Sadly, McDermott is the wrong guy to develop his own guys

[VW82]

16 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

If you had waited to get all the stuff around him you want, you wouldn't have Allen.

 

This isn't about the Allen pick, or even trading away all our picks to get him. If he's the right guy, then it's worth it.

 

This is entirely about McBeane messing up the other QB spot(s) on the roster to the point where now they have to play Josh before he's ready and with little to no help. They're throwing the kid into the olympics before they've fully taught him how to swim. All they needed to do was get through the first half of the season so he could see and learn how teams prepare and what he needs to do, and then play him when we're out of it and the pressure is off. He'll still probably suck at that point because he's such a raw rookie, but the weight of the world wouldn't be on his shoulders and he wouldn't have enough games left for the fans and his own teammates to turn on him.

 

That last part is a real thing btw. Allen probably needs several games plus another off season of work to iron out some of the fundamental kinks in his game. He may not get that second part now if he doesn't improve and the team watches him lose his confidence. At that point he's just Peterman with no support in the locker room. Once that's gone, it's over. 

Edited September 14, 2018 by VW82

[GG]

10 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

The game was a lost cause.  They had nothing to lose at that point.

 

Then the safest thing to do was to only run the ball in the 4th quarter and have your precious franchise QB take a knee to end the game. 

[oldmanfan]

Just now, VW82 said:

 

This isn't about the Allen pick, or even trading away all our picks to do it. If he's the right guy, then it's worth it.

 

This is entirely about McBeane messing up the other QB spot(s) on the roster to the point where now they have to play Josh before he's ready. They're throwing the kid into the olympics before they've fully taught him how to swim. All they needed to do was get through the first half of the season so he could see and learn how teams prepare and what he needs to do, and then play him when we're out of it and the pressure is off. He'll still probably suck at that point because he's a rookie, but the weight of the world won't be on his shoulders and he won't have enough games for the fans and his own teammates to turn on him.

 

That last part is a real thing btw. Allen probably needs several games plus another off season of work to iron out some of the fundamental kinks in his game. He may not get that second part now if he doesn't improve and the team watches him lose his confidence. At that point he's just Peterman with no support in the locker room. 

I don't see him as the type that will lose confidence.  They had a plan: McCarron.  Some wanted other guys like Bridgewater, but cap and/or not wanting to be a fill in waiting for Allen may have affected those.  McCarron was the guy they thought could holdvthings down for a while.  Two things happened:  McCarton didn't play very well and Peterman did.  So things changed.  Why Peterman blows up in real games is a mystery to me, but he clearly did last week.  So it's Allen time.

 

I would have preferred Allen wait a bit.  In retrospect I think I would have looked more at a guy like Anderson or Moore in the offseason (and certainly would be now).  But if Breer is right, if Allen had played better against the Bengals he would have started last week and all these what ifs would be moot.

 

So we'll see.  It may just help if guys like Groy could hold a block on occasion and if guys like Benjamin could actually finish their routes and catch the ball.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

...probably a dumbazz question, but that's what I'm known for so here goes.......plenty of posts saying McD does not know offense.......thus it is pretty safe to say that his background is defensive leaning.....if, IF so, why then does the combination of defensive McD and Frazier manage to put up stinker efforts?......sure the Ravens were formidable....but how bad did we get smoked in the pre-season especially on the ground?.......ONLY thing I can think of was they were going "true vanilla" to hide their heralded abilities (COUGH)......pretty sneaky......what else could it be?.......

[GunnerBill]

3 hours ago, JohnC said:

Was Allen's timetable pushed up because the Peterman explosion? Yes. So big freaking deal. If Allen struggles more than he would have if he had more time as a backup my response is so what? Again, big freaking deal! Aikman was throne into the fire right from the start. He got pummeled and battered and struggled for a couple of years. He survived his brutalization and went on to lead his team to SB victories and earned a gold jacket for himself. I'm not suggesting that Allen is an Aikman caliber of qb but what I'm saying is playing sooner than expected is not preordaining a doomsday scenario.  

