The Draft Network's Jon Ledyard Eviscerates Allen’s Week 2 Performance

[HappyDays]

 

[26CornerBlitz]

20 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

His All-22 critique of Allen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BB@Shooter]

2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

It's a fair evaluation of how he looked in his 1st ever game. By the way I like Daboll's scheme. Players are getting open. Allen just needs to progress and start seeing the field better.

You probably could have used a clip where the defense wasn't in the backfield before 2 counts.

[Doc]

1 minute ago, BB@Shooter said:

You probably could have used a clip where the defense wasn't in the backfield before 2 counts.

 

Those don't fit Ledyard's agenda. 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

 

[Fadingpain]

Allen looks below average right now, but he's a rookie with no experience and he has a lot to learn.

 

At some point expectations will be greater than zero, however, and then he's going to have to perform.

 

Where each fan sets the performance line remains to be seen. 

 

Tyrod had/has supporters up to the very end and even now.

 

When should Allen be expected to perform better?  Mid-season?  By the end of this year? By the end of next year?

 

When?

 

 

[Doc]

2 minutes ago, Fadingpain said:

Allen looks below average right now, but he's a rookie with no experience and he has a lot to learn.

 

At some point expectations will be greater than zero, however, and then he's going to have to perform.

 

Where each fan sets the performance line remains to be seen. 

 

Tyrod had/has supporters up to the very end and even now.

 

When should Allen be expected to perform better?  Mid-season?  By the end of this year? By the end of next year?

 

When?

 

By next year.

[PeterDude]

35 minutes ago, BB@Shooter said:

You jump on and off the bandwagon from post to post. Do you even read what you write or does your little sister post when you are attending the local jr. high?

You jump on and off the bandwagon from post to post. Do you even read what you write or does your little sister post when you are attending the local jr. high?

Huh? I've never liked the Allen pick, not sure what bandwagon you're talking about...

[BB@Shooter]

38 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

That could as easily been a TD if receiver comes up with it. So it goes. For one to look at it after the fact is an easy thing to do

 

[Klaista2k]

5 hours ago, RyanC883 said:

My 2 cents.   I did not want to draft Allen due to accuracy issues.  But he has been better than I thought.  He is mentally strong, and can move in the pocket.  He also has ZERO help at the WR and OL positions, 2 areas where rookie QB's need help.  

 

If he doesn't improve, I can see us taking another QB in the 1st round next year, or early 2nd depending.  

 

Nothing to be lost by putting him out there now.  

 

 

Posts like these don't make sense. 

 

You didn't want to draft Allen because of his accuracy issues but now he's better than you thought?

 

He STILL has accuracy issues. So if you originally like the pick you STILL shouldn't. Nothing has changed.

[SoTier]

5 hours ago, Midwest1981 said:

According to PFF, Allen graded out at 73.7 for his performance against Baltimore, which I thought was pretty encouraging, even mostly against second-stringers.  

 

But his overall grade dropped to just above 50 factoring in his Chargers' start, which did not grade out well.

 

The problem with PFF ratings of QBs is that too often they seem to make mediocre QBs appear to be far better than they are.  Does it matter if Joe Backup who was a failed first round QB pick has better PFF ratings than Tom Brady if Brady and the Pats clean their opponents' clock?

[Luka]

Nearly 300 yards in total offense for his first game. Put points on the board. You can dissect every single play and find something wrong I'm sure. You can do it for every first start of every QB's career.

 

It's tough to take someone serious who is looking for EVERY negative they can find. This certainly wasn't an unbiased look at how Josh performed.

 

It's going to be a tough road for him, for sure. But trying to bury the kid after one game is ridiculous.

[Klaista2k]

5 hours ago, Utah John said:

The biggest mystery to me is why the Bills traded McCarron.  He was mediocre but competent, and he would have let Allen sit and watch.  Peterman is not ever going to work out.

 

Yeah I agree.

 

I think it's another reason why I'm starting to have my doubts about this regime.

 

[BillsVet]

4 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

You cant do it all in one offseason.

 

I'd put money on you having said this during the Nix/Gailey rebuilds, the Whaley/Marrone rebuild, and, perhaps during the Jauron era.

 

That said, when I see people refer to posts, articles or whatever with words like "eviscerate" or "destroys" or any language like that, I already know it's drama to get clicks.  Sports media being so competitive, the normal coverage isn't going to get ratings and ad revenue.

 

So I take this analysis with a grain of salt, especially because it was Allen's first start.  Did anyone think he'd tear it up with that and a poor surrounding cast? 

[Like A Mofo]

6 hours ago, BillsFan4 said:

I am not saying he is wrong. Josh struggled mightily. 

 

But, reading through that twitter timeline, this tweet stuck out to me - 

 

 

Does it almost seems like he is excited that Josh Allen struggled and he gets to point it out, or is it just me? 

 

He was a very strong critic of Allen before the draft iirc. 

 

 

Of course he is. This guy sounds like he lives in a basement and trolls all day and yearns for attention and validation. Tell him to clean his room.

[John from Riverside]

8 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

 

I'd put money on you having said this during the Nix/Gailey rebuilds, the Whaley/Marrone rebuild, and, perhaps during the Jauron era.

