. Tape wins. What Kirby says about a 1st rounder getting more rope than a 5th rounder is true but ultimately if what Peterman had put on tape in 2017 through pre-season and regular season showed a genuine promise that he might be a serviceable NFL Quarterback then the Bills would probably have felt good enough about their situation not to need to go an get a serviceable guy (with only 4 starts to his name) as a potential placeholder for their rookie. It is because looking at Peterman's tape there is no indication of that and you would be "hope and pray" territory had you taken that approach. If I'm wrong on Nathan Peterman and we have the next Tom Brady or Tony Romo on our hands - great. All I keep saying is I have watched what is out there and don't see any evidence to suggest to me that is likely. I don't understand why that riles people up so much. I have taken more heat on my view on Nathan Peterman than I have any other opinion I have ever expressed on this forum and to my mind it isn't even in the top 10 of opinions I would consider controversial. 2
Kirby Jackson Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 8 minutes ago, cd1 said: He was asked a very specific question as to what Peterman would have to do to change his opinion about Peterman. His reply was to perform IN A GAME with "real bullets flying" of which Gunner would NEVER want Peterman to step foot in said game ever again. How ironic. Some of this is simply ridiculous. You guys are obviously wasting time posting on message boards when you could be making BIG $$$$ in working somewhere in the NFL. He said that he would have to play well when it matters to think differently. Shouldn’t that be the case? Should he say, “this impressive mini-camp practice has really changed my opinion of the 20 or so starts that I saw?” Of course not!! In my opinion (and Gunner’s I’d assume) he hasn’t earned the right to play when the bullets are flying. If he gets that opportunity than we all hope that he succeeds. With that being said why does a long shot QB that failed deserve more chances? I asked earlier why he deserved more shots than Tuel? Tuel was way better in his appearance than Peterman against a much better team. Are you angry that he only got one chance or did you think that he just wasn’t good enough?
cd1 Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 7 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: If it were up to me whether he sees the field again would depend entirely on him earning the right to see the field again. If he is the best Quarterback in camp when camp opens he will earn the opportunity to play with the starters more in pre-season and if he is the best quarterback in pre-season he will earn the right to start day 1 of the season. I am not pigheaded about this - if Peterman is clearly the best guy he should play. I just sincerely doubt that situation will play out. And what lengths have I gone to? Explaining the basis on which I don't rate him? Would you rather I made decisions on the merits of players without having watched them and taken a view on their game film? Football is for the most part a meritocracy. Tape wins. What Kirby says about a 1st rounder getting more rope than a 5th rounder is true but ultimately if what Peterman had put on tape in 2017 through pre-season and regular season showed a genuine promise that he might be a serviceable NFL Quarterback then the Bills would probably have felt good enough about their situation not to need to go an get a serviceable guy (with only 4 starts to his name) as a potential placeholder for their rookie. It is because looking at Peterman's tape there is no indication of that and you would be "hope and pray" territory had you taken that approach. If I'm wrong on Nathan Peterman and we have the next Tom Brady or Tony Romo on our hands - great. All I keep saying is I have watched what is out there and don't see any evidence to suggest to me that is likely. I don't understand why that riles people up so much. I have taken more heat on my view on Nathan Peterman than I have any other opinion I have ever expressed on this forum and to my mind it isn't even in the top 10 of opinions I would consider controversial. WHAT is the matter with you? Who - WHO is saying that Peterman is a franchise QB? NO ONE! At BEST Peterman or McCarron are place holders/back-ups. FCOL MANY (myself included) would rather see one of them start, even if Allen looks good, just to make sure that the new offense is running on all four cylinders. PLUS - regardless of when Allen starts, the Bills will NEED a back-up QB. This year, when Allen does start, either AJ or Nate will be backup. Unless, of course, in your infinite wisdom, you deem that Allen will not need a backup QB. 12 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: He said that he would have to play well when it matters to think differently. Shouldn’t that be the case? Should he say, “this impressive mini-camp practice has really changed my opinion of the 20 or so starts that I saw?” Of course not!! In my opinion (and Gunner’s I’d assume) he hasn’t earned the right to play when the bullets are flying. If he gets that opportunity than we all hope that he succeeds. With that being said why does a long shot QB that failed deserve more chances? I asked earlier why he deserved more shots than Tuel? Tuel was way better in his appearance than Peterman against a much better team. Are you angry that he only got one chance or did you think that he just wasn’t good enough? Ha Ha Ha, your slip is showing. ? Perhaps you should go back and re-read exactly what he said.
