HappyDays
-
Posts
26,606 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by HappyDays
-
-
I'm glad Tyrod is having a good offseason and leading the team. I hope he breaks the Browns playoff drought and looks great doing it, and that Josh Allen looks even better.
-
2
-
1
-
-
And that's the last play of Bills minicamp. I would love to see Allen pick up where he left off at training camp and win the starting job. Sounds like he was easily the most impressive QB today.
-
1
-
-
-
McDermott said the QB rotation will be the same when training camp begins, Peterman/McCarron rotating with the 1s and Allen with the 3s. Seems like it's a long shot for Allen to be named the starter for week 1, and there have been no indications that McCarron is outperforming Peterman. If anything the opposite has been true. Do people still think it's really unlikely that Peterman starts the year? I would say if anything he might now be the odds on favorite. Unless the open competition is just for show but I seriously doubt that.
-
-
Are people really interpreting this story to mean that the Ravens don't plan on having him play QB? That is definitely not the case. They're stuck with Flacco's salary for another 2 years and they're grooming Jackson to take over. In the meantime they'll use his athleticism any way they can.
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:
Three reasons. He is 1) rewarding Nate in front of his teammates to show what doing all the rights things (training, film work, being great guy/citizen/teammate will get you, 2) combined with having Josh beat out both guys right in front of his teammates for a legitimate winning of the job versus just having handed it to him, and 3) showing Josh just the right way to do things to be a pro, which Nate does. Nate is a great guy and teammate and has a lot of stuff going for him to make a great NFL quarterback, he just also has a couple of killer deficiencies that prevent him from even being a legitimate one.
4 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:I just answered this above.
Once again, there is no depth chart and they are moving all kinds of guys in and out of first team reps, especially YOUNG guys to get them reps and experience in how they practice, study, learn the playbook, etc prior to going into training camp and preseason. This time of year is not about establishing depth charts.
But this is clearly not true for every position. Edmunds is already the starter at MLB. They are not pretending he is competing with Vallejo. McDermott said at his press conference yesterday they have the depth chart written "in pencil." They already have an idea of who the starters will be but they're obviously still testing out positions where they don't know for sure. They will name the starter during training camp, he said as much in the press conference. They wouldn't be wasting 1st team reps on Peterman if it was already decided that he wouldn't be the starter. They didn't give him 1st team reps last year when Tyrod was already the presumed starter. I know you guys have already made up your mind on Peterman, which is fine, but don't assume McDermott has.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:
Looking good in shorts is meaningless this time of year.
So here's my question to anyone who has said this - how are the coaches deciding who the starter will be if these practices are meaningless? If it is obvious that Peterman can't play from last year's games, why is he being given significant time with the 1st team offense? Clearly the coaches believe you can evaluate the QBs right now. Clearly Peterman is still in the running to be the starter, right?
-
Credit to McDermott for pushing Shaq and not gifting him the starting role. In the Whaley/Rex years spots weren't earned. If they were still around, the excuse would be that Shaq is a former 1st rounder entering his 3rd year and he would be expected to start. Instead McDermott and Beane worked to bring in legitimate competition and they have him running with the 2s. By all accounts this has pushed him to be better. That's the kind of culture change we've needed for 20 years.
-
20 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
I don’t disagree that everything was with an eye to the future. They were still 5-4 at that point and it was a “winnable game” on paper (at least at that point). 9 weeks in the Bills were right in the middle of the playoff conversation.
We were 4-2 when we traded Dareus and our run defense at that time was 4th in YPC. McDermott made every decision last year without worrying about its immediate impact on wins, and I commend him for it. So I can excuse his decision to start Peterman because all he really needed to know in that moment was if Dennison was worth keeping around, and if Peterman could show a flash of starter material.
-
2
-
-
18 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:
Maybe he acted impulsively in giving Dennison what he wanted (and I talked about Dennison and coaching scheme arrogance as far back as last August when debating whether Yates would make the squad) but he also acted as a man who had realised by that point that Tyrod could never be the guy.
Yeah I've gone back and forth with myself on whether that was a good decision or not. I went into last season with zero expectations of making the playoffs. We were building for the future more than the present. They decided Tyrod wasn't the future so they moved on. I get it. I am pretty sure they would have stuck with Peterman for the year if the Chargers game hadn't been a total disaster. But by the same token there is a reason Peterman is still on the team and practicing with the starters. McDermott still sees a possible future with him, so the people who have been saying he has no chance to start aren't really paying attention IMO.
