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

[Norcalbillsfan]

On 6/15/2018 at 10:39 PM, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

McD did a great job of sticking with tyrod even if he "didn't want Tyrod there at all". It's year one.. you can only make so many personell changes (and he gutted the roster.. made a ton) 

 

I always harp on coaches swimming upstream, refusing to play with the cards they are dealt. McD didn't do that come week 1 and beyond. We made the playoffs because our secondary carried the team with a quarterback that didn't hamper that game plan (turning over, losing field position, throwing 5 picks)

 

We're speculating that Dennison pushed McD to start Pete. He could have sacked up and vetoed the idea to give us a remote chance of winning that game. 

 

I also do not care when Peterman starts. Sure he was horrible against a constant pass rush. Mind you that was happening Jets, Saints, and Chargers. So why are we creating the narrative poor Peterman had an unlucky timing in his first start.

 

It's the NFL. Any given Sunday the pass rush can be a bad day. Guarantee any coach with a peanut brain would have blitzed the living hell out of rook version Pete. THE CHARGERS DIDN'T EVEN MAKE THE DAMN PLAYOFFS. don't tell me that pass rush ruined every quarterback they played. Pete lost the game. I know some rooks that don't lose the game by 1st quarter. they are aware they aren't running the show, have a unit that can carry the team and don't impede that. It was honestly the worst football IQ I've ever seen. Peterman is more talented than Tuel by miles, no situation awareness at all. Some coach had to tell him "you're going to have a rough pass rush, take the sack and don't force it."

 

Was the Chargers a bad game for Peterman to start? Crocodile tears here. It's one game. Peterman improved. But i can't stand the narrative that poor Peterman had to start against the Chargers. So we can pick and choose easy games for Peterman to play the easy games and let Tyrod handle the good teams? Good lord why not start Tyrod.. you know our designated quarterback for good defenses.. for every game. The argument is silly someone please debate me on this with serious points other than telling me "oh so you don't want Peterman to be a good QB?" No.. I just didn't want him to see the field last year short of a backup role.

So as an NFL coach and if you liked or disliked a QB prospect and you at least needed to see what he can do you would say "too bad this is the NFL, any given sunday" now go make your first start on the road against a good defense in the middle of a play off push for both teams? I'm not saying there was a perfect time to let him play but it was a terrible time to start a rookie and at least see what he has.

And "THE CHARGERS DIDNT EVEN MAKE THE DAMN PLAYOFFS" they started Peterman against the 4th best pass defense in the NFL, also 43 sacks on the season. They were 9-7, they were a good team.

I agree on not wanting him to see the feild last year, but McD didn't want tyrod for his system. He needed to find out if Peterman was the future, or go get Josh Allen in the draft.

[Bing Bong]

Dawg figure it out in practice. I get if the story is he begrudgingly accepted Dennison's insistence. But he's the boss and Dennison was fired for it. If he really felt strongly about it, sack up and vetoe that. Dennison was a moron before that game. 

 

I'm always going for win now. End the playoff drought for my sanity's sake. And I love McDermott's attitude on that regard. But essentially forfeiting that game jeapordized our chances. I do not care one bit if we want to see if we needed to draft a QB. We should have gone QB no matter what Peterman accomplished. Come draft several people crunched the numbers, and uh, 5th rounders have virtually no track record. Never understood the confidence they had in Peterman. He's a prospect. Don't start him in a crucial game.

 

New narrative going on is "Tyrod threw for 65 yards, end of story". Sure unload him. If everybody's so bullish on Peterman, draft that high first QB and see how the competition pans out the next year. We're so worried at Josh allen getting "broken", yet at the same time it was "hell throw in zPete"

 

Any given Sunday I'm implying Mills is a pass rush turnstile for ANY defense on a pass rush any given turnstile.

 

9-7 is not a world beater's record. It's not that good. We were 9-7 and nobody's saying "the bills were a good team." Why do the chargers break this mold? And Pete, study the scouting report.. weak record. Alot of sacks.. don't win it all by yourself man. You have a secondary unit to carry you. Tyrod at least knew that especially with his garbage weapons.

 

Virtually anybody outside of Buffalo thought this was the biggest joke of the season.

 

I dredged up things you probably have heard. My biggest complaint is why did McD want to know if he didn't have to draft Allen as a contingency plan. No matter how well Peterman may have played.. Draft that QB and see the competition. Short of Peterman pulling a Garoppolo, not happening, we were going to draft high. Coaches were simply too pie in the sky.

