thebandit27

If McCoy goes anywhere now, KC would make perfect sense Though I still doubt they move him

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy I unexpectedly feel bad for him though

I think Harris is there purely to mentor Roberts, who I think is poised to become a star (yes, I'm not backing off of my pre-draft hype on this kid). He truly coaches the 11 he's got on the field. He doesn't ask any one player to do anything they can't do; simply puts them on the field and says "do what you do well". No surprise to me that teams would target Butler in coverage over Gilmore.

The post that I was referring to was this: 1. No, Tyrod doesn't suck. Not by any metric that you can find...but feel free to show me why with more than just your opinion. 2. Don't attribute made-up arguments to me. You've never seen me say that Tyrod hasn't looked lousy this preseason, or that it doesn't matter because it's preseason. Debate the actual point being made as opposed to simply tossing out straw men to suit your fancy. 3. It makes less than zero sense to get rid of a QB that's had a record of 15-14 and lead an offense that ranked 7th in points scored last season (save for after the EJ debacle in Week 17) because you simply don't like the guy. I don't think there's anyone on this board that believes he's great, or even capable of winning in the playoffs; he's simply the best that this team is going to do for 2017. What about the above do you disagree with? Tyrod is a below-average starting QB in the NFL, but he doesn't suck by any measure. He can extend plays with his legs, has an outstanding deep ball, and is very decisive when his first read is open (which is why his career YPA with Sammy in the lineup--8.8--is downright elite). He is most certainly limited in what he can do; that does not make Peterman the better option for this team right now. My point in this thread has always been that Tyrod's limitations and Peterman's readiness to play against starters in the NFL have zero confluence.

The conspiracy theorist could look at the tea leaves and wonder if using Groy exclusively at center means that they're setting themselves up to deal Wood prior to the season...

Stidham is the only guy on my preseason watch list for whom I haven't gotten a chance to do an initial workup, so I'll be watching him very closely this year.

No worries; Bill (fine soul and exemplary Bills' fan that he is) knows I'm just having some fun with him anyway. I think NE's secondary will be quite formidable. Their corner group of Butler/Gilmore/Rowe is probably as good a top-3 as any outside of Denver, and the safety group of McCourty/Chung/Harmon is solid too. Re-signing Hightower and bringing in David Harris to pair with my draft crush Elandon Roberts was really smart too. The pass rush is really going to depend upon the development of Trey Flowers IMO. He looked very good as the 2016 progressed, but who knows how his development arc will go this season? Kony Ealy has been brutally inconsistent throughout his career, and I wouldn't want to depend upon him. Losing rookie Derek Rivers--a guy I really liked coming out of Youngstown State--could be a big blow. I guess I expect NE's defense to be business-as-usual. They'll allow some yards and scores, but in the end they'll make stops when they have to and be opportunistic with the turnovers...and that'll probably be good enough.

Belichick certainly agrees

Sniff test, eye test, what's next? Seriously, read what I said and then tell me where you disagree.

Indeed...I would take Vlad and Mills 7 Sundays out of 7 over Corey Hulsey and Jon Carmen

No, I am not. What I am saying is that Peterman is not showing anything beyond that of what many rookie late-round picks before him have shown against backups. The highlight video was expressly intended to speak to the fact that Tyrod showed many of the same things. Nobody. Is. Arguing. Differently. The point that I have made, and somehow still seems to get lost, is that just because Tyrod hasn't improved in those areas doesn't mean that Peterman is better simply because he shows a similar ability to do it against backups and 3rd stringers as Tyrod did as a rookie.

Agreed (not about the jerk part)...that says absolutely nothing about Peterman, which is what I have been saying for 3+ pages now. Separate discussions. Tyrod isn't good enough =/= Peterman is good enough.

How is it possible that some of you folks continue to miss the point? I did answer you; I said that I agreed that Tyrod needed to improve, but that you were conflating two different points (and you still are). That Tyrod needs to improve does not, by any measure, mean that Peterman is better than him at those traits. Right now, Peterman is showing that he's got some ability in those areas, but as I just showed you, Tyrod showed the same thing against 2's and 3's. What happened? He had to start playing against starters. Forgive me if Peterman completing 50% of his passes against backups and showing the same passing and anticipatory ability that Tyrod did as a backup (sans the dynamic running) doesn't exactly inspire me to believe he's a better player right now, or that he'll become one in the future. Again, context matters. That is (still) the point.

