BisonMan

Peterman has to be feeling good right now about the competition. ?

Zay Jones citing!

McCarron not reacting well. Holding the ball too long.

Typical Tyrod. Third and long and can’t hit an open receiver. Late throw 10 yards over Landry. Still hurts to watch him even on Cleveland.

McCarron looks like garbage. Panicked throw on 3rd down there. No pressure and he lofts one over the wheel route receiver, nearly getting him killed on the stretch in double coverage. Bring in Allen now. EdW

Brady doesn’t have a skeleton, which is why he never gets injured. He’s “Gumby, dammit!”.

One of my favorite Bills of all time. RIP Bobby C. Loved seeing him win a SB with the Raiders.

This is the correct way to look at this problem. Success isn’t random and is obviously slanted toward pro scouts evaluations. Looking at at pure success rates out of context would tell you batting .300 is terrible in baseball. Yet that’s the best players. The worst bat in the low .200s.

Remember, this is supposed to be guys you thought were great signings but turned out bad. This isn’t a list of the worst, just the ones you loved at signing. i forgot about Stroud. I liked that at the time too. I don’t think was as big a bust for me as Dockery.

Which Bills free agent pickup that you loved to turned out to be a flop? Mine is Dockery. I thought the line really needed help and he was part of the answer. Man, he was a bust. ?

Interesting Notables under 55: Deshaun Watson - 45 Nate Peterman - 49 Dak Prescott- 54 Mitch Trubisky - 51 AJ McCarron - 53 It seems a bunch of starters are right around 55, including Wentz, Mahomes, Winston and Mariota. The number appears arbitrary to me and may not be applicable in game conditions. Peterman’s ball seems a lot slower to me in game situations than Watson’s but he was 4mph faster at the combine. EdW

Not sure what one has to do with the other. One article is about the scientific basis of medical claims and the other is about a prediction model. However, odds are just a statistical likelihood. I've won/lost many a poker hand where one of us had 3-1 odds. 538 has been pretty good and transparent about their models. They were one of the few sites that openly discussed the inaccuracy in many state polls and gave Trump higher odds of winning than other prediction sites. By comparison, they gave Obama over a 90% chance of winning and their "likeliest" outcome model picked the exact electoral vote (which I used to win a pool bet!).

Great article on the pseudoscience that BRADY pushes to his sucker fans: Tom Brady Is Drowning In His Own Pseudoscience - FiveThirtyEight https://apple.news/AIT1CprDZPL-ZezRloMxoAQ Enjoy. EdW

I don't believe there is any type of "conspiracy" in the NFL to favor the Patriots or any other team. By definition, a conspiracy involves a number of people secretly agreeing on a course of action to benefit themselves or others. To this point, there is zero evidence of such a relationship in the NFL. People weave selected facts together to see a conspiracy where none likely exists. Can individuals be corrupted by money? Yes, as we’ve already seen with a few NBA refs, pro tennis players and the Black Sox. Typically, this involves gambling and organized crime. If there was strong evidence that a widespread conspiracy was favoring one team over another outside of organized crime, NFL owners would have a bigger problem. Everyone involved would wake up with a horse’s head in their bed because they’d be cheating so many shady characters, who make their living on book operations. Some here have pointed out that calls by refs (or replay officials) are biased toward the Patriots, or specific players (Brady, Brees, etc.). If there is a bias (it's likely because refs are human), it's subconscious. The Cam Newton example is telling. I would guess a number of “lesser” QBs don’t get the same calls as Brady, Rogers, etc. There is no directive to do so, it’s just unconscious bias at work. A can recommend a great book on this subject. “Scorecasting” by Tobias Moskowitz and L. Jon Wertheim is an excellent book on how hidden biases affect decision-making in sports. They looked a data from a variety of sports an analyzed how refs, coaches, players, etc. made “irrational” decisions because of influences outside the games. Coaches don’t go for it on 4th down even though doing so would increase their odds of winning a game. Baseball umpires change the size of the strike zone depending on the count (at 3-0 the zone gets bigger, at 0-2 the zone gets smaller). Refs give more subjective calls (i.e. holding, PI) to the home team in all sports likely because of fan bias. Statistically, this is really bad in the NBA. Success of teams like the Patriots, Steelers, Packers, etc. are more likely caused by better team management, coaching and having a star QB than by any conspiracy that might exist in the league. As many have pointed out here, if it’s obvious to casual fans (TBD denizens), you can bet the hyper-competitive ownership of the other teams would raise holy hell in order to stop it. There is just too much money and ego on the line for them to passively let this type of thing go by. Someone pointed out that owners would just be happy because they are already making so much money. Tell that to the members of Congress that just passed a huge tax cut for the wealthiest Americans under the threat of having their campaign contributions curtailed by rich donors. The uber-wealthy can never have enough. That’s how they keep score. EdW

