BigBuff423

Andrew Brandt did a nice job showing the strategy and events that led to the Eagles getting Wentz, trading Bradford, and "accelerated the process" by tearing down the organization and building on cornerstone players. https://theathletic.com/148448/2017/11/06/brandt-a-mixture-of-smarts-and-serendipity-helped-the-eagles-land-carson-wentz/ "When referring to The Process about a Philadelphia sports team, the conversation usually turns to the NBA’s 76ers. The Process is an ideology, meticulously crafted by former general manager Sam Hinkie, that rejects mediocrity, tearing down the franchise to its studs and building it with cornerstone players destined for sustained success." "In the first half of a season that no one saw coming—don’t believe them if they say they did—the Eagles have the NFL’s best record (8-1), are widely regarded as the NFL’s best team, and continue to win convincingly despite injuries to their best cornerback (Ronald Darby), best offensive lineman (Jason Peters) and most versatile offensive weapon (Darren Sproles). There are many reasons for their stunning success, but the primary one is that they found a generational player to lead them. Carson Wentz gives the Eagles, and Eagles fans, reason to believe they will be championship contenders for years to come. A combination of deft trading and leveraging of another team’s desperation in 2016 is now paying dramatic dividends" Brandt explains how the Eagles took the risk in playing Carson Wentz in his Rookie season and of course, how now it's contributing to their teams' wins and overcoming the difficulty of injuries to some key players. The Process, has been used by McDermott but if you buy into this principle as noted above, you MUST begin at the QB position. Something the Bills fans seem to know more than the team itself. Every year we're convinced the Bills have found a "cheap" or "fast" way to get a QB so they can also have All-Pro players surrounding the aforementioned QB to be better. Yet, what most of us fans have learned that apparently the Bills Front Office has not, is that the QB MAKES those players around him better, not vice-versa - they are great because your QB is great. There is a litany of examples from both history and contemporary players where a good WR or TE or RB goes to another team and never gains the type of production they had with their prior team that was manned by a great Quarterback. I can only hope that because Beane was hired after the Draft and that McDermott decided to simply stay the course for a year and build Draft picks, evaluate some players to keep, and feel fully convinced to let other players go after this year to release some FA money, they actually do intend on selling-out for a QB, no matter the cost - because in the end, it will be well worth it. In full disclosure, I was counted among those who wanted to give Peterman a chance, because I believed the Offense would improve based on his strengths to staying in the pocket, anticipate a WR / TE open, and get the ball out faster. I was wrong....but, also, the Offensive line is atrocious and the Defense could NOT stop anyone. So, while Peterman is not ready, his Rookie production - or catastrophic lack thereof - was exacerbated by the previously mentioned deficiencies. I also wanted Peterman to start because to me, if the Bills brass does not know definitively that he either IS or IS NOT the answer to QB, it would lead to vacillation and equivocal planning toward the QB position. Hopefully, this last game highlights the absolute desperation that should be the Bills state of thinking regarding the QB position and how it can immeasurable alter the course of their future. But, only 2018 will answer these questions for us fans....something we apparently understood years ago that Marv Levy, Russ Brandon, Buddy Nix and Doug Whaley never figured out.

I suppose it really depends on how "terrible" is defined and how it looks. So, for me if he is throwing into double coverage b/c no one is open, then that's a Rookie mistake. If he's widely inaccurate and missing open receivers causing turnovers - be it INTs or on downs - that's a learning / development issue that I'm not sure can be fixed at this point in his life. If he's throwing up contested balls and the Defender is outplaying the receiver causing 2 or 3 INTs, then to me it is mostly on the receivers to snatch that ball and keep it and I'd give him credit for getting his guy the opportunity. If he's not recognizing blitzes or taking what the Defense gives him, that's something IMHO he can learn. So, if he's terrible with what to me would be QB 101 - accuracy, knowing the Offense enough to know where the ball should go on pre-read capability, if he's overthrowing or under-throwing receivers b/c of arm strength, if he lacks touch, etc....then I'd be concerned about his future ability in the NFL. If his "terrible" is a result of Rookie-itis, then I'm fine with it b/c it would be unfair to demand or expect he doesn't have learning and development to go through.