GunnerBill Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 16 minutes ago, cd1 said: WHAT is the matter with you? Who - WHO is saying that Peterman is a franchise QB? NO ONE! At BEST Peterman or McCarron are place holders/back-ups. FCOL MANY (myself included) would rather see one of them start, even if Allen looks good, just to make sure that the new offense is running on all four cylinders. PLUS - regardless of when Allen starts, the Bills will NEED a back-up QB. This year, when Allen does start, either AJ or Nate will be backup. Unless, of course, in your infinite wisdom, you deem that Allen will not need a backup QB. Okay that is fair nobody is saying he is a franchise QB. Even if he turns into a Ryan Fitzpatrick I would be very surprised. I don't see any actual tape evidence to suggest he can get to that kind of level. And yes - is there a chance Peterman ends up as the Bills backup this year? Of course there is I have never said any different. I don't think he is going to stick as a long term backup though. I just don't think he is talented enough. Nor have I said there is no chance he beats out AJ (I don't particularly love him either). I disagree on holding Allen back - if he is clearly the best guy he should play in my opinion. I don't think keeping him back and putting a clearly inferior Quarterback out there helps anyone.
BurpleBull Posted June 13, 2018 Author Posted June 13, 2018 19 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said: Yes, if Peterman has 15 TDs and 4 INTs and is 10-0 but the Bills think Allen is ready he will play. Which scenario do you think is more likely: A) Bills think Allen is ready Week 1 B) Peterman is 10-0 with wins at Baltimore, home to the Chargers, at the Vikings, at the Packers, home to the Titans, at the Texans, at the Colts, home to the Pats, home to the Bears and at the Jets with a 3:1 TD:INT ratio That is your hypotethical. Nate Peterman’s mom would laugh at that. 31 of the 33 QBs drafted in the top 10 over the last 20 years started during year 1 at some point. I don’t know why you expect Allen to not be a part of that group because of Nathan Peterman?!? That’s beyond crazy talk. You know what Nathan Peterman's mom would laugh at even more than my hypothetical? Your notion that the Bills' coaches would pull him from the lineup in favor of Allen If this scenario played out. What do you say would constitute Allen being ready and deserving of taking over the reins from Peterman, in McDermott and Daboll's minds in this given scenario? I'm just curious.
Kelly the Dog Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 6 hours ago, Aussie Joe said: The optimism is coming from media reports from the Minicamp thread...I find it hard to imagine you wouldnt be aware of these comments but feel free to refer to the thread on the subject... With all respect, if McD and Daboll thinks he has won the job in preseason than I will go with their opinion...Obviously we are still a long way from that... would be a nice story regardless of how unlikely... A quarterback with all of the deficiencies that Gunner lays out CAN look great in OTAs because none of those deficiencies are exposed because it’s not played at game speed, with real pressure from the D.
Aussie Joe Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 42 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said: A quarterback with all of the deficiencies that Gunner lays out CAN look great in OTAs because none of those deficiencies are exposed because it’s not played at game speed, with real pressure from the D. As I have said probably 5 times... what else can he do at the moment to further his case but look good in the OTA’s? If he looked bad than I’m sure people would be using that as more evidence to condemn him.. After the OTA’s they will move onto training camp and the preseason and see if he continues to look good and we will then assess further won’t we? ...as I have also said these further steps may find him out...
