Shaw66

Makes sense to me. Legitimate franchise qb is what he was and still is.

John We heard you, and we get that you feel that way. And I'm not here to argue with you, because you're entitled to your opinion. Most of the recent comments in response to you have simply been saying that we aren't willing to state with absolute confidence much of anything about how the guy will perform several years from now. We aren't arguing with you, although we do wonder how one can be so certain about that. Tom Brady was a MUCH worse prospect coming out of college than Allen and if asked, MILLIONS of football fans would have said with absolute confidence that he would never become one of the greatest QBs in the history of the game. The absolute confidence of those millions of fans had absolutely nothing to do with what Brady became, and your absolute confidence, right or wrong, has nothing to do with what Allen will become. Odds are one thing; certainty in predicting the future is quite another.

You can't use one half in the guy's first preseason game to determine if he's an accurate thrower. New game, new offense, new line, new stadium, new receivers. It's simply too early.

Hey, we haven't overdone the arguing. Just back and forth a couple times. So long as it's clear, and it is now, that it's Johns opinion, I'm fine. Like you, I think it doesn't make sense to think we can know what kind of QB he will be in five years. If he doesnt think it will happen, fine. He may be right. I just bristle when someone tells me no other outcome is possible. I don't think there's a lot gain doing that. I agree, there's nothing to lose. And all live game time is beneficial. You don't see coaches do it very often any more. I would guess they don't because they see little benefit, and they don't want all the QB controversy distraction. When you insert a guy who looks like legitimate competition to your starter, then everybody, including the team, begins to get distracted. Coaches don't want that. But McD is fearless. He showed it starting Peterman. So maybe he would do what you suggest. As I said, I don't see that it hurts.

I see I've sparked an ongoing discussion about this. I think what you say is simply foolish. It was crazy talk 20 years ago to say that by 2015 more photographs will have been taken on people's telephones than with cameras in the history of the world, but it happened. To say that something is impossible five years from now is simply foolish. Josh Allen is a superior athlete. I don't know you, but I'm a decent athlete and I'm absolutely certain that I can't truly comprehend what it means to be an athlete in his class. He's bigger, faster, stronger than I am, and probably than you too. He throws a football in a way that very, very few people on the planet can throw a football. He's going to have five years of year-round training and coaching with the best trainers and coaches in the country. He's going to practice and play. To think that it's impossible - IMPOSSIBLE - for a man like that with that kind of developmental activity in front of him can't be as accurate a thrower as two guys who clearly are not as good pure athletes is simply foolish. That's like saying that a 21-year old golfer ranked 50th in putting in the PGA today cannot possibly be the best putter on the tour five years from now. All kinds of people in all kinds of disciplines - actors, musicians, doctors, lawyers, athletes - get better at what they do through study, practice and coaching. Lawyers and doctors are MUCH better at what they do five years after they finish school. This idea that some people have that among all the detailed disciplines in the world, passing accuracy is somehow the only thing that a professional cannot improve is simply foolish. Allen's a great athlete with a great arm. To be OF THE OPINION that he never will develop supreme accuracy is fine. That's your opinion. But to suggest that a superior athlete with a great arm ABSOLUTELY CANNOT develop that accuracy with years of coaching, training and practice is simply foolish.

I wasn't talking about sitting. I have mixed views about sitting. I was talking about the value of bringing in your backup guy lat in the game where you've already lost or you need a miracle comeback. I think you learn some things about how to play QB by sitting, watching and studying. You learn some things by playing. What I said was I don't think that playing in mop-up time is very valuable experience. It isn't a substitute for being a starter and preparing and playing every week. Sitting is fine. Playing right away is fine. Different approaches for different guys may make sense. But getting five minutes of playing time late in five lost-cause games doesn't add much to either approach. Adds a little, but it's not a strategy that I think is worth pursuing.

That was a different era. Playing in mop-up time, ahead or behind, doesn't do much for a qb's development. Real growth comes from preparing, playing, film study, preparing, playing.

E L W A Y

I will say with absolute certainty that there is not a timetable. I think if you go back to the press conferences you will find that both McDermott and Beane have said so. And I'd guess there is not one coach on the Bills who would say with absolute certainty that Allen will never be as precise as Brady or Brees. Allen is going to be a much better QB in five years than he is now.

I think you are incorrect in your assumptions on a couple of points. First, there's a huge difference between a plan and a time table. McD has a plan; he doesn't have a time table. Allen will advance as fast as he can and McD will start him when he's ready. That might three weeks, it might be three months. McD won't start him if he isn't ready, and he won't keep him on the bench if he IS ready but it's earlier than some time table suggested. Second, I don't think there's any reason to conclude that Allen won't be the precision pass Brady and Brees are. It's WAY too early to jump to a conclusion like that. In their early years, Brady and Brees weren't nearly as good as they have been later in their careers. No way the Chargers would have let Brees go if he'd played as consistently well in his first three years as he did later. I'm not saying Allen IS a Brady or Brees; I'm just saying that what he will become is anyone's guess. The one thing the pre-draft analysts agree on was that Allen's ceiling is almost unlimited, and he didn't do anything Thursday night to suggest that there are limits.

Lots of times we're talking about the eyeball test. My eyeballs tell me that's an NFL quarterback. And the excitement you talk about isn't shiny-new-toy excitement, like when you get a special kick returner and wideout. This guy plays the position where he touches the ball every play, and that means every play there's a chance that some really good things are going to happen. I mean, I was generally a Tyrod fan. I kept looking for him to improve in certain areas, to make some major league throws. His critics always said he never would, and over time I agreed. And before that we had EJ and Fitzy and you know the list. In one half of preseason football, Allen showed that he is unlike ANY guy who has started for the Bills since Kelly.

