transplantbillsfan

Come on guys, the reason this isn't a no-brainer is obvious. 2 months ago McDermott and Beane seemed to be going into the season believing (stupidly) that Allen would benefit from being the backup QB and learning on the bench while another QB led the team. Their foolishness stemmed from thinking Nate Peterman could be that other QB. Then they had to insert Allen. They were absolutely forced to. Then Allen got hurt and after a quick reminder of the ongoing Peterman mistake, Anderson became the starter. And if Anderson were playing like Barkley did yesterday, it's like hitting the reset button on the start of the season. He sucked too and we lost a string of games. Then Matt Barkley comes in and has the best QB performance this football team has seen since Taylor against Miami on Christmas Eve in 2016. And our offense is utterly dominant against a decent defense. I saw a graphic flash that we had the 3rd best offensive output for a half in team history. That's amazing. This team is 3-7. We suck. We aren't making the playoffs, yet we are mathematically still in it. You can't make a move for the sake of development. You MUST make a move according to what helps your team win. And McDermott will make his next decision according to that, and that alone (along with the health of Allen's elbow) because it's obvious that's what he cares about. And he could go either way, but the simple truth is that Barkley-until-he loses is the easier choice. Personally, I think benching Barkley after that game would take guts, and I don't know if McDermott has the guts to do it. After all, he didn't have the guts to name Allen the starter over the Summer when it was obviously the right move.

Saw him on First Take this morning. Pretty hilarious how pissed he is. Also pretty much par for the course that Buffalo gets no credit.

Super close for me and I'm fine either way, but I think it's 51% chance Barkley starts over 49% Allen. Hard to justify benching Barkley after that game to the team and you can use the excuse of getting Allen fully healthy for one more game. And truthfully, maybe the UCL injury could use the rest.

If Barkley sucked today, I would have put Allen starting after the bye at 99%. Now it's 49% Allen vs 51% Barkley. Sorry, but I think Barkley could very easily be the hot hand McBeane so desired at the beginning of the year to let Allen ride the pine and learn while another QB helps the team win some games. And honestly, McDermott would have more to justify to his hard working players if he benches the guy who just had the best QB performance this team may have had in the last 2 years for Allen. Allen's the future, obviously. But I think maybe you ride the hot hand until you have 8 losses on the season.

You're exaggerating. You could easily still sell starting Barkley. But the moment we lose 1 more game you can't anymore. So it's a question of where McBeane thinks Allen's development is served best: on the field or on the bench... and the answer there isn't obvious.

Agreed.

This play is exactly why I'm perfectly fine if Benjamin is cut tomorrow.

I don't think it's an easy decision, but I can honestly say I'll be excited and perfectly fine with either of the 2 decisions McDermott has in front of him. Remember, it's obvious the Bills wanted Allen to sit this year. What they bungled was who they brought in at QB to start while Allen sat on the bench. What I think happens is Barkley starts until we lose and Allen's injury is used as the excuse. But I'm happy either way.

I actually don't know. This will be an interesting decision for McDermott. The only thing that absolutely must happen is Peterman must be cut.

You mean they haven't already released him?

You do? What's your previous username? And I'm sorry, but nothing I said about Peterman's preseason was wrong. Be enamored with preseason stats all you want. For QBs, those don't matter much--see 2015 And Jeff Tuel in 2013. What matters is what TYPES of throws they're making, whether they're going through progressions, pocket presence in the face of pressure, etc. Peterman was, at best, an Incomplete on all those important things in the preseason.

Not at all. He threw at MINIMUM one pass that should have been picked off in every one of those games. They were all those out patterns he's too weak-armed to throw. It happened. And all his great stats were the result of incredibly vanilla offense with easy passes vs incredibly vanilla defense. He never should have started this year and he wouldn't have if we had a coach who wasn't enamored by stats.

Aww puddin, I'm so flattered. FTR... it was start Allen if he's healthy enough and doesn't risk making his injury worse. If not, anybody but Peterman. Got my wish

350 yards 3 TDs 1 INT

No, Peterman was still Peterman even in preseason. The difference was that DBs dropped obvious interceptions and pick-6s.

Hurt again??? Bro, Allen's fine. He'll be back after the bye. McDermott is just being overly cautious since we have the benefit of a bye week after this game. Aren't you the guy who said McDermott should be fired if he starts Allen tomorrow. Well, he's not starting him and now you're crying Allen got hurt again??? You must just light up rooms with charm and cheer every time you walk in.

Mine too

How could Barkley be worse than Peterman? A blind quadriplegic would be better than Peterman

Smart to ignore me here Nate's gonna be cut over the bye week

Yeah, who's a better option than Peterman, but still a terrible choice.

About my guess, too, though I'd put it at more like 58%, 40% and 2%. McDermott's comments this week tell me he's pretty much done with Peterman.

No. You're wrong. But if he EVER starts Peterman again, the likelihood he gets fired dramatically increases.

I do too, but I admit last week I left the bar where I was watching early in the 4th quarter and would have left earlier if I wasn't waiting waiting for a takeout order for my wife. Every time Peterman takes the field, it's another step backwards this team takes.

This isn't necessarily about Ws and Ls--though I think if Allen had the whole Summer with the 1s, we have at least 1 or 2 more wins, which puts us back in playoff contention in the crappy AFC--but is instead about allowing your Franchise QB to get comfortable in the system and with the guys he's playing with during the season in order to further his development and perhaps even minimize risk of something like an injury that might take him out of a few games.

But would anyone on that list have been good enough to hold onto the QB reins for the season and stave of any serious pressure to put Allen in once that QB struggles? Guys like Allen, Darnold, Mayfield, Rosen, Goff, Wentz, etc. who are very clearly drafted in the top 10 with the expectations of being the Franchise QB for the next decade + will start much sooner rather than later UNLESS there's a vet in front of him who's not merely adequate, but good. That's why Mahomes with the Chiefs is the exception, not the rule. Although if the Jets made the decision early on to go with Bridgewater once they knew he was healthy, they could have followed suit. Our QB competition was a farce the moment Peterman was even allowed to be a legitimate part of the competition. I just wish McDermott had the guts to call the inevitable early on so that Allen could have maybe built up a little bit more chemistry and communication with our crappy WRs and OL.