We'll have to release him. His contract for next year is waaaay to high for a backup or marginal starter in this league. I think his salary with roster and signing bonus remaining is ~$17M. Nobody will take his contract and give the Bills a draft pick. Anybody could sign him for less than that once he becomes a UFA.

Best wishes to RS with his injury and his life. He'll have the best care in the world and I hope he makes a full recovery. We notice him as fans of the sport but playing in the NFL is not near the top of most dangerous jobs but pays extremely well. I don't hear anyone bemoaning the fate of loggers, pilots, fisherman, iron workers, truckers or any of the other most dangerous jobs in America. About 5,000 workers die each year from job related accidents. None of them are NFL players (until we count CTE). None of these have the health or pension benefits of NFL players. None have the earning potential of NFL players. NFL players earn high incomes for playing a dangerous sport but mostly because it draws in a lot of fans. Logging is a hell of a lot more dangerous but nobody pays to watch them so they are injured and die without fanfare. I'm not trying to minimize Shazier's injury or situation, just trying to put it in context. Oddly, Shazier's life may be better in 20 years if he's forced to retire than it might be if he continues playing because of the dangers of CTE.

Peterman it is. I can't see how starting Taylor accomplishes any of the goals set forth by the team's leadership. If the goal is to win a championship at some point, we know it won't be with Taylor. I'd love to see what Peterman can do with a small amount of line protection. The line play against the Chargers was a joke.

Any coach, GM or owner that makes decisions about player personnel based on a "PR problem" deserves to be run out of the league. Some of the worst decisions in the last decade have been made by owners doing exactly that. I live in the DC region and Snyder (until a couple of years ago) constantly played "fan boy" with the roster to bring in players (and even coaches) that he was enamored with. It was a miserable failure. PR doesn't win championships. Worrying about PR definitely doesn't. If there is something in McD or Bean's actions that lead you to believe they give a crap about PR, let me know. So far, I've seen the opposite. The current owner, GM and coach had nothing to do with the last 17+ years. I seriously doubt they think much about that in any decision. EdW

