transplantbillsfan

Again, when did they say that? When did anyone say that, verbatim? If it were said, it would be in print. I guarantee it. Please find the date of the PC, which you are insinuating, I suppose, would have come when...??? After preseason game 3? ...After Peterman sucked in Baltimore??? Regardless, when you said: I would expect you could at least find a link to those completely "lyin-through-my-teeth-as-I-try-to-cover-my-tracks comments that must've come (if they came at all) after some of the utterly disgraceful QB play we had this season.

You're bluffing or not accurately remembering what was said or interpreting the way something was said to mean something that wasn't directly said. Sorry to put that so bluntly. You're a quality poster and I generally like your posting, but I followed those Summer PCs very closely and never heard or read any such comments. If they happened, you should easily be able to find a link because the media coverage by Joe B and Fairburn and such of comments like that would have been bananas.

7-9. I really wish I could be the optimist. But we don't beat the Patriots and we drop another... probably the Dolphins in Miami. Too bad McBeane screwed up the QB position so bad to start the season.

I completely agree with Thurm... awesome...

Still not understanding it I see.

1st team reps over the Summer with the WRs and OL he would be playing with in order to gain chemistry, obviously. And there's no telling what would've happened in that Baltimore game if Allen got the whole Summer. We were seriously behind and getting blown out largely because of Peterman. If Allen starts after getting most of the Summer reps, who knows? He came in and moved it well in the 2nd half of that game. As for the rest of the games, maybe Allen doesn't get hurt or we at least have a more capable QB behind him who won't actively lose us games the way Peterman and Anderson did.

Oh boy, so much of this is misguided, shortsighted, or just plain wrong. I responded to some of these points already, but what I said was not hindsight. If McDermott were truly evaluating Peterman during the preseason properly, he would have understood all those easy reads against those vanilla defenses and noticed SEVERAL dropped INTs by defenses on exactly the types of throws that demonstrate he should NEVER have been considered for the starting QB. Not hindsight because I (and many others) were saying that before TC even started. McCarron was the wrong guy to bring in if you wanted Allen on the bench. Also not hindsight. Also something I said back in OTAs. Allen sucked for one half in the preseason. Peterman looked good. Taylor sucked last year in preseason pretty much the whole time. Peterman looked a lot better. It was a bad move. It was the wrong move. Not all rookie 1st rounders start right away, but almost all of them do very early on in the 1st year because, much like McDermott, their Head Coaches realize they made a huge mistake not starting them.

Are you kidding? Have you watched the QB play of Anderson and Peterman. Baltimore Peterman couldn't get a SINGLE FIRST DOWN!!! Plus... turnovers. Texans our D was unbelievable and when Allen got hurt we were already in scoring position in a one score game. Instead, pick-Six-Peterman loses us the game. Colts our D was great to start the game for all the 1st quarter and most of the 2nd. Then a sluggish offense and plenty of turnovers. Bears game our D held their offense to less than 200 yards but... ya know, turnovers and defensive TDs. Plus, you forgot the Patriots game, where Buffalo held the Patriots offense to 13 points, but our offense couldn't move and also... ya know, turnovers and defensive TD. All of that is aside from the fact that if Allen or another capable QB were in there from the get go, we would have anywhere between 1-3 more wins and be right in the thick of the playoff race.

Yes, yes it is. McCarron sucked. Peterman was all smoke and mirrors. Unfortunately, McDermott got played a fool by all the smoke and mirrors. The smartest move would have been to cut Peterman in the offseason and bring in 2 vet QBs who have had legitimate NFL starting experience--more than just the 5 games of NfL experience. Actual, legitimate NFL QB competition would have been the best move. That never happened because McCarron and Peterman were NEVER it. That's why at the very latest, Allen should have been named the starter after the 1st preseason game. Ideally even earlier. That's not hindsight on my part. I said Allen would likely be the starter against Baltimore back during OTAs in May. I was obviously wrong, mainly because I didn't think our HC was a total idiot when it came to QB decisions... or at least I thought he wad the type of guy to learn from mistakes. Allen was physically superior, smart, a great leader, a hard worker, and even Beane kept refuting the national narrative that Allen was "too raw." And we traded up to #7 to get him so it's obvious McBeane thought very, very highly of him. Allen struggles in one game after progressively getting better throughout the whole offseason and--I would argue--being the best QB on the roster through those first 2 preseason games from an evaluative standpoint of the types of throws he was making, often under duress. I'm still pissed McDermott basically threw this season away because of blind, stupid faith in a player who he should have realized by the end of last season could NEVER be a starting NFL QB rather than making the obvious and inevitable choice--given the competition--early on in Training Camp to help Allen get more comfortable with the WRs and OL he would quickly be playing with. The answer is yes, Man the ***** up because you watched him play and develop throughout the whole Summer and first 2 preseason games. Relying on a single half of play in the 3rd preseason game to be THE determining factor in the QB decision in this case was absolutely stupid and cowardly.