Again, if you're looking at Peterman based on preseason vs 2's and 3's, then you need to look at Tyrod in Dennison's offense in the same situation. Now that, my friend, would be logical. And I'll add that "we don't know" isn't automatically better today than "we don't think so"

That's not accurate...if you go back and look at Tyrod's performance in the preseason as a Raven, he was able to do plenty of those things. I feel that you folks are falling into the trap of comparing Tyrod vs 1's in the regular season to Peterman vs. 2's and 3's in the preseason, which is apples-to-oranges at best. For example: Plenty of accurate throws, quick releases, throws to covered targets, and stepping into the pocket there. And that's the point: what Peterman is showing against 2's and 3's in the preseason is in no way uncommon for a late-round pick, and portends nothing more than that he's got the potential to be a roster-worthy NFL QB.

As I said, I truly hope that's the case...and that when they see he cannot compete, they let him go.

You're conflating two points. No, Tyrod isn't good enough. No, Peterman has certainly not shown that he is better than Tyrod at any of those traits--perhaps further along as a rookie than Tyrod was though.

Let's set aside for a moment the fact that every one of those is an eye-test metric, and that none of them can be quantified or supported by fact. That said, let me get this straight: Peterman has somehow proven to you, in his 3 quarters of preseason action against 2's and 3's running base defensive schemes, that he does all of those things better than Tyrod? Furthermore, it is your opinion that the eye-test performed on those traits (by you) should supersede what Tyrod has done over 2 years as a starter? You cannot seriously think that that's a logical position to take. Look, I'm not exactly the type to stump for Tyrod, but good grief. You want to replace a guy that's got a 15-14 record as a starter (despite playing on a team with a hugely-underachieving defensive unit) and has proven that he can lead a top-10 scoring offense while minimizing turnovers with a 5th-round rookie that is currently completing 50% of his passes against backups? Surely you must recognize that your position makes no sense, right? Then wouldn't you want to go back to what Tyrod did in the preseason when running Dennison's scheme in Baltimore and add that in for context?

Try stating a fact--please. Seriously

Good grief, do you really not understand the point of my reply? It is tantamount to absurdity to ask what a player that has proven himself to be a mediocre NFL starter does better than a rookie 5th-round pick that has never started so much as a preseason game. That was my point. I'm sorry that I didn't make it clearer from the get-go; I assumed you'd pick up on it. If you really want to play this game, then here are 5 things Tyrod does better than Peterman: - He is a better runner; Peterman has never shown that skill - He throws an excellent deep ball; Peterman has not shown that skill in his brief preseason appearances - He is more accurate--as evidenced by both a higher comp % in this preseason, as well as by a higher comp % against NFL competition in 2016 than Peterman had playing in the ACC - He has better ball security--he had the fewest turnovers among starting QBs in the NFL last year. Peterman turned the ball over more times in 13 college games last year. - He has a better familiarity with this offense having worked with Rick Dennison; Peterman is completely new to it I played your game, so now it's your move. Name 5 things that Peterman has shown--even in the preseason against backups and 3rd stringers--that he does better than Taylor.

I promised you a mea culpa if he's starting in week 1, and you shall have it.

I'll also add that they were actually 7th in ppg and had the fewest turnovers in the league before EJ took the reins in week 17.

Tell you what: name 5 things that Peterman has proven he can do better than Tyrod at the NFL level. State a fact that supports your argument...so far, you've managed to buttress your opinion with another helping of opinion.

Cute. I suspect you know this, but the passing game ranked 30th in YPG...which is pretty common when you throw the ball less than every other team in the NFL for 2 consecutive years. How does this debunk the notion that Tyrod is the best option from the current players on the roster for this team in 2017? FYI, they also ranked 20th in YPA, 19th in passer rating, and 22nd in completion percentage. Guess which of those numbers matters more than points scored? I suspect you know the answer to this as well. And again I'll ask: what makes you think that Peterman is a better option for this team in 2017? Furthermore, where did I say that Tyrod is a stud? Actually, I'll ask you to do me a favor: take a step back from slinging mud, read what I actually said, and then tell me where you disagree with me. Thanks.

Does it make more sense to judge what a 6-year vet can do in the NFL based on what he's done over the course of 2 regular seasons as a starter, or based on what he's done in 2 quarters of a preseason?