 

This McCarron vs Peterman debate is a waste of time. They are in the same lower rung category. Let me refresh your memory about the camp and preseason: Peterman outperformed McCarron. What does that mean? Nothing, because both qbs were placeholders for the future franchise qb. 

 

Let's stop this foolishness about you insinuating that McDermott visioned Peterman as a franchise qb. That's utter nonsense. If you believe that then why did the wrestling coach and organization invest so much resources in drafting Allen in the next draft year?. You are trying to portray it as if McDermott was fooled in knowing what the talent of Peterman was. That's a figment of your run amuck imagination. This organization drafted Peterman in the fifth round. They know what the talent level of a fifth round qb is and they know the talent level of the high first round qb they drafted this year. 

 

You are treating the Peterman start as a franchise catastrophe that will reverberate beyond the one game that he started. That is an absurdity because there are so many reasons beyond Peterman as to why this team is going to struggle this year. It's time that you save your ammo for targets that actually exist beyond this one player who is no longer starting. 

 

 

 

You are beating down straw men John.

 

I never said this was Peterman v McCarron. I think both suck and said that way back in May. Peterman sucks more... but then he sucks more than almost anyone to have ever played in the league. Who won the starting job was irrelevant because this was always eventually Josh Allen's team. 

 

Nor do I ever think McDermott viewed Peterman as a franchise QB. But while we are talking about what people viewed Peterman as..... earlier in the pre-season you said you thought he could be a serviceable backup Quarterback. He has proven again that he can't. Then you said you thought he could be a solid placeholder. Again, he has proven he can't. 

 

Personally I am not bothered that this accelerated Allen - I'd have started him week 1. The point is that McDermott seemingly didn't want to. Equally that McDermott shared your view of what Peterman could be worries me (and I am a big McDermott guy) because I think the fact that Peterman was incompetent and incapable was abundently clear to anyone who knows what they are watching. 

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

You are beating down straw men John.

 

I never said this was Peterman v McCarron. I think both suck and said that way back in May. Peterman sucks more... but then he sucks more than almost anyone to have ever played in the league. Who won the starting job was irrelevant because this was always eventually Josh Allen's team. 

 

Nor do I ever think McDermott viewed Peterman as a franchise QB. But while we are talking about what people viewed Peterman as..... earlier in the pre-season you said you thought he could be a serviceable backup Quarterback. He has proven again that he can't. Then you said you thought he could be a solid placeholder. Again, he has proven he can't. 

 

Personally I am not bothered that this accelerated Allen - I'd have started him week 1. The point is that McDermott seemingly didn't want to. Equally that McDermott shared your view of what Peterman could be worries me (and I am a big McDermott guy) because I think the fact that Peterman was incompetent and incapable was abundently clear to anyone who knows what they are watching. 

The Peterman issue isn't my straw man--- it is yours. He has been replaced entering into the second week of the season. I simply don't understand your zealotry on this issue. It makes little sense to me. I said right from the start that at best he can be a serviceable backup. Regardless how much you lament he is the backup, at least for now. Why invest so much venom on an inconsequential player? Your campaign to malign a player who it was understood was a temporary placeholder at qb is very much out of proportion to his role as the backup.  

 

I, like you, am not bothered by the accelerated installation of Allen as the starter. I'll even go farther than you in that I celebrate this substitution. With him as the starter there is a more compelling story-line of following the play of a talented but raw rookie qb. Peterman is now the backup whether you like it or not. You may be disturbed by that role but I am not. 

[Bing Bong]

19 hours ago, BigDingus said:

I like McDermott. I think he's a good coach. I think he's a good leader. But he's shown he's already thrown up too many red flags to say he knows how to develop a QB properly, or even knows how to identify a good QB in the first place.

