SI.com: Why Peterman started Wk 1, Why Allen is starting now, and Why Tyrod was never coming back

[bobobonators]

8 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:

 

 

 

Well lets see if they do end up resigning them. 

[BB@Shooter]

6 hours ago, Lurker said:

 

0.00001% of NFL QBs?    Buy me a lottery ticket, won't you...

Change your handle to clueless. It would save some of us time reading your posts. Thank you so much.

[Lurker]

35 minutes ago, BB@Shooter said:

Change your handle to clueless. It would save some of us time reading your posts. Thank you so much.

 

You're a funny guy.  Come back often so the Wall can get more good laughs from your razor sharp wit...

[BB@Shooter]

23 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

You're a funny guy.  Come back often so the Wall can get more good laughs from your razor sharp wit...

You got it Clueless. I had a dog named Clueless once. He went outside to pee and was never seen again. He must have gotten confused by the dog door. You are so negative about Allen I just figured you were clueless. If it helps there are a lot of non believers out there. The crow shortage is going to help out the corn growers.

6 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

Not sure I agree. Both came out of small school, both played pro style offense if I recall correctl y.  Both had pretty much ideal measurable.  Wentz's stats looked better, but as one who has a pretty fair knowledge of statistics you could argue some statistical comparisons were very weak and didn't take  important variables into account.

 

Doesn't matter now though.  He gets his shot starting Sunday and we'll see

They both were recruited by the same coach and played under him and his system. Wentz for only two years. Allen for 3 years as he played jc ball one year, medical redshirt at Wyoming his first year and then left after his junior year.

Edited September 14, 2018 by BB@Shooter

[formerlyofCtown]

9 hours ago, Ayjent said:

Come on any article that lauds the Star signing should be looked at a tad skeptically.  It's not a bad article, but its certainly one of those pieces that they are trying to sell to demoralized fan base.  The obvious issues are skirted over (like failure to address the O line in the draft or FA in a meaningful way - na 5th round pick and a couple of below average OL FAs doesn't really scream investment in protecting your investment at QB).  Even if you buy into the Tyrod point of view in the article, the fact remains that they could have signed Bridgewater at the level of 6 mil/yr or kept McCarron as a substantial investment in having the luxury to sit Allen if he wasn't ready in their eyes.  Then the cap issues are kind of glossed over on how a team cap strapped created even more dead cap with a couple of their moves this offseason.

You assume Bridgewater wanted to come here and they drafted Teller.

[oldmanfan]

8 minutes ago, BB@Shooter said:

You got it Clueless. I had a dog named Clueless once. He went outside to pee and was never seen again. He must have gotten confused by the dog door. You are so negative about Allen I just figured you were clueless. If it helps there are a lot of non believers out there. The crow shortage is going to help out the corn growers.

They both were recruited by the same coach and played under him and his system. Wentz for only two years. Allen for 3 years as he played jc ball one year, medical redshirt at Wyoming his first year and then left after his junior year.

Lots of young QBs out there; will be interesting to see how they develop.  Several years ago I said the era of the superstar QB that can put a team on his shoulders would end with the Brady/Rogers era.  I may have to rethink that.

[MDH]

7 hours ago, BobChalmers said:

 

I also believe Bills fans, far too many being complete fools, will run Allen out of town on a rail if he doesn't succeed, and won't cut him any slack at all for the weak team he has to work with.

 

This will absolutely happen if he has 2-3 bad games in a row, which is likely for a developmental QB.

 

He’ll be called a bust by many fans by mid-season, I have very little doubt.

[BB@Shooter]

5 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Lots of young QBs out there; will be interesting to see how they develop.  Several years ago I said the era of the superstar QB that can put a team on his shoulders would end with the Brady/Rogers era.  I may have to rethink that.

I have said a lot of things I thought was right. Time proved me wrong. Lol.

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, MDH said:

 

This will absolutely happen if he has 2-3 bad games in a row, which is likely for a developmental QB.

 

He’ll be called a bust by many fans by mid-season, I have very little doubt.

I mentioned earlier we should count how many posts say that should they lose this week.  Or even how many come out when he throws his first pick.

[Teddy KGB]

5 minutes ago, MDH said:

 

This will absolutely happen if he has 2-3 bad games in a row, which is likely for a developmental QB.

 

He’ll be called a bust by many fans by mid-season, I have very little doubt.

 

They called Wentz a bust during his rookie season when I thought he looked strong 

[YoloinOhio]

3 minutes ago, Teddy KGB said:

 

They called Wentz a bust during his rookie season when I thought he looked strong 

And Goff, before he had a coach, OL and weapons 

[Batman1876]

3 minutes ago, Teddy KGB said:

 

They called Wentz a bust during his rookie season when I thought he looked strong 

The thing to watch for the first season is growth not success. You want to see that they can improve their game. Success can be deceptive RG3 may be the best example. 

[Ayjent]

1 hour ago, formerlyofCtown said:

You assume Bridgewater wanted to come here and they drafted Teller.