Kirby Jackson Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 55 minutes ago, BurpleBull said: You know what Nathan Peterman's mom would laugh at even more than my hypothetical? Your notion that the Bills' coaches would pull him from the lineup in favor of Allen If this scenario played out. What do you say would constitute Allen being ready and deserving of taking over the reins from Peterman, in McDermott and Daboll's minds in this given scenario? I'm just curious. I have no idea what will constitute Allen being ready. That is 100% up to Daboll and McDermott. At some point they will be comfortable with him playing and that’s when he goes on the field. Beane will be pushing for that to be sooner than later. The fact that Peterman being 10-0 with a 3:1 QB to INT ratio is even on your radar is absurd. Tom Brady couldn’t do that with that schedule. The reality is, if Peterman or McCarron starts the Bills will be no better than 2-2 coming home to play the Titans. If Allen is “ready” by that point he will get the ball. The next “logical” time would be about a month later home to the Bears. At some point though, right or wrong, the Bills are going to get him out there.
Kelly the Dog Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 36 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said: As I have said probably 5 times... what else can he do at the moment to further his case but look good in the OTA’s? If he looked bad than I’m sure people would be using that as more evidence to condemn him.. After the OTA’s they will move onto training camp and the preseason and see if he continues to look good and we will then assess further won’t we? ...as I have also said these further steps may find him out... Then how can you criticize the comment that until we see him do it under live bullets we won't know? You want it both ways.
Aussie Joe Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 3 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said: Then how can you criticize the comment that until we see him do it under live bullets we won't know? You want it both ways. Huh? How have I criticised that? The post you quoted mentions no such thing..
Alphadawg7 Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 Oh the offseason...26 pages and counting on a future PS player. Hey anything is possible, but the odds of NP winning this job over AJ and Allen are very low. Looking good in shorts is meaningless this time of year. Seen a number of threads saying how it won't be hard to beat out AJ...ok where is that coming from? AJ had a substantially better college career. AJ has performed substantially better in Preseason appearances AJ has performed substantially better in limited NFL starts AJ got to sit and learn the NFL game longer I am not even the biggest AJ guy, just acknowledge that he has a case for optimism and potential. I actually think Allen might just win this job outright come week 1, although I would prefer it to be AJ so we can maybe showcase him for trade value while also letting Allen sit longer to learn and prepare. But NP was an unheralded college QB with limited physical tools who managed to just complete 50% of his passes in preseason and completed 49% of his passes with 6 interceptions and 3 fumbles in his limited reg & post season appearances. 6 INTS and 3 fumbles in 52 career pass attempts to be exact in barely over a games worth of total NFL action. As I said before, I have nothing against Peterman, and hope he proves me wrong. But this is a bit silly to really think at this stage he has a legit shot to start. He is like a dear in head lights who throws off his back foot in a panic under pressure, and as GB pointed out, that was an issue for him in college too. So I personally can't even consider him a legit option until he shows something when the pads are on and people are coming after him. He doesn't have the physical tools to over come these poor habits IMO.
Aussie Joe Posted June 13, 2018 Posted June 13, 2018 1 minute ago, Alphadawg7 said: Oh the offseason...26 pages and counting on a future PS player. Hey anything is possible, but the odds of NP winning this job over AJ and Allen are very low. Looking good in shorts is meaningless this time of year. Seen a number of threads saying how it won't be hard to beat out AJ...ok where is that coming from? AJ had a substantially better college career. AJ has performed substantially better in Preseason appearances AJ has performed substantially better in limited NFL starts AJ got to sit and learn the NFL game longer I am not even the biggest AJ guy, just acknowledge that he has a case for optimism and potential. I actually think Allen might just win this job outright come week 1, although I would prefer it to be AJ so we can maybe showcase him for trade value while also letting Allen sit longer to learn and prepare. But NP was an unheralded college QB with limited physical tools who managed to just complete 50% of his passes in preseason and completed 49% of his passes with 6 interceptions and 3 fumbles in his limited reg & post season appearances. 6 INTS and 3 fumbles in 52 career pass attempts to be exact in barely over a games worth of total NFL action. As I said before, I have nothing against Peterman, and hope he proves me wrong. But this is a bit silly to really think at this stage he has a legit shot to start. He is like a dear in head lights who throws off his back foot in a panic under pressure, and as GB pointed out, that was an issue for him in college too. So I personally can't even consider him a legit option until he shows something when the pads are on and people are coming after him. He doesn't have the physical tools to over come these poor habits IMO. So why is McD wasting valuable first team reps on someone who is going to be PS at best?
Recommended Posts