Fair enough, and to those specifics, I can't / won't disagree.

To your last point, I have to disagree Gug....to me, "tank" insinuates they're intentionally trying NOT to win. However, I DO think they said basically, "We're adjusting the roster to reflect our values and to get guys we believe have the specific skill-set and mindset we need to turn this sinking Titanic into a cruise liner worth its weight" and knew it would lead to a rough first season...and, IMHO that's why the Peterman makes so much sense now. If he wins and does well, fine problem at QB solved, if he's terrible, then you know you need to get another one somewhere in the 1st 2 rounds or via FA, ala Cousins (if available), and if you still don't know whether he's any good because of what Rookies do - up and down, some bad - some good, then you know that too and can decide accordingly. But, he is also seemingly a good fit for the Offense and Tyrod no longer factors into the present or the future....JMO

I don't think the two have to be mutually exclusive of each other.....it could very well be that McD and Beane didn't have any intentions of bringing Tyrod back next year and considering the team is still in the playoff picture, they decided to give Peterman the reins to see how he plays, and to have a better decision-making capability about what to do at the QB position next year. It's likely McD and Beane believe Peterman is better suited for the Offense and had half a season to get adjusted to NFL so now is the time to move him in and get him experience. The two issues could be linked, they could be separate ideas altogether or none of these things could be right. But, about Tyrod's future, that I don't think was really ever in question except to the national media.

I know I've heard this quite a bit on this board, and admittedly I'm no expert, but when I watch Peterman from his college days, completely discounting his very, very limited NFL throws so far, he had plenty of arm for the game. In one highlight, and I'm sorry I can't recall which game it was, during his senior year he was on the run, full-out and just before the line of scrimmage tossed a 50 yard pass leading into redzone / endzone (don't remember which). His feet weren't set and he didn't square up as though they were and that throw had a fair amount of muscle behind it. Arm strength might be an issue, but honestly I don't think it will be unless he regresses or injures it somehow. It will be what it is for most Rooks: timing, reading blitzes and coverages, accuracy, and of course taking the hit and getting back up.

I agree with Milano starting, and I've been on board with it since the first game Humber came back. Nothing against Humber AT THAT TIME, it was more about going with the youth movement and giving a promising LBer some time to grow and maybe become a core member of the Defense for years to come. Since then, it makes no sense to me to have Milano ride the pine as he was more productive AND is hopefully in their future plans. A sort of Peterman issue on Defense.

I liked the O'Neal kid from training camp, and thought with some more practice and use, he could be a decent back-up. Maybe they find out where he's bagging groceries and have him stop by...

It's a quote from Joe Gibbs (minus a couple words, edited for brevity and relevance I assume).

Ok, look - I'm on board the Peterman train as much as just about anyone else for a variety of reasons not the least of which would be to give our Offense a needed change at the QB position, to give Peterman a real opportunity to prove one way or the other about his potential over the course of 7 games, and hopefully playoffs, and because watching Tyrod over / under throw receivers, while taking sacks, and failing to move the Offense is just maddening....buuuuuuuuut, maybe slow down on anointing him the next great....can we do that, for our collective sanity? Thanks

The issue I have with that is, Tyrod and the Offense have not really contributed at (except for Oakland and first Jets game) to the Bills getting closer to the playoffs, with a really tough schedule ahead for the next several weeks, why would we think he can somehow flip a switch and get it done? So maybe Peterman sparks something and the Offense starts clicking, the Defense gets more rest and is energized and the team starts to win and playoffs are a reality. Or, maybe he is a Rookie and has highs and lows and they miss the playoffs or he's downright terrible....but knowing ahead of the 2018 Off-season at his point only helps the team.

My apologies. Will do, thanks.