Me too. Fascinating if true, but I think that was pure speculation. Waiting for @Alphadawg7 to provide a link.

When and where did they say that? Do you actually have a link? If that's true, I lost a little more respect for McDermott for not manning up early in training camp like he should have.

Tim Tebow, Colt McCoy, Matt Leinhart, Kellen Moore, RG3, Landry Jones, Andre Ware, Vince Young, Graham Harrell, Johnny Manziel, Bryce Petty, Sam Bradford, etc. Nuff said

Ummm... yah... how many turnovers with Peterman and Anderson in at QB?

How incomplete is that 6 pack? Are we talking one beer missing because he had a roadie on his way over to the party or 2 beers remaining on opposite sides to maintain balance while you carry it in?

So Milano is already out of concussion protocol? That's awesome news!!! I think our team MVP so far is between him, White, Hughes, and Haushka. Wait, so you can practice without a non-contact jersey in concussion protocol?

Allen has a much, much better chance of being a Franchise QB. Obviously.

Here's the thing: nothing long term is accomplished by starting Barkley for another game if Allen is 100% healthy. I assume, and sure do hope, that Allen risks no further injury. If that's the case, this is a mostly easy call. I say mostly, not entirely, because I stand by my belief that this move is a little riskier from the "now" perspective, knowing that this team still has an outside chance at the playoffs and that a single loss will eliminate us. Barkley would have been "safer," which is why I thought there was a decent chance he would start again. But I like this move by McDermott. It shows he has guts. Allen should have been named starter early in Training Camp. It still irritates me that he didn't and I think it cost us at least a couple of wins and stunted Allen's develpment a little. But now that he's seen the field, start him if he's fully healthy. If he absolutely sucks on Sunday, I'm betting there will be at least internal, but also probably external backlash against McDermott's decision to start him. I don't think that'll happen. I think Allen will look pretty good. In fact, I hope that what he said about "things were finally starting to slow down for me" back in the Houston game is true and this final 6 game stretch is one where we see him look like our QB of the future. Throw out whatever stats you want, but I think he's already looked a lot like a Franchise QB... just as a rookie. With an OL that got dramatically better against the Jets (thank you Teller!!!) and a WR corps that finally has some speed AND hands (except for the useless KB) and a seemingly revitalized Shady McCoy, I think we're going to be safe from falling into being one of the infamously worst offenses in the NFL. And I think Allen will lead us into an exciting offseason after getting this team to somewhere between 3-5 more wins. At this point, starting Barkley with a fully healthy Allen just doesn't accomplish anything other than driving up Barkley's asking price in the offseason. And don't you want Barkley back as our long term backup in case Allen gets injured or flops down the line? I do. But we invested waaaaaaayyyyy too much in Allen for him not to get a seriously long look. I don't think you can even talk about benching him until his 3rd season in the league. And despite what some others seem to be clamoring for--we absolutely will NOT be drafting a QB in the 1st or 2nd round this year. And I'm hoping we don't really need to until a very late round for a 3rd string developmental QB because we will have locked Barkley up long term as our backup, which we won't be able to do if Barkley plays a couple more games and plays really well.

Someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed. You said the playoff machine started yesterday. You were wrong and I corrected you and provided a link to prove it, as per CoC. Stop being such a baby.

Posted on Wednesday, page 4 of that thread. Looked like it was up from the previous week at the time, too. Thought about starting a thread, felt it was relevant in the "miracle playoff run" thread, though and decided not to add clutter.

If it just came up, why did I provide a link for it last week?

It's been up and active for a couple weeks now. I posted a link to a scenario of us getting in over in that "miracle playoff run" thread. Yesterday actually helped us. But I think the Colts get in.

Good stuff. That means he's gotta be fully healed. Can't wait for Sunday after that month and a half of a $h!+ show with the 1 week reprieve

Okay, just to clear things up, this was my very 1st post in this thread The primary reason Allen wouldn't start is because of worry about his injury. But Allen's injury risk is compounded by his inexperience, which so far this season has caused him to hold onto the football longer than he should and take more unnecessary hits than he should have. I want to see Allen play and get experience, but I don't want to see him get hurt. And I'm quite sure McDermott is very aware of that injury, as well. But if Barkley just sucked against the Jets, the pressure to put Allen in quickly would be even greater. This year has been one big experiment for the coach and GM at the QB position. Allen maybe could have played against the Jets, but the QB experiment continued with Barkley and, for the first time this season, it was successful. That, in conjunction with the injury, is, I'm sure, being weighed heavily here, despite what some here might think.

Right, which is the reason McDermott's "if healthy" add-on at the end of Monday's PC was noteworthy. Very true.

That doesn't mean it is fully healed or that he won't risk further injury. Allen is our future. His injury is to the same ligament that, if made worse, could require a surgery that would take more than a year to recover from. If he's listed as "full participant" tomorrow, I'll expect the team doctor's said there's absolutely no risk of making that injury worse. If that risk still exists, Allen will be limited and him starting in one week is very much rightfully in doubt.