19 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:I don’t think that the plan was ever to marry Tyrod. Peterman in the playoff hunt though was never going to give them a better chance to win
Very few of our personnel decisions last year were about immediately securing more wins. I think McDermott was as surprised as anyone that we made the playoffs last year.
-
24 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
They aren’t cutting McCarron. If anything, he gets traded.
I could see that. If we could get a 7th for Cassel we could get something for McCarron too. If we traded him that would save us $1 million in cap space this year and $5 million next year. By all accounts none of the QBs have been outright bad so far. So it is conceivable that we trade McCarron and start Peterman until Allen is ready to take over. I am not suggesting that Peterman has a good shot of turning into our franchise QB, merely that he has a good shot of beating out McCarron for the bridge starter/future backup. That would be the best possible scenario.
-
2
-
-
5 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
I’m assuming that I am one of those posters that you are referring to? Yes, I have made up my mind that he will never be a good NFL QB. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong but I’ve seen enough to believe that I will be right. I hope he turns into Aaron Rodgers. I just don’t see it. I don’t care to be right. I care that the Bills win.
You may have made up your mind on him but McDermott hasn't. And that's really what this discussion is about. They're going to name the starter during training camp, this isn't a redux of the Tyrod/EJ/Cassel competition that went until the end of preseason. The fact that Peterman is still taking first team reps means he is very much in contention. I would wager he and McCarron have an equal chance to be the starter, and that their cumulative chances are better than Allen's. If we're only keeping 2 QBs and McCarron doesn't definitively separate himself from Peterman I don't see how he makes the team.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:
The ones who benched him after 30 mins and admitted to the team it was an error to start him?
They fired Dennison at least in part because of that decision, and they brought Peterman back to compete for the starting position. Whatever everyone thinks of Peterman we should all be able to agree that he has a legitimate chance of starting this season. That chance may be very small, although I'm starting to wonder if his chances are really any worse than McCarron's.
McDermott isn't the type to waste time. When he knows something doesn't work he moves on right away. Look at all the trades he made, look how quickly he fired his OC, look how quickly he gave Tyrod's backup a chance and how quickly he went back to Tyrod. If he didn't have some level of trust in Peterman he certainly wouldn't be wasting time giving him 1st team reps. He more likely would have outright cut him.
McDermott said today he wants to have the starting QB declared by training camp or during training camp. Allen has taken less than 5 total reps with the 1st team offense so I personally don't see him being named the starter that quickly - they're bringing him along slowly, as they should. That leaves McCarron and Peterman as the potential starters and there's no reason to think that competition is just for show.-
4
-
-
8 minutes ago, Luxy312 said:
No. If we had cut him pre June 1, the hit would have been $2m to this year's cap. Cutting him now would be $2m in dead cap to next year. It's not saved. Read the damned contract! 2-year contract with $4m bonus. Bonus prorated over 2 years.
Click the red X under the scissors for the year 2018. It very clearly says for a post 6/1 release we would save $200,000 in 2018 cap. And a $2 million dead cap hit in 2019 instead of the $7 million cap hit we would have if we kept him.
Not sure what you're misreading but you are mistaken. The 2018 cap hit isn't the important part anyways. $5 million in 2019 could go a long way. It is incredibly obvious that Peterman is the preferable backup if he shows he can perform.
-
19 minutes ago, Luxy312 said:
Cutting McCarron would result in $2m ADDITIONAL cap hit, not savings. Cutting Peterman would save $400K.
This isn't right:
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/a.j.-mccarron-14575/
If we cut McCarron now we save $200,000 in cap space this year. More importantly we save $5 million on next year's cap. Why would we keep McCarron over Peterman if he isn't clearly better?
-
-
Like I've said before if Peterman proves he's at least as good as McCarron we can cut McCarron to save the cap space.
-
What do you know, Peterman showing some improvement in his sophomore season.
-
Apparently Allen looked quite good in his first set with the 1s. That's certainly encouraging.
-
Foster doesn't seem like any old UFDA. He's been taking 1st team reps pretty consistently. I don't think that was true of former UDFA training camp stars. I'm starting to think he's a lock to make the team.
-
1
-
-
-
You know it's the offseason when someone is talking up Cardale Jones
-
2
-
-
Kelvin Benjamin looking good ... where does he rank among AFCE WRs?
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
For rookie Josh Allen I'd take Kelvin Benjamin over all of them. His catch radius will be more important than anything the other receivers bring to the table.For rookie Josh Allen I'd take Kelvin Benjamin over all of them. His catch radius will be more important than anything the other receivers bring to the table. Although I voted for Edelman because he is probably the most dependable receiver on the field.