And keep in mind, the next 3 are: Chargers (west coast travel), Chiefs, and Pats. Now, a good to great QB should still fair well in all three games to some degree, but I don't know that's fair to say we should be 3-0 at the end of that either. He should be evaluated on how he does individually as to whether they stick with him or not.....if he can't move the ball, if the Offense looks as impotent or worse (somehow) as it did with TT and / or he is missing really open receivers and holds the ball too long, then he should sit...but I also think we should expect a couple INTs because he probably will take that chance and push the ball into tight windows and down field.

Honestly, I don't know that you can answer that question with clarity since each QB takes their own time to truly know....like you said, in retrospect, those other guys we should have known quickly. However, as with Wentz, he started the whole year and threw 16 TDs to 14 INTs - and on this board, that gets you benched but look at him this year. I think, JMO, you know when you see the guy throw. It's not always about stats, it's about how he commands the Offense, how he throws the ball, where the throws the ball, how the receivers are able to catch the ball and what can they do after the catch, if he can recognize Defenses appropriately and audible, and how accurate he is because in the case of Wentz, his completion % was 62.4 last year, a solid number. Now, don't mistake my use of Wentz as an example to say that I think Peterman is or could be Wentz, I'm just saying I don't know that stats tell the whole story, which is very much the case for Tyrod. His stats aren't terrible, but when you watch him play, at least for me, I know that he's a truly gifted athlete and good guy, but he can't QB in the NFL. His skill-set doesn't match the demand for what the NFL requires NFL QBs to do....

Haha!! For all of us my man, for all of us...and I think Peterman has a chance to be good in Rico’s Offense, not to say he will be but I like his skill-set and what he does naturally. However, only time and actual demonstration will prove that out...so with hope, we wait.

+1....for sure.

Man, that is truly wishful thinking, especially because Bills will be facing Bosa and Ingram. So, let’s be a bit conservative, also a Rookie’s best friend is a good running game. So, how about 19-28, 234 yds, 1 TD 1Int, but because of his use of WCO, running game breaks 100 yds again, and they get 2 rushing TDs and a FG, so 24 points.

Welcome to the revolution Sean...Peterman madness!

Peterman train is leaving the station!!!

All aboard the Peterman train!! Choo-chooooooo!!!!!

This is a good point, and to me this is reflective of how the Bills were getting their wins early in the season....good Defense, playing well enough to maintain good field position and take some time off the clock and give the Defense a little time to rest, eventually the Offense was able to get enough going to score some points, mostly through Hauschka (sp?) field goals which was due to the field position.

^^^this...

I understand both those opinions, and not to say you or anyone who espouses such belief is wrong, but looking at the current situation, do you really think they couldn't positively contribute to the Defense? Regardless of Darby's strength, I believe he would certainly be better than Leonard Pitts and Ragland may have a more natural fit to the 3-4, but hard to believe he couldn't have spelled Brown as MLB or helped Humber or Lorax at outside assignments. My point is that getting rid of those two guys, given the lack of depth in both of those position groups made less sense to me, not that I didn't understand the perspective or "hated" the move, it just was unwise IMHO.

It's a fair point....sometimes I do think the talent needs to be overhauled, but there are other times I think HCs and GMs just get rid of players because like you said, they're not "their guys". I understand the Sammy trade, especially in light of comments he made after he left, and the Dareus thing because the contract was so cost prohibitive to signing other players and what production you received in return was insufficient. But, I liked Darby and Ragland, those are two I don't understand at this point.

It's as if there is an aversion to Offensive minded coaches being the HC in Buffalo since Levy. I mean honestly, it likes the lore of Buffalo being a blue-collar, hard-working city overtakes the demand of an Offensive coach, like McVay or Pederson of the Eagles (although he was hired last year) or Shanahan, etc. I love good Defense, and I'm very frustrated when I see the Defense give up big play after big play, but what is even MORE frustrating? To see an impotent Offense...unimaginative, lacking in production and boring. IMO, Tyrod shoulders much of the blame, but so does the Coaching staff. And I know they have to get more than just a year or even two, I keep getting older and more of the same bullsh*t keeps being cycled onto the field. I'm sick of it....