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

[Chilly]

I think the biggest thing is the Bills need to declare a winner between AJ and NP, even if it's just internally. Demote one to running with the 3rd string, make sure you're planned 1st string guy gets enough reps, run Allen with the 2s unless he ends up killing it the rest of camp and you start him.

[Ittakestime]

The truth of the matter is, if Peterman was drafted by last regime, he would have been off this team already. The guy can't play in NFL. I have no idea why he is given so much opportunity here. His arm is really bad and he is predictable with his throwing. It would be nice if we have a different guy in here with a legit chance at winning us games. 

[ColoradoBills]

10 hours ago, Chilly said:

I think the biggest thing is the Bills need to declare a winner between AJ and NP, even if it's just internally. Demote one to running with the 3rd string, make sure you're planned 1st string guy gets enough reps, run Allen with the 2s unless he ends up killing it the rest of camp and you start him.

 

I think that day is coming fast, maybe by this coming weekend.

Edited August 5, 2018 by ColoradoBills

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

On 8/3/2018 at 11:30 AM, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Always been fine with McCarron if he wins the job, I just think (and prefer) Allen will end up winning it because he'll just progress and outshine the other 2 guys.

 

....don't see it as being that clear cut.....NOT saying McCarron or Peterman are expendable ala "guinea pigs"......but with the OL in the state of development/flux, same for the WR corp anointed as "THE worst in the league" by some, as well as RB's AFTER Shady particularly from a blocking perspective, McD may want to see those elements face "live ammo" before throwing the hopefully franchise QB out there for target practice.....just an unsubstantiated hunch/opinion.....

[26CornerBlitz]

13 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

....don't see it as being that clear cut.....NOT saying McCarron or Peterman are expendable ala "guinea pigs"......but with the OL in the state of development/flux, same for the WR corp anointed as "THE worst in the league" by some, as well as RB's AFTER Shady particularly from a blocking perspective, McD may want to see those elements face "live ammo" before throwing the hopefully franchise QB out there for target practice.....just an unsubstantiated hunch/opinion.....

 

None of those factors will determine whether Allen starts.  The team will not "protect" him due to any perceived positional deficiencies on offense.  He'll either start or not based on the merits of his own readiness.

Edited August 5, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz

[Fadingpain]

20 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

I think that day is coming fast, maybe by this weekend.

Why?  I realize it's important to make 1 guy "the guy" so he gets the work he needs to continue to develop, but you don't need to "declare" anyone "the guy" just yet.

 

Seems like we have until at least the first preseason game for everyone to be a "No.1" at least in theory.

 

 

[ColoradoBills]

1 minute ago, Fadingpain said:

Why?  I realize it's important to make 1 guy "the guy" so he gets the work he needs to continue to develop, but you don't need to "declare" anyone "the guy" just yet.

 

Seems like we have until at least the first preseason game for everyone to be a "No.1" at least in theory.

 

 

 

That's why I said "maybe" by this weekend (after the 1st preseason game).

I'll edit it to say "this coming weekend".

 

That being said it may take another week if no one QB stands out.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

2 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

None of those factors will determine whether Allen starts.  The team will not "protect" him due to any perceived positional deficiencies at other positions on offense.  He'll either start or not based on the merits of his own readiness.

 

.....difference of opinion which makes this place work thankfully......we differ from the perspective that I think McD will take ALL factors into consideration.....certainly the Ravens opener is win "at all (most) costs"......BUT.......McD may choose to get a look at his OL, WR's and RB blockers with AJ at the helm.....stay tuned...........

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

.....difference of opinion which makes this place work thankfully......we differ from the perspective that I think McD will take ALL factors into consideration.....certainly the Ravens opener is win "at all (most) costs"......BUT.......McD may choose to get a look at his OL, WR's and RB blockers with AJ at the helm.....stay tuned...........

 

It's not a difference of opinion. It's what Beane stated on the record regarding the plan for Allen. 

[Bangarang]

44 minutes ago, Ittakestime said:

The truth of the matter is, if Peterman was drafted by last regime, he would have been off this team already. The guy can't play in NFL. I have no idea why he is given so much opportunity here. His arm is really bad and he is predictable with his throwing. It would be nice if we have a different guy in here with a legit chance at winning us games. 