He's a great coach IMO. either some quarterback coach, OC, or GM, might be bending his ear about Peterman, or he's monumentally dumb. He can't identify a quarterback at all. Putting aside that severe lack of judgement. He should just start Allen. And he's not supposed to develop quarterbacks he's a defensive mind. Which is fine, what's not is no other coach or OC is developing. But Peterman will always suck, there's no no point in developing him. His ineptitude is on him.

 

Allen needs coaching absolutely and I don't agree with you that he is definitely not being developed properly.. we don't know! If he can hang his hat that he played to his full potential, no matter how bad the offense around him performs, he's gonna be very promising. I'm not asking for a 300 yard statline. But just make good throws and play fast. Nail KB on a corner route and if he drops it.. be proud you made a hell of a throw. You did it at Wyoming, be the diamond in the rough baby!

 

Basically i'll get back to you on Allen after week 1. I wanted Rosen throwing them short routes anyway. I think allen's got a good shot at making it. But heck he might not adjust to the hardship and fail. A good quarterback intangible is making the best play in a crap situation.. throwing it to the dirt when necessary, scrambling when the defense is swallowing up your recievers, break a tackle in the pocket and take advantage of a busted play. No excuses for a quarterback's play if the surrounding offense lays in egg. Forget the stats. Did he look like a good quarterback on a bad offense? Or did he look like a bad quarterback.

[BigDingus]

2 hours ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

He's a great coach IMO. either some quarterback coach, OC, or GM, might be bending his ear about Peterman, or he's monumentally dumb. He can't identify a quarterback at all. Putting aside that severe lack of judgement. He should just start Allen. And he's not supposed to develop quarterbacks he's a defensive mind. Which is fine, what's not is no other coach or OC is developing. But Peterman will always suck, there's no no point in developing him. His ineptitude is on him.

 

Allen needs coaching absolutely and I don't agree with you that he is definitely not being developed properly.. we don't know! If he can hang his hat that he played to his full potential, no matter how bad the offense around him performs, he's gonna be very promising. I'm not asking for a 300 yard statline. But just make good throws and play fast. Nail KB on a corner route and if he drops it.. be proud you made a hell of a throw. You did it at Wyoming, be the diamond in the rough baby!

 

Basically i'll get back to you on Allen after week 1. I wanted Rosen throwing them short routes anyway. I think allen's got a good shot at making it. But heck he might not adjust to the hardship and fail. A good quarterback intangible is making the best play in a crap situation.. throwing it to the dirt when necessary, scrambling when the defense is swallowing up your recievers, break a tackle in the pocket and take advantage of a busted play. No excuses for a quarterback's play if the surrounding offense lays in egg. Forget the stats. Did he look like a good quarterback on a bad offense? Or did he look like a bad quarterback.

 

I pretty much agree with most everything you said.

There are a few things I still question though... They were high on Peterman last year. McDermott wanted & identified him, thought very highly of him & talked him up, and eventually felt confident enough to bench the 3 year starter to play him as a rookie. 

And did he even take into consideration any other parts of the equation when making that decision? We were to play on the road, across the country, in LA. We haven't beaten the Chargers away in like 30 years, and on top of that, had injuries we were dealing with. Most importantly, we were going up against a beastly pass rush, and everyone knows what opposing coaches want to do against rookies, especially in their first game.... stop the run & make them beat you in the air. Seemed not well thought out...

 

(NOTE: I am preferacing this next part by stating I do NOT think Josh Allen is "bad" or is a bust, or is even going suck)

Then we go into the draft with 4-5 QB's expected to go in the 1st round. All have done amazing things in high school & college, whether it was dominating their conference, put up monster numbers, great play in big games, signature wins, awards out the a**, etc. except for one. During the draft, you saw "Heisman Finalist," or "Freshman of the Year" or "All Pac-12 Offensive First/Second Team" or "Heisman Winner" or winner of this, that, the other, etc. with stats, wins, and footage to back it up. Then Josh Allen has "Mountain West Honorable Mention" as his only text pop up, and you just knew it'd be a Bills move to grab him. 