I agree. My only problem was that a few times I thought he looked like Cutler in terms of arm talent, and the thought that he could be another Cutler is not comforting. It's too soon to tell, but he didn't look like he was the pure gunslinger that Cutler always was. He seems to play with discipline. Pure arm strength, after one preseason game, I have to say that I don't think there is anyone in the recent pro game who compares with him. Maybe Elway. He's one of those guys the receivers have to get used to because the ball arrives so quickly and with such velocity. And there's a benefit to that velocity, because although his receivers get used to it, the defenders usually don't. So defenders often assume that he can't and won't make a throw that he does. And the defenders often miss interceptions because of the velocity. I'm excited now. Maybe he doesn't start right away, but he will start eventually. I think he's a candidate for the job right now. I'd compare him to a talent like Odell Beckham, Jr. (I'm not suggesting he's a headcase like OBJ, just talking about his talent.) A guy like OBJ shows up, you have to put him on the field, even if he has some rookie flaws and/or immaturity. He's just that good. Allen looked to me like that kind of talent. Inexperienced, not seeing everything yet, not by a long shot, but he's simply going to make plays for you that the other QBs never will. That kind of talent will put relentless pressure on McDermott to start him. McD probably is telling Daboll to double down on teaching Allen what he needs to know.

I think this was the thing that impressed me the most. (Well, can't not be impressed with the arm strength.) Allen seems to understand what he's supposed to do on each play and does it. No hesitation. See it, do it. I commented yesterday about the throw over the middle to the receiver crossing from right to left. The underneath defender was directly in the line of sight between Allen and the receiver. Allen let it fly, knowing that the receiver would be open when the ball arrived. Allen knew the route, he understood the defense and he threw when he was supposed to. It was, in some ways, an ordinary NFL throw, but not one Taylor regularly made. What impressed me about it was that Allen seemed completely comfortable doing it. No double clutch, nothing. See it, throw it.

I didn't see the game and just saw the video of all his throws and some of his runs. I agree with you. Allen is major league talent and he is not far away. First, to state the obvious, he has elite arm talent. He can make every throw, he can throw under pressure, he can throw off balance, etc. Second, he has anticipation and guts. Completed one over the middle where he threw to the receiver before he uncovered. It was exactly the thro that Taylor rarely made. Third, he has pocket presence and eacapability. Fourth, he can run. I think he's closer to starting than most people think. Yes, he looked like a rookie some of the time, but those other two guys are not going to make the throws the guy is making already. I was impressed. If he isn't starting soon, it means one of the other two is playing really well.

I really like the guy. It's a shame he's so messed up.

Right. No o line discussion. Nothing earth shattering here, but a nice summary. The guy is fun to listen to, because he is enjoying himself.

He doesn't have to be perfect. He has to be as good or better than the others in the time he's on the field. If he is, he'll get more time. If he isn't, he has to wait. Same as any other player at any other position.

Doesn't want to go to training camp. That's great. Teams are just dying to get players who don't want to practice.

You know, it's just so hard to tell what goes into stats. I agree about the target to reception ratio, but I don't think you can dismiss the parade of QBs throwing to him. Someone posted a stat (I couldn't find it) that said that Coleman was third highest in the league in uncatchable balls when he was targeted. That's completely believable with the QBs he had throwing, and that would affect his ratio significantly. On the other hand, how many times did Coleman run a bad route, causing the uncatchable ball? That's the kind of thing only the coaches in Cleveland know.

This is a good point. Always happens with strong throwers.

Beane explained what they're doing a week or ten days ago. He said Allen would get third team reps until the first preseason game. After that, he would get better reps or not, depending on what he showed in the first preseason game. It isn't about bringing him along slowly. He will get a chance to show what he can do, and he will move up or not.

I think its pretty simple. Best man plays. Best man is determined by all aspects of the game. QB play calling, reads, audibles, execution, leadership. Whose the best? Allen isn't yet. As Beane said, let's see what he does in his first game. If he shines, he moves up. If he doesnt, he scratches and claws for more time. Same as any other position.

Okey doke. You and I agree he's worth a 7th round pick two years out. We will see what he accomplishes.

All I've said is that there isn't much difference in their NFL production. When you adjust for targets and their QBs, there isn't much difference. As someone said, let him run fly patterns all day and he will help the offense. I'm not trying to convince anyone, including myself, that Coleman is Julio Jones. Neither is Sammy.

Nice math. Sammy played 29 games, Corey 19. so you'd expect Sammy would have more catches, more targets and more yards. That's why I did the averages, per game. Sammy was targeted a little more than Corey, but only a little more. So Sammy wasn't used more as a receiver than Corey was. Sammy had more catches per game because, as I said, his completions per target were much better than Corey's. That's the only difference in their stats; everything flows from that. If Corey had caught the same percentage as Sammy, then they'd have very comparable per-game stats. So what's the difference? Some combination of two factors - (1) Sammy has better hands, which almost certainly is true and (2) Sammy had a better QB throwing to him, which probably is true. Someone posted earlier that LAST season, Corey was #3 in uncatchable balls thrown his way, so at least last season, some of Corey's lousy catch percentage was attributable to the QB, not Corey. Don't get me wrong. I was among the biggest Sammy homers, he has special skills. And I don't know anything about Corey Coleman. I'm not saying Corey has the same potential as Sammy. However, over four seasons now, Sammy hasn't reached his potential. Wait and see. The Bills wouldn't have traded for Coleman if they didn't think they could make something of him; McBeane don't usually go looking for projects. Coleman has the fundamental skills, and we'll see what McDermott can do with them. If Coleman reaches his potential, Bills will have made a great deal.