 

I don’t think this is true at all. The current regime has shown they are not afraid of getting rid of players, especially ones brought on by the last regime. They obviously like Peterman.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

11 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

It's not a difference of opinion. It's what Beane stated on the record regarding the plan for Allen. 

 

 

...public and private can be a world of difference.....as in how he showed his cards "pre-draft", right??.......just sayin'......

[Rocky Landing]

47 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

 

I don’t think this is true at all. The current regime has shown they are not afraid of getting rid of players, especially ones brought on by the last regime. They obviously like Peterman.

I think they do, too. I even find myself giving him more of the benefit of the doubt as a result of their continued faith in him-- and I have been an unforgiving Peterman hater up to this point (mostly because I was at that Chargers game-- I spent good money on those seats!) 

 

But, I also believe that they keep Peterman based on Allen's readiness. If, by the final cut, they aren't comfortable with Allen running an NFL offense, they'll keep Peterman as a back-up (assuming McCarron is the starter). If Allen wins the job, or if they would be comfortable with him as backup, I would think it's off to the PS for Peterman.

[Rocky Landing]

1 hour ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

None of those factors will determine whether Allen starts.  The team will not "protect" him due to any perceived positional deficiencies on offense.  He'll either start or not based on the merits of his own readiness.

This may just be getting into semantics, but one has to believe that they are assessing his readiness to lead the offense they have. It would be a lot easier to call Allen "ready" with a stable of decent WRs, and an O-line that can effectively protect him. 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

4 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

This may just be getting into semantics, but one has to believe that they are assessing his readiness to lead the offense they have. It would be a lot easier to call Allen "ready" with a stable of decent WRs, and an O-line that can effectively protect him. 

 

...ok, so I'm gonna make you the Big Dawg for a moment (don't shoot! it's a hypothetical)......IF in your judgement a BIG question mark remains about the OL and WR corps being "ready", would you start Allen, hopefully your franchise QB or start McCarron/Peterman, and I am NOT implying that either are expendable "guinea pigs" for target practice....you're "on the clock"....

[26CornerBlitz]

8 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

This may just be getting into semantics, but one has to believe that they are assessing his readiness to lead the offense they have. It would be a lot easier to call Allen "ready" with a stable of decent WRs, and an O-line that can effectively protect him. 

 

They are evaluation his readiness irrespective of the OL and WR corps ber the GM.  That's not semantics. 

[Rocky Landing]

26 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...ok, so I'm gonna make you the Big Dawg for a moment (don't shoot! it's a hypothetical)......IF in your judgement a BIG question mark remains about the OL and WR corps being "ready", would you start Allen, hopefully your franchise QB or start McCarron/Peterman, and I am NOT implying that either are expendable "guinea pigs" for target practice....you're "on the clock"....

I think we'll see this in preseason.

Personally, I am of the opinion that rookie QBs can both benefit by sitting behind a vet, and be damaged by being started too soon in a situation where they are likely to fail. I know that this is a subject of debate on this board. (If Peterman is able to bounce back from an historically bad rookie outing, for example, that speaks well of his mental fortitude. Such a situation can really damage a player's confidence, IMO)

We know that McCarron is used to playing NFL football behind a crappy O-line-- he did it in Cincy. IMO, if McC, and Allen are more or less even, and the O-line has not gelled, then I would hope they start McC. And, I don't think that I agree with 26CB that McD's comments about Allen's readiness are completely separate from the rest of the team's readiness (although, 26CB certainly does follow these things much more closely than me). I think that Allen's readiness should, and would be evaluated vis a vis the situation he is in, which definitely does include the O-line's ability to protect him, and the WRs ability to handle the velocity, and accuracy of his throws.

And, I think these evaluations are looked at differently for McCarron than they are for Allen.

Edited August 5, 2018 by Rocky Landing

[26CornerBlitz]

On 7/29/2018 at 6:54 PM, 26CornerBlitz said:

Bills GM: First preseason game could be pivotal for rookie QB Josh Allen

PITTSFORD, N.Y. – The Buffalo Bills’ first preseason game could serve as a Year 1 crossroads of sorts for rookie quarterback Josh Allen.