Just like we've seen hundreds of times in the past, at least one QB shoots up the board based on "potential," having a great arm, size, and hand size, and the large majority of the time they fail. Now if he put up crazy stats, dominated his conference, looked like a man playing among boys, willed his team to victory time & time again, had some signature wins against good competition, etc. then having lifelong accuracy issues or other problems could be overlooked. But if you wanted to gamble on a risky or raw project QB with "potential," you could've just as easily grabbed Patrick Mahomes or DeShaun Watson last year, only they had some prolific numbers & great play to go with it. And yes, Josh Allen didn't have the greatest talent around him, but he also didn't have the greatest talent playing AGAINST him either... And even with that being true, MANY QB's outside of Power 5 schools have had great play, stats, wins, etc. against good competition in spite of being on a team without all the big names. Our own freaking Nathan Peterman BEAT CLEMSON & outplayed Watson (putting up great numbers in the process) the very same year they won the National Championship! Can anyone say Pitt had even close to the level of talent around them that Clemson did? 

 

Allen wasn't known for his ability to read a defense, wasn't known for what he did on the field, wasn't known for big games, big numbers, awards, football IQ, etc. He was known for his arm, and what he COULD do, and what he MIGHT become given the right coaching, development & tools around him. He was a project, and we all knew this. And what did our coach & FO do? They grabbed that guy and did the exact opposite of what one should do given this specific player:
 

1. Put him behind one of the worst offensive lines in football

2. Knowing they wanted a QB in this draft, they drafted no serious help on the O-line in 2017 or 2018 & signed no major help to protect him

3. Gave him a bottom of the barrel WR group to throw to, with a # 1 WR in Benjamin that isn't even a definitive #1 by most metrics

4. Signed yet another OC in a handful of years, making our team have to relearn everything once again. So the guys around him aren't going to be able to help our rookie QB get fluent in the system, as they're learning it too! And this OC? Yeah...there's plenty of concerns about him too

5. Didn't see the need to sign any veteran QB to mentor & help develop our prized rookie...someone to provide some leadership (Players & Coaches have stated countless times how crucial this can be, even if the veteran isn't playing)

6. Are now telling him to do things he's never been able to do, only now at the Pro level & against the most difficult competition he's ever seen

7. Have already shown him how short the leash is, or at the very least, what our HC deems worth a benching & reevaluation of the starting job. If Allen starts off poorly, or throws an INT early on (like Darnold for example), he's already seen what McDermott thinks about that, and could start thinking "next one means I'm getting pulled" & play worse. You could say "but he knows he'll have more time & the coaches will have patience!" but that's not necessarily true. He was told ALL OFFSEASON this was an open competition, and the person playing best & most likely to give a chance to win will be the starter. And yet he was still the #2 guy by the time the season started, meaning Peterman outplayed him & EARNED his spot. Up until now, Allen believed he Peterman was ahead of him at the pro level, as McDermott reiterated that plenty of times, verbally & through his actions & decisions. Now suddenly Peterman is below him, and not through anything Allen's done. 

He knows he's the same player, he's just not the #2 guy anymore. He knows it's because of Peterman's play, which could just as easily be him if he plays that poorly too. But wait, our brilliant coaches don't have a veteran, or a 3rd option to go with if he doesn't play well, so what then? They don't even have a 3rd inexperienced guy like McCarron to go with because they figured they were set with these 2.

 

So Allen's sitting here knowing he's the guy, having not earned it through his play yet, and that he has to do things he's never done before at a level more difficult than anything he's ever faced. And he already knows he'll only have about 1.5 to 2 seconds max to make these plays, and without many real weapons. Great environment for success McDermott has fostered here!

His only other big pick he identified on offense was Zay Jones. We used the 37th overall pick on him, and that turned out well too... McDermott isn't an offensive guy. But that doesn't excuse him from the mess we're in now. And picking the most risky QB while simultaneously making every bad decision that has ruined other rookie QB's permanently could undo this whole "believe in the process" thing. I honestly feel sorry for Allen...I hope he can pull of the miracle & become something he's never been. I hope he can make it through this year alive, and not be mentally destroyed going into next season. I hope the FO & coaching staff realizes their litany of mistakes & saves Allen from weekly embarrassment. And most of all, I hope we don't see week to week QB changes until the season ends. JP Losman v Kelly Holcomb/Trent Edwards round 2 is not something I was ever hoping to see again in my life.  