I’m not assuming he did I’m simply pointing out an example of someone that fits what the Bills needed.  I’m pretty sure “the process” liked McCarron more though.   A 5th round pick is barely addressing the OL. For every Kyle Williams, there are hundreds of guys that never have much of a career drafted that low. 

1 hour ago, Batman1876 said:

The thing to watch for the first season is growth not success. You want to see that they can improve their game. Success can be deceptive RG3 may be the best example. 

Don’t you measure growth to some degree by success?  RG3 had someone design an offense where he could flourish, and then that all changed and he was asked to be a different QB. He may have grown a lot in that process but it never lead to success for him or his teams, because his dual threat attribute was gone and he was asked to be something he simply isn’t a pure pocket passer. . Put a QB in a position to succeed and the growth will happen naturally. 

[Kelly the Dog]

3 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

At least 10 teams a year have QBs that can't compete. Maybe 3 teams have backups that can compete. The Browns are 1-31 the past two years!! I don't think their players are revolting in the locker room. If Allen goes down with an injury I want our backup to be terrible. I don't want to win another game this year if that happens. The players will get over it. Stuff like that is way overblown.

That is not true at all, at least under my definition of unable to compete. Every other starting QB in the league and 75% of the backups can compete. They have the ability to POSSIBLY succeed. Nate cannot. Guys like Matt Barkley and Kellen Moore cannot because of their arms. AJ McCarron surely can and he has done it. Not that he is good, mind you. But he can make all the throws, he doesnt always panic. He can beat you deep. Teams cannot always crowd the line against him.

[transplantbillsfan]

"The call to go with second-year pro Nathan Peterman, made on Sept. 3, was a fairly close one. The staff gave Josh Allen a preseason start on Aug. 26 as his shot to win the starting job. He didn’t; Peterman, through a strong August, had."

 

Regarding even this, here's the thing... Peterman did look better in the preseason in terms of stats.  But he wasn't really making NFL throws and was almost always throwing to his 1st read that he determined pre-snap based on coverages and the passes were no more than 10-15 yards down the field and if they were longer they were to wide open guys on busted coverages, like the TD to O'Leary.

 

And he was STILL consistently throwing at least 1 or 2 blatant interceptions a game even if the D couldn't hold onto the ball.  And they were interceptions caused by him and his poor arm strength or poor accuracy, in the case of the 1st Interception.  And in that 1st game against Carolina our 1st string OL looked at least competent, if not decent.  They just deteriorated in the Browns and Bengals games.

 

Whereas Allen was making NFL throws all over the field.  Yes, he was making mistakes and had inaccurate passes, but he was also doing things you'd expect out of a seasoned vet.  And he always kept his eyes downfield, like on that TD pass in the Browns game.  And he took a friggin beating in the Bengals game.  But the majority of those sacks were on the OL, not him.  But he kept on getting up and kept his poise.  There's no humor intended to this statement: he proved he can take a beating.  But Allen has also proven he can shrug off defenders in the backfield and elude pressure and isn't afraid to throw the ball away or slide to protect himself.

 

 

 

Silly me for thinking McDermott spent his QB evaluation on preseason games watching game film asking themselves "okay, how does this translate to what this player can and can't do in live game action" rather than looking at the results and statistics of games at 3/4ths speed.  That's pretty clearly what other good QB evaluators do as Head Coaches. 

 

I feel like a good evaluator would have seen those consistently almost-intercepted passes still happening in the preseason and would have known the arm strength still isn't there.

 

Or that all his pre-snap diagnoses can be muddied up by simply disguising blitz packages and coverages the way the Ravens did in week 1.

 

Or that he rarely ever went to his 2nd or 3rd read, which is kinda important to evaluate when it comes to real games.

 

Or that Peterman rarely threw the ball more than 15 yards down the field except to wide open guys.

[Ayjent]

4 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

"The call to go with second-year pro Nathan Peterman, made on Sept. 3, was a fairly close one. The staff gave Josh Allen a preseason start on Aug. 26 as his shot to win the starting job. He didn’t; Peterman, through a strong August, had."

 

Regarding even this, here's the thing... Peterman did look better in the preseason in terms of stats.  But he wasn't really making NFL throws and was almost always throwing to his 1st read that he determined pre-snap based on coverages and the passes were no more than 10-15 yards down the field and if they were longer they were to wide open guys on busted coverages, like the TD to O'Leary.

 

And he was STILL consistently throwing at least 1 or 2 blatant interceptions a game even if the D couldn't hold onto the ball.  And they were interceptions caused by him and his poor arm strength or poor accuracy, in the case of the 1st Interception.  And in that 1st game against Carolina our 1st string OL looked at least competent, if not decent.  They just deteriorated in the Browns and Bengals games.

 

Whereas Allen was making NFL throws all over the field.  Yes, he was making mistakes and had inaccurate passes, but he was also doing things you'd expect out of a seasoned vet.  And he always kept his eyes downfield, like on that TD pass in the Browns game.  And he took a friggin beating in the Bengals game.  But the majority of those sacks were on the OL, not him.  But he kept on getting up and kept his poise.  There's no humor intended to this statement: he proved he can take a beating.  But Allen has also proven he can shrug off defenders in the backfield and elude pressure and isn't afraid to throw the ball away or slide to protect himself.

