transplantbillsfan

Still chuckling at your comprehension of the word "ignore"

All I have to do is lock the poll by adding today as the date the poll should be closed. I figured I'd make the date the day before the game, September 8th. No need to lock the thread. It's still pretty much a guessing game... why lock the poll? I'm not changing my original vote... people can, though.

So the narrative very widely held here seems to be that for those who believe Peterman will start the season, Allen will take over in week 4 or 5 or thereabouts. Which begs the question: why does Allen take over in week 4 or 5? Is it because he's ready in week 4 or week 5 even though he wasn't in week 1? OR Is it because Peterman just sucked that much in weeks 1-4 that Allen obviously had to be thrust in? Th first question seems, to me, an obvious no. If Allen isn't ready now, one month isn't going to suddenly make him magically ready to take the reins. So that leaves us with Peterman sucking for the first month. And I think most here saying Allen will start by week 4 or 5 but won't start the season believe it will largely because Peterman isn't playing well and the team is losing. Well, if average joe message board guy knows that's the reason, don't you think the coaches at One Bills Drive know that, as well? And if the coaches know that Peterman will force their hands in a month or so because of poor play--and I'm sorry, call this a leap but I think McDermott and Co. understand that teams don't scheme for players in the preseason, which was a massive part of Peterman's preseason success and that he is probably SIGNIFICANTLY easier to scheme for than Allen is--why do you really think the coaches would choose to keep Allen on the bench if they're going to play him anyway in a month? If Nate is terrible in week 1 against Baltimore, McDermott is going to look foolish on a national scale again. At least you have some wiggle room if Allen has a bad game in Baltimore since he's a rookie. I just think the more time this takes to announce the more likely it's Allen. If the Bills hold back the announcement until Baltimore and Allen goes out as the starter, no matter what the outcome, people across the nation will understand the move to hold back the announcement. If Peterman trots out there and if he has a bad game, McDermott is going to (I think rightfully) be pretty seriously criticized in a number of ways.

TheFunPolice would have to arrest you for missing such obvious sarcasm

About where I sit, but I still lean a little towards it still being Allen. There's more of a reason to continue this cat and mouse game for Allen than there is for Peterman. Sounds like McDermott truly doesn't know yet. But also sounds like it'll end up being Peterman. Interesting that Lorax genuinely seems to not know.

Peterman might start, but every single sentence in this post is sheer and utter crap. That's the game I'm going to this year. I'd be happy with that

I seriously doubt AJ is actually being considered at this point. Last night was one of those showcase games McBeane's hoping garners them a 5th-7th round draft pick. Doubt it

Inevitable??? Yet, he hasn't been named the starter and the last time he actually saw the field with the 1st team offense was against the Panthers. And I just know you wouldn't vomit that his stats were SooOOooo much better so he earned it over anyone else because have some football knowledge and understand that preseason stats are meaningless because coaches are looking at film after the games most importantly to examine what happened.

I get it. I also think that thought process is one that largely resigns us to sucking this year and I don't think McDermott is resigned to sucking. I think he wants to win now while building for the future just like he's been saying. And I don't think he would've been able to get Kyle or Lorax back if it were different. So, while I agree Peterman very much could be the starter in Baltimore, he's going to be on a short leash. If Allen is the starter, that leash will be a mile longer.

I just think there's more to this preseason than Peterman's production. Don't you get the sense that it's manufactured production? https://www.instagram.com/p/Bm_hoi3hzI7/ McDermott admitted Daboll showed too much on offense vs the Panthers, thus severely holding the offense back, since then, making it difficult to grade the other QBs. I don't think anyone has a clue at this point, but I'll stick with my original prediction that Allen is our starting QB week 1. I think that last preseason game shuffling OL in and out was as much a test as anything else. Allen definitely didn't produce the way he had the previous 2 games, but he also protected the football... something McDermott clearly values considering he gave Picked-off-again Peterman just a half before recommitting to Taylor as the starter last year. I think McDermott simply can't ignore the pick-six per game that Peterman is solely because of his weak arm. I think that there's a good chance that this preseason was as much about building up Peterman's confidence again after his abysmal start in his limited regular season action as it was about seeing if Allen is ready to start yet. After all, backup QBs might need to play, and if they do, you'll prefer they don't throw 5 INTs in a half. Both of those missions look like they're about accomplished.

We're going right up to the wire folks and even the coach doesn't know... (even if he obviously knows)

but... a clue??? https://twitter.com/JoeBuscaglia/status/1035304350762127360 Joe Buscaglia ✔@JoeBuscaglia In warmups, #Bills QB Nathan Peterman is working with presumed starting center Ryan Groy, Josh Allen with Russell Bodine, and AJ McCarron with third-string Adam Redmond. More evidence that it’s the AJ show tonight. Also, fair to note the Peterman/Groy pairing. 1:12 PM - Aug 30, 2018

Welp… this keeps up the mystery of who starts against the Ravens pretty well

I think Buffalo Fanatics posted something on Instagram about how McDermott ruined Allen's 1st start and the question was why. Some of the reasoning: - That non challenge on the obvious 1st down. -Rotating lineman in and out -Showing too much playbook with our 1st team offense in the 1st preseason game against the Panthers with Peterman There were a couple others... don't have access to the article right now. That last one I guess they claim McDermott actually admitted he showed more of the playbook than he wanted in that Panthers game. I don't really know. Is it because McDermott really doesn't want to be forced to play Allen and if Allen looked really good he would have been forced to do so? OR Is it that McDermott wanted to challenge the hell out of Allen and see if he could maintain his poise and composure? Don't know, but we won't know who our starter is almost certainly for another week and a half.