But McDermott's handling of the offense & QB's in particular since he's been here do not give me much faith that he really knows "what's best for the franchise" or that he knows how to identify offensive talent.

[Ol Dirty B]

17 hours ago, BigBuff423 said:

 

Wrong, because I disagree with you? No, wrong is when it comes to fact and you don't agree and that's fine, but that's not wrong - it's just not what you agree with. Long-winded? Yeah, you got me there. But instead of posting in 10 different threads that essentially say the same thing, I decided to do it all  at once.

 

Tyrod is playing for a Browns team that as of right now could compete, the Bills were not doing that this year. Tyrod's place on this team would have just been to be a mentor and not to actually play to win this year. He's a good guy, never insinuated any different, but content being a mentor, nope, sorry that was not his intent. If you don't see how McCown are so incredibly different in where they are in their respective careers, there's nothing anyone can say to you to be reasonable.

 

Dawkins played extremely well last year - and other than one game - there's nothing else to go by. If you don't see that, then you ignore virtually every other metric and analyst and that's on you.

 

You don't like McD....again, fine. But don't let that bias sway you from he did what he said he was going to do: give the job to QB who played the best and in the Pre-Season and camp, that was Peterman - by all accounts including his detractors. 

 

Edmunds never going in the top 10....hindsight is easy, but if you go back to early April, and resurrect old Draft predictions and player rankings, find me any more than 3 out of 10 that had him out of the top 10, I'll publicly apologize for being wrong to you in this thread. I've done it before and I'll do it again if you feel the need. 

 

Lastly - if you've even read this far - I'm not really sure hurling insults is helping the situation. I've been cordial and respectful, so why the need to make it personal by saying, "My goodness, this is a lot of rambling nonsense and homerism. I'll show where you are wrong in a much more succinct manner without the blinding homer **** that leads to whatever the !@#$ that was."??                      

If it gets you that upset, then so be it...but I wonder what happened to you this morning that a differing opinion gets you all bent out of shape. Relax.

 

Man you ramble on and on.

 

Tyrod is doing in Cleveland what he could have easily done here. He has been a mentor to Baker. You're in denial.

 

Dawkins, I agreed was good, the point is because he's good, doesn't mean you don't ship talent out of town and then sit on your hands. Last I checked, teams usually employ a right and left tackle.

 

And Edmunds didn't go top 10, I guess we really got the 1 overall selected pick because Kiper suggested that too at one point for Allen. You're arguing that mocks matter more over what actually happened. Just like most of your points, it's disingenuous to reality. 

 

 

[GunnerBill]

5 hours ago, JohnC said:

The Peterman issue isn't my straw man--- it is yours. He has been replaced entering into the second week of the season. I simply don't understand your zealotry on this issue. It makes little sense to me. I said right from the start that at best he can be a serviceable backup. Regardless how much you lament he is the backup, at least for now. Why invest so much venom on an inconsequential player? Your campaign to malign a player who it was understood was a temporary placeholder at qb is very much out of proportion to his role as the backup.  

 

I, like you, am not bothered by the accelerated installation of Allen as the starter. I'll even go farther than you in that I celebrate this substitution. With him as the starter there is a more compelling story-line of following the play of a talented but raw rookie qb. Peterman is now the backup whether you like it or not. You may be disturbed by that role but I am not. 

 

My zealotry is based on the fact that at best he might be the worst Quarterback to ever start multiple games in the NFL and I don't want him on my team. The Bills habe battled hard over 5 years to shed themselves of the "laughing stock" tag. Starting Peterman last week put us right back there. He isn't at best a servicable backup. You are wrong. He is a player who has no business being in the league. I don't care that he was never the long term solution. I don't want someone that bad on the Bills in any role. 