The trouble with wild conspiracy theories is that you can never prove them wrong and are rarely based on actual evidence. In this case, Vic is telling us what's in the minds of the coaching staff, GM and owner. Guess what, they'd never tell you that. You can spin endless conspiracy theories around this move including racism, as I've heard on at least two outlets in the past few days. A few things we can infer are backed up by actual evidence: Tyrod Taylor was forced to renegotiate his contract if he wanted to stay with the Bills and either wasn't offered more money elsewhere (likely) or chose to stay knowing the new offensive scheme was coming. So, he isn't "under paid" by economic standards. Based solely on his contract, the Bills had no intention of keeping Taylor next year unless, by NFL market standards, his play this year would make him worth the $16M in his 2018 roster bonus and salary. He has obviously not excelled in this offense to make him worth that much next year. The Bills have stock-piled picks in 2018. They did this before having a full understanding of how their QBs would play in games or in practice. The likely reason for this is that the team feels it needs a new QB. Rarely do you see successful teams bundle picks to move up to pick another position (see Sammy Watkins). The most exposure to the play of Nate Peterman has been to the coaching staff during practices. Pre-season and mop up duty this year is not what determined their confidence in him. His performance in practice has likely led this staff to determine that he is a better option down the stretch. The team obviously would like to see what they have in Peterman with real bullets flying prior to the draft. How many games does this take? Likely more than three or four. The coach stated openly that this move is a risk. Why take a risk? Because you think that the current path does not lead to success, either in the short run, the long run, or both. It's a bit ironic that one likely reason Taylor is being benched is because he is so risk averse, even in situations where taking a risk is the only chance to succeed. The offensive scheme the Bills chose (WC variant?) is mainstream in the NFL. The former non-standard offense has had limited success in the league (one SB appearance with SF/Kap?). It has not been repeated. This creates a roster that is highly specialized and inflexible. The rules in the NFL favor passing offenses and instituting a "run first, run second, run third" scheme is swimming upstream. Making the playoffs, while important, is not the goal of the organization as stated several times by McD. Winning a championship is. The staff has shown no reticence to make controversial moves to improve the team in the long-run. The idea of replacing a QB that plays well enough to get you to the playoffs but not a SB is not controversial. That would be an easy move compared to trading away Sammy or dumping Darius for a 6th round pick. EdW

Wait, I'm supposed to have two?

I agree that Eli was already tapped to be the future in NY. However, he wasn't supposed to start in 2004 as he was supposed to sit and learn behind Warner. Warner had a horrible start which led to accelerating Eli into the starting role. I'm not sure that the Bills believed that Peterman was the "future" but they have always been (or seemed to be) high on Peterman. It's also obvious from Tyrod's contract that they had no intention of paying him $16M next week given his typical production. Tyrod was always going to be history in Buffalo unless his game completely changed this year...an unlikely scenario. RE: "best possible situation...hoping for 6-10" I don't believe that the "best possible situation" has a goal of just one more win this season. Best possible is that he steps up to the challenge and they take games from LA, MIA (2), INDY and finish with a 9-7...sneaking into the playoffs in a weak AFC.

I pointed that out in the OP. If a #1 overall failed that miserably, what can we expect of a 5th rounder?

Kudos to The NFL Network for pointing today out that the last 5-4 team in a playoff hunt to replace their QB with a rookie was the Giants with Eli Manning replacing Kurt Warner (2004). Sure enough, they have Warner on the show to talk about it. Warner pointed out that that Giants team wasn't very good and "not a playoff team" and switching to the #1 pick at QB was an acknowledgement of the future (sound familiar?). Of course, Warner didn't point out that he was having the worst year of his career with 6 TDs, 4 INTs and a whopping 39 sacks (in 9 games!). He also had one of his lowest YPG of his career. Everyone assumed he was washed up after the 2 injury filled seasons before that. As it turns out, the offense wasn't aligned with his skills (see: Tyrod Taylor) and moving to AZ revived his career. Eli was horrible as his replacement with 6 TDs, 9 INTs and just 115 YPG. Let's hope Peterman is no Eli Manning...as a rookie.

Also, kudos to The NFL Network for pointing out that the last 5-4 team in a playoff position to replace their QB was the Giants with Eli Manning replacing Kurt Warner. Sure enough, they have Warner on the show to talk about it. Warner pointed out that that Giants team wasn't very good and "not a playoff team" and switching to the #1 pick at QB was an acknowledgement of the future. Of course, Warner didn't point out that he was having the worst year of his career with 6 TDs, 4 INTs and a whopping 39 sacks (in 9 games!). He also had one of his lowest YPG of his career. Eli was horrible as his replacement, however. 6 TDs, 9 INTs and just 115 YPG. Let's hope Peterman is no Eli Manning as a rookie.