 

That said, when I see people refer to posts, articles or whatever with words like "eviscerate" or "destroys" or any language like that, I already know it's drama to get clicks.  Sports media being so competitive, the normal coverage isn't going to get ratings and ad revenue.

 

So I take this analysis with a grain of salt, especially because it was Allen's first start.  Did anyone think he'd tear it up with that and a poor surrounding cast? 

Those rebiulds did not have a QB the talent of Josh Allen....I feel like he is different then all of those other QBs for a multitude of reasons

 

When you have that on board.....the rebiuld has a much better chance of being successfull

[SoTier]

1 hour ago, ctk232 said:

Exactly - Allen was not the QB to draft and expect to become the franchise on day 1. We all knew he was raw and needed developing, that was the intention with the pick. If we had a halfway capable QB on the roster and team behind him, we would likely not have seen Allen play much at all this year, and just Mahomes him while he develops his game. He's being thrown in over a year before the FO intended and this is the result of the current product before any development can really take place.

 

But developing what exactly, with the team this year, I'm not so certain. The games he will be seeing each Sunday are not case studies of typical NFL games...I hope he/we can re calibrate his barometer to adjust to what an NFL team actually looks like and how a team is supposed to perform in this league.

 

I disagree that the FO ever intended to sit Allen.  The absolute ONLY reason to trade Taylor before the draft and McCarron before the beginning of the regular season when the only QB on the roster not named Allen is Nathan Peterman is to make sure that Allen has to start early in the season.  It's absolutely the only reason why Peterman is still on the roster instead of some veteran QB.  Why would they do that?  To put butts in the seats might be one reason.  To cover the FO's collective butts if Allen busts seems a more likely one because they can always claim that Allen might have been better if he'd had more time to sit and learn but "circumstances" forced their hands. 

[26CornerBlitz]

6 hours ago, Midwest1981 said:

"Utterly dreadful" and "brutally bad in a myriad of ways" isn't quite how I'd characterize it.  But I have to admit- I was more discouraged than encouraged.  "It's his first start," "he had a few good plays," etc.  I know those things- IMO it was still discouraging to see him miss on some blatantly open throws (Murphy & DiMarco, famoulsy) and to force those picks in the second-half (especially the first one- I was imploring him to throw it away as he released it)...

 

Ledyard correctly mentions "there's a long way to go"- and I still think Allen's relentlessly competitive nature gives him a chance, even with his pre-draft concerns rearing their ugly head again in start #1 (mechanical unsoundness, inconsistent accuracy, decision-making, etc.).  Still, I was hoping week #1 offered a few more positives (there WERE some), even considering all factors like the Bills' under-talented roster, the opponent, his first NFL start, etc.

 

https://twitter.com/LedyardNFLDraft/status/1041772507903262720

 

Week 2 performance actually.  Fair critique nonetheless. 

[SoTier]

1 hour ago, Albany,n.y. said:

It's not a mystery at all.  The Bills, after getting to know Allen,  think he can handle & benefit from learning on the field instead of sitting on the bench watching.  I've been watching the NFL for over 50 years and watching the game didn't improve my meager football skills one iota.  Allen's best leaning opportunity isn't by sitting & watching, it's by playing.  

Once they reached that conclusion, McCarron was traded with their full knowledge that the sooner Peterman proved inadequate, Allen would go in there.  Now the sit & watch crowd, of which you are a member, can't go on WGR or message boards demanding McCarron starts. 

 

You credit the Bills FO with much more honesty and transparency than I do.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

6 hours ago, BillsFan4 said:

I am not saying he is wrong. Josh struggled mightily. 

 

But, reading through that twitter timeline, this tweet stuck out to me - 

 

 

Does it almost seems like he is excited that Josh Allen struggled and he gets to point it out, or is it just me? 

 

He was a very strong critic of Allen before the draft iirc. 

 

Yeah, I read it that way too.  I wonder if he's combing through Sam Darnold and the glimpse we saw of Lamar Jackson with the same "looking for notably wrong" lens.  Imma guess: No

 

9 minutes ago, SoTier said:

I disagree that the FO ever intended to sit Allen.  The absolute ONLY reason to trade Taylor before the draft and McCarron before the beginning of the regular season when the only QB on the roster not named Allen is Nathan Peterman is to make sure that Allen has to start early in the season.  It's absolutely the only reason why Peterman is still on the roster instead of some veteran QB.  Why would they do that?  To put butts in the seats might be one reason.  To cover the FO's collective butts if Allen busts seems a more likely one because they can always claim that Allen might have been better if he'd had more time to sit and learn but "circumstances" forced their hands. 

 

Let's put it this way, SoTier.  If the FO did not intend to sit Allen, then what was the point of the whole gamish about having him take 3rd string reps through OTAs, TC, and preseason?  Surely both he and the first-string OL and WR would be more cohesive and practiced with each other if the Bills just put him out there with the 1sts from the start.

 

Then you switch gears and say "oh, they want to cover their butts in case he busts due to their all-along plan to start him before he's prepared, but not let him prepare full-time with the 1s for that plan"  No, sorry, McBeane don't get a "get out of consequence free" card for creating a problem situation which then causes a problem.