[BillsFan1988]

20 hours ago, hondo in seattle said:

 

Let's set the stage:  The Bills have the fewest number of homegrown players in the league.  In other words, we haven't drafted well in the past.  And this year we're in Cap Hell because of bad signings in the past.  In fact, we're spending less on current player salaries than any team in the NFL.   So we have virtually no talent we've drafted ourselves and we can't afford to pay for FAs.  That's what Beane  and McD are up against.  This season they have a team will little talent.   Their plan is to improve the cap situation so they can sign better FAs and draft better than the previous regime.  It's going to take time.  

 

So in this past free agency, we dumped TT to get his salary off our books and get some draft capital.  

 

We also signed AJ - the best vet FA QB would could afford.  We still had Peterman.  And we drafted Allen - a guy who many scouts and former NFL QBs believe has a lot of upside despite your misgivings.

 

Peterman - surprisingly - outplayed the other guys in preseason and won the QB competition.  AJ disappointed in camp, got  hurt, and was traded away for more draft capital.  

 

Coaches tend to publicly say they have faith in their players because players play better when they have the confidence of their coaches.  It's a well known psychological phenomenon called the Pygmalion Effect.  You have no idea what McD privately thought of Peterman.  Given what we saw of Peterman last year, I seriously doubt that McD ever considered Peterman a franchise QB.  I suspect he considered Peterman a placeholder until Allen developed a better ability to read NFL defenses.  

 

But when Peterman faced a real NFL defensive scheme playing at regular season speed, he couldn't approximate his preseason success.  So Allen's getting the starting nod earlier in the season than maybe expected or ideal.   But most Bills fans and observers expected Allen to start at some point this year anyway.  

 

I'm not sure how this series of events lead you to conclude McD doesn't know how to develop QBs?  Dallas threw Aikman to the wolves his first year.  And speaking of Carrs, Oakland threw Derek Carr to the wolves and it didn't ruin him.  Putting a rookie behind a bad line on a bad team doesn't necessarily ruin him.  It depends on the resiliency of the the QB.  I'm not even convinced that David Carr was "ruined" by his rookie year - he just might not have been quite good enough for the NFL.  

 

No one can look at this roster or Week 1's result and be happy.  But nothing leads me to the conclusion that McD doesn't know how to develop a QB.  

McBeane is making sure they keep the legacy in place with more bad signings and more bad drafts and more well u know what I'm gonna say incompetence.  So let the golden Era of Bills football continue. 

[Radar]

First mistake trading Tyrod. Second mistake keeping Nate. Third mistake trading McCarron. Yeah, they got a handle on this quarterback thing. I hope that the next mistake wasn't drafting Allen. I do truly hope he's our franchise quarterback.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

20 minutes ago, Radar said:

First mistake trading Tyrod.

 

 

[Jpsredemption]

One of the problems is who he's selected to develop Josh Allen.

 

Terrifying.

23 minutes ago, Radar said:

First mistake trading Tyrod. Second mistake keeping Nate. Third mistake trading McCarron. Yeah, they got a handle on this quarterback thing. I hope that the next mistake wasn't drafting Allen. I do truly hope he's our franchise quarterback.

They couldn't possibly keep Tyrod..he's not one of their guys....and as we know this staff has trouble developing players from previous regimes....

 

It's all about the culture....which is code for we don't want to adapt our coaching style to talented but sometimes troubles players.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

23 minutes ago, Jpsredemption said:

Tyrod..talented

 

 

[JohnC]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

My zealotry is based on the fact that at best he might be the worst Quarterback to ever start multiple games in the NFL and I don't want him on my team. The Bills habe battled hard over 5 years to shed themselves of the "laughing stock" tag. Starting Peterman last week put us right back there. He isn't at best a servicable backup. You are wrong. He is a player who has no business being in the league. I don't care that he was never the long term solution. I don't want someone that bad on the Bills in any role. 