 

McD didn't need to know Peterman that specific game. Just wait for competition next year. And if all the quarterbacks suck.. well we got a taste of Peterman year 2.

 

49 minutes ago, Norcalbillsfan said:

So as an NFL coach and if you liked or disliked a QB prospect and you at least needed to see what he can do you would say "too bad this is the NFL, any given sunday" now go make your first start on the road against a good defense in the middle of a play off push for both teams? I'm not saying there was a perfect time to let him play but it was a terrible time to start a rookie and at least see what he has.

And "THE CHARGERS DIDNT EVEN MAKE THE DAMN PLAYOFFS" they started Peterman against the 4th best pass defense in the NFL, also 43 sacks on the season. They were 9-7, they were a good team.

I agree on not wanting him to see the feild last year, but McD didn't want tyrod for his system. He needed to find out if Peterman was the future, or go get Josh Allen in the draft.

 

[starrymessenger]

4 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Meanwhile we stack up a few Ls? No way. If he IS ready and clearly better, then you go with him. NOT on a oh well, aw shucks, wing and a prayer.  That goes for all 3 qbs.

 

Whoever Coach feels won the job in TC should and probably will start the season. If that's all your saying I don't disagree. And I will get behind whoever that winds up being. But if its NP and the result in the first half of the Chargers game is basically a true reflection of his ability and prospects, which is what his detractors believe, then IMO he won't be starting for very long. Either that or Coach will be shown the door.

My sense of it is that NP is better than that but I haven't seen enuf to know how much better. It may, or may not be enuf to justify giving him a starting assignment. Those who don't like him feel that they have seen enuf already and that he probably doesn't even deserve a roster spot. I wouldn't say that myself but it is certainly not beyond the realm of possibility. 

All will be revealed to the faithful but only in due course.

[eball]

9 hours ago, Wily Dog said:

 

And you of course do. 

 

Never said I did!

[BurpleBull]

18 hours ago, Norcalbillsfan said:

So as an NFL coach and if you liked or disliked a QB prospect and you at least needed to see what he can do you would say "too bad this is the NFL, any given sunday" now go make your first start on the road against a good defense in the middle of a play off push for both teams? I'm not saying there was a perfect time to let him play but it was a terrible time to start a rookie and at least see what he has.

And "THE CHARGERS DIDNT EVEN MAKE THE DAMN PLAYOFFS" they started Peterman against the 4th best pass defense in the NFL, also 43 sacks on the season. They were 9-7, they were a good team.

I agree on not wanting him to see the feild last year, but McD didn't want tyrod for his system. He needed to find out if Peterman was the future, or go get Josh Allen in the draft.

 

As much as I'm on Peterman's side, I think too much is made out of him playing against the Chargers defense.

 

I honestly didn't even know they had a sack-happy defense until after the game. Perhaps because they didn't have much of a buzz having relocated to a new stadium.

 

Peterman just didn't have a good showing in his first start, but I'm not sure the game takes the turn it did if the first pick off of DiMarco's fingertips doesn't happen.

 

The game started with a simple completion and then another up the field to Benjamin; it seemed as though Peterman was playing within himself and the offense up to the interception.

 

After that, I think Peterman began pressing trying to redeem himself with the impact play.

 

Before the season started last season, I stated that Peterman would probably end up second on the depth chart at QB despite the other more experienced QBs brought in because he looked very comfortable playing under center, in a pro-style offense at Pitt and for putting up solid numbers during his time there.

 

So I feel like it was more McDermott having genuine faith in Peterman being able to handle the responsibility of leading the offense, than simply trying to see if they needed to draft a QB once the season ended.

 

I think that is why people are so dumbfounded as to why Peterman finds himself in the position he's in, being granted the opportunity to win the starting role.

 

McDermott still has genuine faith in Peterman...though some think it blind faith. 

 

I actually thought the Chargers game was the perfect game to have Peterman make his first start, they weren't a team on fire up to that point, but more than that he would be making his first start in front of only 25,000 people versus the usual 70,000 plus serving as the Chargers 12th man.

[3rdand12]

20 hours ago, iinii said:

Song remains the same.....

 good movie

13 hours ago, starrymessenger said:

 

Whoever Coach feels won the job in TC should and probably will start the season. If that's all your saying I don't disagree. And I will get behind whoever that winds up being. But if its NP and the result in the first half of the Chargers game is basically a true reflection of his ability and prospects, which is what his detractors believe, then IMO he won't be starting for very long. Either that or Coach will be shown the door.

