transplantbillsfan

#1- Look at what happened to Marcus Mariota today #2- The line hasn't been improving throughout the whole year, mainly the last couple weeks. They were willing to put him out there because their jobs wouldn't have survived keeping Peterman in for the whole season. #3- Again, look at ALL of their actions leading up to the season. They didn't want Allen to start right away. Even Beane acknowledged publicly he mismanaged the QB position. #4- I don't entirely disagree. I think you believe I want Allen to sit the rest of the year. Look at my very first post in this thread. #5- You're right. One more loss and we're completely eliminated. Whoever plays QB when we get that loss will wind up shouldering a ton of blame; as the old adage that "QBs get too much credit and too much blame" goes. And I doubt Kyle and Lorax were convinced to come back for one more season in order to lose games and help a young QB grow. And then there's the ever-moody Shady. Those are 3 guys McDermott considers as part of his "leadership counsel" or whatever.

No sources, just logic, and an understanding of cognitive development based on professional research and the experience of 15+ years of experience working with teens and young adults 7 or 8 hours a day every day of the week. That's why I prefaced what I said with "probably," which you conveniently left out. At some point in the very near future, absolutely. Might be this week. Might not be. Got things to ponder... maybe the most relevant and important thing is what happened today to another QB

I think you're being naive if you don't think McDermott is heavily weighing all options and considering reasons for them here.

What part of what I said do you not understand? What % of an NFL stadium nowadays would you say consists of fans with sense? Why are you turning green?

No, it's not our most likely shot at the playoffs. We're now 2 losses worse than the teams holding the #6 seed. We're 4 losses worse than the Patriots, who I believe have the 2nd easiest remaining schedule.

Very nice gesture.

Yes, we can beat them. Don't know if we will, but we can.

If I oversold it, you’re underselling it. Barkley had that performance with just 10 days on the team... that’s pretty damn impressive. 2 TDs (3 of his passes actually resulted in TDS), 0 turnovers, 9+ YPA, 232 yards passing all in 3 quarters of play. No, I actually don’t think I oversold that now that I think of it considering the circumstances—that was a great performance.

And I hope Mariota’s reinjuring of the same elbow today that he ALSO injured early this season with a UCL injury gives McDermott some pause before just throwing Allen back in.

#1- The UCL injury is worrisome to me. It's not a common injury for QBs. It's a common injury for pitchers. And Allen was a pitcher. If the doctor's say it's 100% healed and no further risk of injury, this no longer concerns me. #2- Connected with #1, our OL has been a lot worse this year than I thought they'd be. Allen was the most sacked QB in the NFL for a time there. It's part of why he got injured. There's been some improvements lately, but I think they need more time to gel. #3- Connected with #2 and #1, while I wanted Allen to be named the starter all Summer, as I've already said, it was more because of his competition than him. I think Allen is our Franchise QB, but I also think has a bit to learn in terms of pre and post snap reads and reacting quickly to them. I don't question his ability to do it. I question whether the talent around him on offense right now is most suitable for that portion of a rookie Web's learning curve. #4- Barkley did the pre and post snap reading last week and made quick decisions and did it successfully. Anderson might be a good mentor and might be able to preach those things, but he wasn't exactly successful in doing it, and there's something to be said for seeing it done well and up close. #5- Barkley had a great game last week. History tells us it was a fluke, but regardless, all of the players on the Buffalo Bills saw that game up front and personal. Allen better play well against the Jags because otherwise you risk losing some guys in the locker room. Remember, even though none of us fans really think the Bills are still in the playoff race, they technically are if they win out. And with the ease of the upcoming schedule, you better believe most of the Bills players are still thinking "hey, we still have a chance!!!" If the Bills play Barkley and lose, the players will pretty much get it because of the game he had against the Jets. If McDermott goes back to Allen and he underperforms and we lose, players might not publicly question McDermott, but they will be internally. There are other reasons... these are just some that I've already brought up, but see, it didn't boil down to gettin booed

I don't think Allen is mentally fragile. Look at my track record posting about him. That's one of the reasons I grew to like him. But facts are facts. Once you start Allen, you can't bench him until you suspect he's a bust. You weren't around since you're new to this Bills fan thing, but we've seen a bad mishandling of a 1st round rookie QB in Buffalo recently. If you start Allen and he absolutely sucks, all you can do is hope he can shake off rust and rise to the occasion. Barkley could afford another week or two or 3 of growing and adapting and developing. And for the record, I don't think Allen is going to suck when he plays. And I don't think he has sucked. Then again, I didn't think we'd get absolutely demolished by the Colts or the Mack-less Bears at home. It's riskier starting Allen next week. Maybe not a huge risk, but definitely riskier. No need. Read my previous posts. Hell, you don't have to go back further than less than a week ago... some of which I've said in this thread. Why do I have to restate something I've already stated?

I absolutely acknowledge that I thought Allen should have been named the starter immediately, but it was purely because of MY OWN feelings that McCarron and Peterman were utterly inferior competition. But just because I was right, I don't then also think that McDermott and Beane also felt the same way. They couldn't see the forest for the trees. McDermott started Peterman because he thought he was better than Allen and because he thought he gave the 2018 Buffalo Bills the best chance to win. He was a complete moron for thinking that, of course. But he thought it, nonetheless. Oh boy.

See, here's what you're not getting... playing Allen at home is riskier than playing him on the road. On the road, they always boo the opposition. At home, when fans boo, it's a true test of a player's mettle because you know you're playing terribly. It's a fact of human physiology that your brain isn't fully developed until you reach 23. It's probably the biggest underlying reason that people make the argument that rookies should sit and learn. 80,000 jeering fans can maybe push you over the edge at such a young, impressionable age when you're so used to being the Apple of everyone's eye, as most of these NFL starting QBs are. Barkley starting at home--potentially sucking and getting booed at followed by Allen starting on the road in Miami with everyone automatically booing--is less of a risk than Allen getting his 1st start in a month and a half and possibly shaking off some rust against a great defense. Fans will boo terrible play, no matter who's under center. Do you watch games on mute?