Yes, I think he plays. And if he plays, he still might start the season opener. This offseason is clearly not a typical offseason. McDermott might want to get his starting QB as many reps as possible tomorrow since there's been such a serious rotation since OTAs. Unfortunately, tomorrow doesn't answer who starts.

I would never ever bet on this, but I really just think it's more likely Allen starts the vast majority of the year. Either Peterman starts week 1 and gets benched in week 1, 2, 3, or 4. OR McDermott doesn't announce the starter all the way up until the Ravens game in order to try to give his rookie every competitive advantage he can get and trots Allen out there under center right away. Regardless, I don't think McDermott is going to pull Allen once he's in there unless he gets injured. I think he's shown enough poise and composure that once he starts, he's our starter.

Closing argument: Whoever starts is going to face a ton of pressure because our OL sucks...

I think whether Josh is the starter or not week 1, he should play a lot tomorrow. Give him the reps, no matter what.

I guess I should rephrase... fascinating it hasn't been announced, yet. Not necessarily surprising, though. I agree that McDermott's already made the decision. But Figster, while I understand the perspective that his decision has been made and it's Peterman, I'm not so sure. And I don't think anyone who starts or plays or doesn't start or play in tomorrow's game will give us an answer, either. You say McDermott hasn't made the announcement because he wants to take the Ravens by surprise and it will be Peterman taking them by surprise. I think it could be that he didn't make the announcement because the best way to get a rookie QB off to a good start is by giving the opponent a guessing game and that's exactly what he's got going right now. People say Peterman performed the best in the preseason and has the production to show for it, so he's pretty obviously going to be the guy. I think it could be that Allen's performance in that last game, while ugly, demonstrated a certain level of poise and composure in the pocket in the face of extreme pressure that shows he can handle it. The real question McDermott, Dabol, and probably to a slightly lesser extent Beane will be answering is whether Allen's beyod the "too raw to start" stage. Beane has made comments all offseason that the "too raw" narrative by the media was misguided, if not completely false. People who think the approach will be "our OL is awful, we don't want our investment destroyed so let's start another expendable QB" might have the right idea on what the approach should be, but I believe it's pretty naïve to think NFL coaches approach who starts at QB based on that. As for who starts tomorrow and the inevitable bickering that comes about what it means, nothing about this offseason has been traditional. I can see McDermott bucking the trend and playing whoever he starts week 1 a lot just in order to get as many reps in for that guy since there's been such a true 3 way rotation of the QBs since OTAs. Anyway, we won't find out until kickoff in Baltimore. I'm happy with that. McDermott should keep the Ravens and Harbaugh on their toes anyway. Maintain any advantage he can.

But if he gets absolutely mauled in year 1, will there be a long term impact? That's really the issue. Now, on the flip side, I also think Allen mitigates some of those OL problems with his athleticism and stature. Gonna be an interesting decision. Fascinating it hasn't been made yet.

Watched sack 3 a ton of times. You fail to account for the fact that a QB has 2 eyes and a progression of reads to go through and, clearly, Benjamin was his 1st read on that play. There's the possibility he could have gotten it to Coleman, but you're talking milliseconds here. Pulling that ball down and not throwing it on that play may have made the difference between a sack and an INT. Whoa. This is a really ignorant statement. No, here you're just flat out wrong. Take the sack over throwing to a covered defender crossing the middle. Coaches across the NFL widely disagree with you... Sack >>>>>> INT And you absolutely risk an INT throwing to a covered WR across the middle.

McDermott is obviously trying to do both. So... both.

My bad, I think I was momentarily blinded trying to read a pretty poorly written novella someone I know with no life had just written. I initially said Peterman had about a 5% chance to start, not 50%.

I know exactly what I said. I wasn't hiding that thread. I've consistently bumped it. His chances are clearly greater than 5% right now. Dear Lord there is just so much wrong with what you say here, Thurm. But a few things we can glean from your post regarding you that simply never change. You're massively hypocritical. You run away from arguments you're clearly wrong in or dance around those same arguments trying to twist in the wind to prove you're somehow right. You're here at least as much, but probably more for arguments of rhetoric rather than actual Football discussion. You get seriously lost in your arguments of rhetoric. I think it's a combination of eagerness to argue rhetoric combined with the arrogance of a professor/teacher of college (pretty sure you once said you were one of those) that suckers you into that trap so consistently. You don't have a very good sense of humor--massively failing to understand sarcasm and tongue in cheek responses. I could go on, but I don't have the time to respond as thoroughly as you. I have a life