 

Buffalo Bills GM Brandon Beane told Postmedia on Sunday that the number of reps Allen gets in training camp thereafter could rise or fall, depending on his performance in that game against the Carolina Panthers a week from Thursday night, Aug. 9.

 

Allen, the cannon-armed No. 7 overall draft pick from the University of Wyoming, is battling fifth-year A.J. McCarron and second-year Nathan Peterman for the starter’s job.

 

The offensive line took a hit in the off-season. Will that impact the decision as to who will start at quarterback in Week 1?

 

BEANE: “No. The line is its own entity. And again, we’ve got to put the best quarterback out there who helps us win each week. That will be our motto throughout the year. Hopefully the starter we pick for Week 1 starts throughout the year and does a great job, stays healthy and we don’t have to switch. But, you know, obviously things can change so we’ll take it a week at a time.”

 

6 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

I think we'll see this in preseason.

Personally, I am of the opinion that rookie QBs can both benefit by sitting behind a vet, and be damaged by being started too soon in a situation where they are likely to fail. I know that this is a subject of debate on this board. (If Peterman is able to bounce back from an historically bad rookie outing, for example, that speaks well of his mental fortitude. Such a situation can really damage a player's confidence, IMO)

We know that McCarron is used to playing NFL football behind a crappy O-line-- he did it in Cincy. IMO, if McC, and Allen are more or less even, and the O-line has not gelled, then I would hope they start McC. And, I don't think that I agree with 26CB that McD's comments about Allen's readiness are completely separate from the rest of the team's readiness (although, 26CB certainly does follow these things much more closely than me). I think that Allen's readiness should, and would be evaluated vis a vis the situation he is in, which definitely does include the O-line's ability to protect him, and the WRs ability to handle the velocity, and accuracy of his throws.

And, I think these evaluations are looked at differently for McCarron than they are for Allen.

 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

30 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

I think we'll see this in preseason.

Personally, I am of the opinion that rookie QBs can both benefit by sitting behind a vet, and be damaged by being started too soon in a situation where they are likely to fail. I know that this is a subject of debate on this board. (If Peterman is able to bounce back from an historically bad rookie outing, for example, that speaks well of his mental fortitude. Such a situation can really damage a player's confidence, IMO)

We know that McCarron is used to playing NFL football behind a crappy O-line-- he did it in Cincy. IMO, if McC, and Allen are more or less even, and the O-line has not gelled, then I would hope they start McC. And, I don't think that I agree with 26CB that McD's comments about Allen's readiness are completely separate from the rest of the team's readiness (although, 26CB certainly does follow these things much more closely than me). I think that Allen's readiness should, and would be evaluated vis a vis the situation he is in, which definitely does include the O-line's ability to protect him, and the WRs ability to handle the velocity, and accuracy of his throws.

And, I think these evaluations are looked at differently for McCarron than they are for Allen.

 

 

...nice assessment...thank you for sharing...

[Rocky Landing]

30 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

The offensive line took a hit in the off-season. Will that impact the decision as to who will start at quarterback in Week 1?

 

BEANE: “No. The line is its own entity. And again, we’ve got to put the best quarterback out there who helps us win each week. That will be our motto throughout the year. Hopefully the starter we pick for Week 1 starts throughout the year and does a great job, stays healthy and we don’t have to switch. But, you know, obviously things can change so we’ll take it a week at a time.”

 

 

Like I said: You pay a lot more attention to this minutia than I do, and many of us rely on you for these insights. 

 

Still- it's an odd statement from Beane. The very next sentence from the one you bolded: "...we’ve got to put the best quarterback out there who helps us win each week," almost contradicts his own point. "No. The line is its own entity." Is it really? Ever? If Allen is not able to perform without adequate protection from the O-line, then of course that impacts their decision. But, the clarification I would want from Beane at that point is are they going to evaluate Allen under the same lens they evaluate McCarron and Peterman vis a vis the rest of the offense? Beane seems to be suggesting they are, which might seem to contrast McDermott's approach. And, for that matter, aren't these questions more apt for McDermott?

[major]

Peterman after Chargers game