Wait... so you're an Allen fan, not a Bills fan? So basically, you believe that McDermott and Beane simultaneously and purposefully sabotaged the beginning of our season on purpose in order to get Allen in without resistance? Okay, now I guess if Allen doesn't play I will have to pay attention to whether McDermott uses the word "setback" or alludes to one.

I get it just fine. You're saying Allen is definitely starting next Sunday. I'm saying that's still in doubt. Actions will speak louder than words, so let's see what happens in the upcoming week.

You're seriously giving them the benefit of the doubt here. I think McDermott and Beane just grossly screwed up the QB situation outside of Allen.

See my comments above. Clearly McDermott has no respect for the intelligence of the media or fans. What does belithey mean? Regardless, Allen hasn't exactly lit the world on fire so far, though he has certainly flashed and demonstrated poise and composure. I could really see this going either way. Who are you trying to convince?

They didn't want Allen to start this year. They wanted him to ride the pine and learn from the bench. Do you even dispute that? What McDermott and Beane screwed up on was their massive overestimation of Peterman and McCarron. Barkley could be viewed as an opportunity to hit the reset on Allen learning from the bench for a few more weeks. You're exactly right about the investment in Allen. That's why I won't be surprised with either of the 2 decisions McDermott might make.

What did McDermott say immediately after the Saints game last year? What happened the very next day? What did McDermott say about his confidence in Peterman on Monday? What happened hours later? I like McDermott. I don't trust what he says at all, and I don't know why you would. Actions speak louder than words, especially with this Head Coach.

I'll believe it when I see Allen start practicing fully on Monday. That report is from before Barkley's performance, so it's only relevant insofar as to say that Allen is pretty much healthy, or very close to it. But if Allen is truly 100% ready to go and McDermott has no doubts that Allen would be starting a week from tomorrow, on Monday he would have just said "We thank Matt for filling in, Josh will be our starter after they bye week." I want to see if Allen is still "limited" on Monday. If he is, him starting is very much in doubt.

I generally agree with you while understanding and being fine with the route of Allen starting. I still think Barkley is pretty likely to start against the Jags, anyway. Remember that McDermott said "if healthy." That elbow injury is a tricky and unique injury for a QB and I could absolutely see us erring on the side of caution... or even using the injury as an excuse for 1 more game for all the reasons you stated. But then what happens if Barkley lights it up 1 more week? He gets another week? And then another? And then another? And what happens if he has 3 really good games after the bye and 1 absolute stinker? Do we stick with him again? If so, what if he has another stinker? I like Barkley. I wanted to draft him out of college. But the simple fact is that we're too invested in Allen, so allowing Barkley to go out there and have a series of good to great games might be a bad idea for the simple reason that it's incredibly short-sighted--and it feels awkward for me to say that because I'm all about "best chance to win" and everything. We cut Peterman, so while perhaps Barkley is our best chance to win RIGHT NOW (and possibly not... gotta wonder the impact of the fact that the Jets preparation was entirely for Allen), trotting Allen onto the field won't give the appearance us us actively trying to lose the way it did with Peterman. And I think Allen's development happens best and quickest on the field, anyway. Stow Barkley away on the team as a long term backup ASAP. If Allen turns into a bust, give Barkley his shot then. Not now. There's almost no point in doing it now and it might even be detrimental to our efforts to retain him as a long term backup.

Nice recent example of a guy we were reportedly pursuing and couldn't get.

Wait... did you just say Taylor can't even be a proven backup?

Who knows? But we'd have more wins. We still have 6 games to go so maybe this is an interesting question to end the season. But it's very, very obvious that Beane and McDermott completely screwed the pooch on the QB position, and I'm sure if they could see the future and knew the offseason and beginning of this year would unfold the way it did, they would have kept Taylor. We have the 2nd most turnovers in the NFL. What did Taylor do well? This is a simple equation. Our passing game might not have been great, but we wouldn't have turned the ball over nearly as much as we have. And I can't find a statistic for "points off turnovers," but I'm sure we're right up there for that, too. I haven't even looked at anyone's posts in here, but I imagine people are saying things like, "are you crazy?!?! No, Taylor sucked! We'd still suck!" Those people, if they're saying anything resembling that, are naive. We might not be a playoff team with Taylor, but right now we'd sit at probably at least 1 or 2 more wins than we have, which would put us squarely in the playoff picture. And before anyone cites the Vikings game or Jets game saying Taylor never would have matched the offensive output we got in both of those games, notice the fact that our defense nearly pitched shut outs in both of those games. We still would have won both of those games with those performances with Taylor. Playoffs with Taylor? Maybe. At least we never would have seen the 13 combined turnovers from DA and Nathan Peterman that happened in the 5 total games the 2 of them played in, all of which were losses.

Yes, I realize most of those players listed are on D... it seems we've focused mostly on D in our drafts. Zay, Dawkins and Allen are the 3 offensive players we've drafted in the first 3 rounds over the last 2 years vs. White, Edmunds and Phillips this year. All of those players have showed promise, at least, up to this point. You can't talk about any of them looking like a bust right now. But what's been really impressive is the drafting of players in later rounds with guys like Milano, Taron Johnson, and Teller. That's 9 players who look like they will be starters for us for a good number of years. 9 players in 2 drafts is pretty impressive, along with the TBD guys like Ray Ray. Hitting a starter on better than 50% of your draft class over the span of 2 years is pretty impressive. But again, it all boils down to JA.