Your target of scorn is not playing. There are plenty of mediocre talents on this team that are starting that are worthy of your derision. You are like the person whose house is on fire complaining about the roommate who left dirty dishes in the sink. My kindly advice to you is use your energy to focus on meaningful issues. Peterman is nearly irrelevant to the fortunes of this team. Yet you continue to unceasingly harp. Give it a rest. 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

8 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Your target of scorn is not playing. There are plenty of mediocre talents on this team that are starting that are worthy of your derision. You are like the person whose house is on fire complaining about the roommate who left dirty dishes in the sink. My kindly advice to you is use your energy to focus on meaningful issues. Peterman is nearly irrelevant to the fortunes of this team. Yet you continue to unceasingly harp. Give it a rest. 

 

I think there's a couple camps of people around here. First would be those who hated the McDermott hire, and those that didn't. Those who did are going to harp over every mistake those who didn't aren't.

 

I think, and I may be wrong, that Gunner is in group one.

 

 

[JohnC]

15 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

I think there's a couple camps of people around here. First would be those who hated the McDermott hire, and those that didn't. Those who did are going to harp over every mistake those who didn't aren't.

 

I think, and I may be wrong, that Gunner is in group one.

 

 

My complaint isn't over one's position on an issue. What I find abnormal is the disproportionate attention to a player that has been replaced. On top of that it was understood that the player who was replaced was acknowledged to be a temporary/placeholder player for the rookie prospect. Although the switch has been made the venom keeps flowing for the replaced inconsequential  player. 

 

The horse that is dead continues to be gleefully beaten. 

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=dead+horse&id=99B97D26E664CFFE2C62C3015A1D054E2BD4C223&FORM=IQFRBA

 

 

 

 

 

[starrymessenger]

IMO there is no way that starting JA on this offence at this time is conducive to his development. Common sense strongly suggests the opposite. I'm actually not that concerned about a loss of confidence. He's a player that has already overcome a lot of adversity on the path he followed to the NFL so I see him as unusually strong mentally for a rook. What worries me is that in the circumstances live action isn't where he should be working on improving the (hopefully correctable) mechanical issues affecting his game and beginning to decipher the complexities of NFL defences. I fully expect to see him do some things that as Bills fans we have not seen for a very long time. But the reason for this will be his extraordinary physical ability, not his ability to run a pro offence (and no he did not run a true pro style offence at WYO). The natural ability that he flashed in college is what got him drafted high in the first round. I'm fully on board with that. But I don't want him to continue to be that player. He needs to be a different and much better player. To me the Bills have put him in exactly the same position he was in at WYO - behind a poor team with a bad line and few playmakers. I don't want to witness a replay of WYO vs Iowa week after week, but I fear I may have to.

Josh Allen is not Jamarcus Russell or Ryan Leaf. He's better because in addition to physical gifts he is a hard worker and he's bright. Raw intelligence is not always the same as football smarts (or vice-versa) but it's a definite positive. To me he's not Jake Locker or Kyle Boller either. He's determined to succeed and he can make throws that other strong armed QBs who failed don't make. 

So with all these qualities it's just possible that he will see his way through this situation and find a way to get better. If he does the credit will be all his (not the Bills) because regardless this is no way to bring a raw rookie QB along and he should never have been put in this position. 

The Bills defence can and I think will play better. That will take some of the pressure off. After that it will be up to Daboll to come up with a gameplan that focuses on Allen's development and bodily security. Putting too much on his plate is almost certainly a disaster in waiting because you know that this player in particular will take it upon himself to throw the whole team on his back, just as he had to do week in and week out in college, and that's when the risk of injury becomes more palpable. The NFL is light years beyond the Mountain West Conference.

Edited September 15, 2018 by starrymessenger

[Radar]

7 hours ago, joesixpack said:

 

 

More talented than the guy they started with. They left themselves with Allen or Peterman. That's a risk when one is new and never had NFL game the other few starts and was terrible aside from a few quarters.