My sense of it is that NP is better than that but I haven't seen enuf to know how much better. It may, or may not be enuf to justify giving him a starting assignment. Those who don't like him feel that they have seen enuf already and that he probably doesn't even deserve a roster spot. I wouldn't say that myself but it is certainly not beyond the realm of possibility. 

All will be revealed to the faithful but only in due course.

sounds cryptic

 I like it

[3rdand12]

13 minutes ago, BurpleBull said:

 

As much as I'm on Peterman's side, I think too much is made out of him playing against the Chargers defense.

 

I honestly didn't even know they had a sack-happy defense until after the game. Perhaps because they didn't have much of a buzz having relocated to a new stadium.

 

Peterman just didn't have a good showing in his first start, but I'm not sure the game takes the turn it did if the first pick off of DiMarco's fingertips doesn't happen.

 

The game started with a simple completion and then another up the field to Benjamin; it seemed as though Peterman was playing within himself and the offense up to the interception.

 

After that, I think Peterman began pressing trying to redeem himself with the impact play.

 

Before the season started last season, I stated that Peterman would probably end up second on the depth chart at QB despite the other more experienced QBs brought in because he looked very comfortable playing under center, in a pro-style offense at Pitt and for putting up solid numbers during his time there.

 

So I feel like it was more McDermott having genuine faith in Peterman being able to handle the responsibility of leading the offense, than simply trying to see if they needed to draft a QB once the season ended.

 

I think that is why people are so dumbfounded as to why Peterman finds himself in the position he's in, being granted the opportunity to win the starting role.

 

McDermott still has genuine faith in Peterman...though some think it blind faith. 

 

I actually thought the Chargers game was the perfect game to have Peterman make his first start, they weren't a team on fire up to that point, but more than that he would be making his first start in front of only 25,000 people versus the usual 70,000 plus serving as the Chargers 12th man.

Good points across the board Bill .

BTW Kudos on what turned out to be a hearty thread  ✔️

 

[billsredneck1]

On 6/20/2018 at 7:39 AM, Kirby Jackson said:

Yes, based on what I’ve seen my opinion of him is different than the Bills. He was still the 191st pick in the draft so a lot of other football people weren’t too high on him either.  In a QB starved league, teams had a lot of guys ahead of him: Turbisky, Mahomes, Watson, Kizer, Webb, Beathard and Dobbs. Completing less than half of your passes and being picked 6 times isn’t making those teams regret passing on him. 

 

So while some football people have a higher opinion of him than me, others probably don’t. I hope that he’s great but don’t think that he is.

so you were happy watching a 6th rd. pick who had been in the league for 5 years lead your team for 3 straight uninspiring years?

[LABILLBACKER]

23 minutes ago, BurpleBull said:

 

As much as I'm on Peterman's side, I think too much is made out of him playing against the Chargers defense.

 

I honestly didn't even know they had a sack-happy defense until after the game. Perhaps because they didn't have much of a buzz having relocated to a new stadium.

 

Peterman just didn't have a good showing in his first start, but I'm not sure the game takes the turn it did if the first pick off of DiMarco's fingertips doesn't happen.

 

The game started with a simple completion and then another up the field to Benjamin; it seemed as though Peterman was playing within himself and the offense up to the interception.

 

After that, I think Peterman began pressing trying to redeem himself with the impact play.

 

Before the season started last season, I stated that Peterman would probably end up second on the depth chart at QB despite the other more experienced QBs brought in because he looked very comfortable playing under center, in a pro-style offense at Pitt and for putting up solid numbers during his time there.

 

So I feel like it was more McDermott having genuine faith in Peterman being able to handle the responsibility of leading the offense, than simply trying to see if they needed to draft a QB once the season ended.

 

I think that is why people are so dumbfounded as to why Peterman finds himself in the position he's in, being granted the opportunity to win the starting role.

 

McDermott still has genuine faith in Peterman...though some think it blind faith. 

 

I actually thought the Chargers game was the perfect game to have Peterman make his first start, they weren't a team on fire up to that point, but more than that he would be making his first start in front of only 25,000 people versus the usual 70,000 plus serving as the Chargers 12th man.

I think the Chargers had a 3rd or 4th ranked sack defense going into that game. If I was coach I definitely wouldn't have chosen that game to debut Peterman. And it didn't help that the online quit. The few amount of fans was irrelevant. Nate played better in the home snow Colts game. I see him making the 53.

[Kirby Jackson]

2 minutes ago, billsredneck1 said:

so you were happy watching a 6th rd. pick who had been in the league for 5 years lead your team for 3 straight uninspiring years?