 

 

 

Silly me for thinking McDermott spent his QB evaluation on preseason games watching game film asking themselves "okay, how does this translate to what this player can and can't do in live game action" rather than looking at the results and statistics of games at 3/4ths speed.  That's pretty clearly what other good QB evaluators do as Head Coaches. 

 

I feel like a good evaluator would have seen those consistently almost-intercepted passes still happening in the preseason and would have known the arm strength still isn't there.

 

Or that all his pre-snap diagnoses can be muddied up by simply disguising blitz packages and coverages the way the Ravens did in week 1.

 

Or that he rarely ever went to his 2nd or 3rd read, which is kinda important to evaluate when it comes to real games.

 

Or that Peterman rarely threw the ball more than 15 yards down the field except to wide open guys.

If “the process” of evaluating QBs is always going to be this good, watch out NFL.  Not sure who is making the final call on personnel, but it’s a red flag regardless - was Daboll on board?  If so what’s that say?  If not what’s that say about the dynamic?  At least Marrone knew to make a stink and demand a another vet option at QB.  This staff said let’s get rid of the most veteran guy, not try to get another vet and ride with Peterman and Allen.  If everyone was on the same page....yikes.

Edited September 14, 2018 by Ayjent

[Coach Tuesday]

I don't think McD loses the locker room (yet).  Peterman played well in the preseason and he's technically a "veteran" as compared to Allen.  McD probably did right by not just handing the rookie the job.  Benching Peterman after Baltimore will help McD in the locker room, not hurt him, because it shows the team that McD is (in theory) trying to win games and put the team in position to be successful.  McD might've lost the locker room if he started Peterman this week.

 

The owner's box is a different story - if Allen gets hurt because of the lack of protection around him, McBeane have some 'splainin' to do.  And I still can't believe the Bills took a bad 2018 cap situation and made it worse by needlessly taking a $3.5M flier on Corey Coleman for a two-week tryout, only to cut him loose (despite lack of talent at the WR position) and now they're effectively paying him to play for the key division rival... if I were Terry I'd be FUMING.

[YoloinOhio]

6 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:

I don't think McD loses the locker room (yet).  Peterman played well in the preseason and he's technically a "veteran" as compared to Allen.  McD probably did right by not just handing the rookie the job.  Benching Peterman after Baltimore will help McD in the locker room, not hurt him, because it shows the team that McD is (in theory) trying to win games and put the team in position to be successful.  McD might've lost the locker room if he started Peterman this week.

 

The owner's box is a different story - if Allen gets hurt because of the lack of protection around him, McBeane have some 'splainin' to do.  And I still can't believe the Bills took a bad 2018 cap situation and made it worse by needlessly taking a $3.5M flier on Corey Coleman for a two-week tryout, only to cut him loose (despite lack of talent at the WR position) and now they're effectively paying him to play for the key division rival... if I were Terry I'd be FUMING.

Coleman had offsets in his contract so they aren’t paying him all of it. Per Joel Corry, cap guy from CBS sports, Assuming Coleman signed for his league minimum $630,000 & doesn't get cut this season from the Pats, Buffalo will get $592,941 of salary cap relief because of the deal. That's 16/17ths of $630,000.

Edited September 14, 2018 by YoloinOhio

[Coach Tuesday]

10 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

Coleman had offsets in his contract so they aren’t paying him all of it. Per Joel Corry, cap guy from CBS sports, Assuming Coleman signed for his league minimum $630,000 & doesn't get cut this season from the Pats, Buffalo will get $592,941 of salary cap relief because of the deal. That's 16/17ths of $630,000.

 

Fine, so they pissed away $3M in a cash-strapped year.  Doesn't really change my point.

[Wayne Cubed]

23 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:

I don't think McD loses the locker room (yet).  Peterman played well in the preseason and he's technically a "veteran" as compared to Allen.  McD probably did right by not just handing the rookie the job.  Benching Peterman after Baltimore will help McD in the locker room, not hurt him, because it shows the team that McD is (in theory) trying to win games and put the team in position to be successful.  McD might've lost the locker room if he started Peterman this week.

 

The owner's box is a different story - if Allen gets hurt because of the lack of protection around him, McBeane have some 'splainin' to do.  And I still can't believe the Bills took a bad 2018 cap situation and made it worse by needlessly taking a $3.5M flier on Corey Coleman for a two-week tryout, only to cut him loose (despite lack of talent at the WR position) and now they're effectively paying him to play for the key division rival... if I were Terry I'd be FUMING.

 

I still question McD a bit. Peterman had one good drive in preseason against a Carolina D not starting its entire DL and playing a vanilla pass defense. After that, did he really look all that impressive? Not to me, he looked like the same guy. Now it's being said that the plan was to start Allen but because of the Bengals game he didn't. A game where Dion Dawkins sat out and they continually rotated the interior of the OL to simulate injuries or availability or to find the right guys. They gave Allen a worst case scenario in that Bengals game and then decided to go with Peterman who was challenged by one "1st team" defense all preseason. That makes no sense and many, many people saw this coming with regards to Peterman.