I was ready to move on from Tyrod. I highly doubt Peterman ever reaches Tyrod’s career of 40 something starts, a winning record and a 3:1 TD to INT. TT has proven that he is good enough to win in this league but I don’t believe that he is good enough to win a championship. That’s why I was ready to move on. I would feel the same way if I was a Dolphins fan or Bengals fan. They too have guys that are starters but not championship caliber. I much prefer the route that the Bills went to the route that the Dolphins did. 

[billsredneck1]

3 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

I think the Chargers had a 3rd or 4th ranked sack defense going into that game. If I was coach I definitely wouldn't have chosen that game to debut Peterman. And it didn't help that the online quit. The few amount of fans was irrelevant. Nate played better in the home snow Colts game. I see him making the 53.

not only that but if he is tied with or slightly better than a.j.in camp, why wouldn't they trade or dump a.j.'s deal? nate's got the skills to start off the season on a winning note. not only do i hope he wins the opener, but he and our new defense put a clinic on a bigtime payback against the bolts week 2 at the home opener.

[3rdand12]

4 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I was ready to move on from Tyrod. I highly doubt Peterman ever reaches Tyrod’s career of 40 something starts, a winning record and a 3:1 TD to INT. TT has proven that he is good enough to win in this league but I don’t believe that he is good enough to win a championship. That’s why I was ready to move on. I would feel the same way if I was a Dolphins fan or Bengals fan. They too have guys that are starters but not championship caliber. I much prefer the route that the Bills went to the route that the Dolphins did. 

You are so harshing here.


I have no idea what Peterman looks like under Daboll.

Odds and logic are not his friends right now. But I can wait for training camp to see what the heck is really going on with these 3 QBs.

 Any of these QBs taking time to throw to the WRs over the break ?

 : )

3 minutes ago, billsredneck1 said:

not only that but if he is tied with or slightly better than a.j.in camp, why wouldn't they trade or dump a.j.'s deal? nate's got the skills to start off the season on a winning note. not only do i hope he wins the opener, but he and our new defense put a clinic on a bigtime payback against the bolts week 2 at the home opener.

for the right offer i am sure they would trade both AJ and Peterman !
But i think Bills need more time to evaluate them. Nate has familiarity with MCD and the Bills.

 AJ has some more NFL experience. Both are likely learning a new system. May the best Man win !

[BurpleBull]

18 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

I think the Chargers had a 3rd or 4th ranked sack defense going into that game. If I was coach I definitely wouldn't have chosen that game to debut Peterman. And it didn't help that the online quit. The few amount of fans was irrelevant. Nate played better in the home snow Colts game. I see him making the 53.

 

You can say the amount of fans were irrelevant only because of the outcome, if I'm a coach trying to ease a rookie QB into actual game action so that he isn't overwhelmed by a hostile, screaming crowd, then I'm doing it in the stadium filled with just 25,000.

 

The snow game was played at home.

[billsredneck1]

9 minutes ago, 3rdand12 said:

You are so harshing here.


I have no idea what Peterman looks like under Daboll.

Odds and logic are not his friends right now. But I can wait for training camp to see what the heck is really going on with these 3 QBs.

 Any of these QBs taking time to throw to the WRs over the break ?

 : )

for the right offer i am sure they would trade both AJ and Peterman !
But i think Bills need more time to evaluate them. Nate has familiarity with MCD and the Bills.

 AJ has some more NFL experience. Both are likely learning a new system. May the best Man win !

i like a.j. he had some good college experience and was never gonna get a shot to unseat dalton. however,  i think that while for the most part they have the same skill set, i feel nate has a quicker, sharper release and great ball placement. if it's anything close to a tie come the end of august, i can see them trading a.j. to a team with an injured starter or a team with a big need for a backup. i don't see them in any way starting josh the first 4 games.

[LABILLBACKER]

57 minutes ago, billsredneck1 said:

not only that but if he is tied with or slightly better than a.j.in camp, why wouldn't they trade or dump a.j.'s deal? nate's got the skills to start off the season on a winning note. not only do i hope he wins the opener, but he and our new defense put a clinic on a bigtime payback against the bolts week 2 at the home opener.

With the 10M wrapped up in AJ, I don't see them bailing on McCarron early. So unless he just sucks in preseason,  it's AJ's to lose. All 3 guys will get reps with the 1's....

[BurpleBull]

59 minutes ago, billsredneck1 said:

not only that but if he is tied with or slightly better than a.j.in camp, why wouldn't they trade or dump a.j.'s deal? nate's got the skills to start off the season on a winning note. not only do i hope he wins the opener, but he and our new defense put a clinic on a bigtime payback against the bolts week 2 at the home opener.

 

That would be some sweet redemption! Didn't even realize that game was on the schedule.

[billsredneck1]

5 minutes ago, BurpleBull said:

 

That would be some sweet redemption! Didn't even realize that game was on the schedule.

its gonna happen. nobody's talking about it now but it will be smackdown time!.  anthony lynn will be anthony lost..and hopefully the ravens game is a win and a tune up for the new era....field. it will be the game of the year and if they kick some charger arse that will send them on the road with the winning attitude.

Edited June 22, 2018 by billsredneck1

[transplantbillsfan]

On 6/20/2018 at 11:09 AM, BurpleBull said:

 

You probably haven't gotten a response to your question because it's clear that you will disregard whatever is said that is in favor of Peterman.

 

You and others are anti-Peterman. 

 

While those who support Peterman are still able to be Pro-McCarron and Allen.

 

Actually I think Kirby's question was a pretty good one.

 

Jeff Tuel was a preseason star, much like Peterman. And he was lauded for a number of similar traits. Then when the regular season came and he faced real NFL teams, he was exposed... but not as exposed as Peterman was against the Chargers and then by Ramsey against the Jags.

 

Why is the Peterman situation so different? It's not like he's loaded with physical ability. Peterman was a late 5th round draft pick for a reason just like Tuel was a UDFA for a reason, right?

On 6/19/2018 at 8:42 AM, BurpleBull said:

 

Do you realize that Peterman as a rookie in preseason led the Bills on its only TD drive, prior to him being inserted into action with the first team offense against the Ravens? 

 

Tyrod Taylor couldn't generate a TD drive up to that point working with the 1st team and I believe he completed only 49% of his passes.

 

Peterman threw a pretty TD pass in the Vikings game, and set the Bills up for points in both the Eagles and Lions finale. 

 

Your attempt to discredit Peterman is a very empty one, that doesn't tell the whole story.

 

Your attempt to use preseason as any sort of validation for Peterman is a very empty one:

 

See EJ Manuel Preseason 2015 followed by regular season stinker in London.

[transplantbillsfan]

On 6/19/2018 at 3:12 PM, BurpleBull said:

 

But Tom Brady...

 

I won't even go there.

 

How about Marc Bulger in the 6th?

 

A pick was actually used on Peterman, what about those who weren't even drafted that went on to have solid careers?

 

Kurt Warner, Tony Romo,...

 

Peterman has his shot.

 

And all 4 of the guys you mention here were good to excellent from the very beginning.

 

None of them threw 5 INTs in their 1st start.

 

Hell, none of them threw 3 INTs in their 1st start.

 

Warner threw 2... but he also threw 3 TDs... so did Bulgaria, without the INTs.

 

Brady and Romo these ZERO INTs in their 1st starts.

 

Peterman had his shot... he epically failed... twice.

[transplantbillsfan]

On 6/19/2018 at 7:24 PM, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Fair enough.

 

But you must've been very unimpressed with Peyton Manning too, then, yeah?

 

First three games he went 61 for 117, 52.1% completions, 2 TDs and 8 INTs with a YPA of 5.8.

 

Wait, Peterman appeared in four games. Lemme take a quick look ... yup, Peyton wasn't much better in his fourth game, 19 for 32, 1 TD, 3 INTs.

 

Plenty of rookies put up early stats that are in no way indicative of what they can eventually do. I'm not convinced yet about Peterman but I'm certainly interested, maybe even a bit excited to see what happens with him, and the other two as well. Rookies are going to tend to make mistakes.

 

1st overall pick with both physical and mental talent regarded as the most can't-miss prospect in a decade and a half with NFL pedigree playing on an absolutely atrocious team throws 1 TD and 3 INTs in a game... game #1 of his rookie year... on a team that finished 3-13 the previous year

 

Vs

 

Late 5th round QB with some mental talent but below average to terrible NFL physical talent with no pedigree coming from a relatively small college program with minor success starts game #9 of his rookie year and throws 5 INTs in a half for a team clinging to a playoff spot 

 

Jesus... what a leap.

 

 

Yeah... you're all Devil's Advocate Thurm, so not really a surprise you'd say you're excited.

 

The appropriate word, if Peterman starts, is anxious... the true definition of that word.

Edited June 22, 2018 by transplantbillsfan