BurpleBull

Thanks man.

Nathan Peterman's gonna turn it on in training camp. Just watch.

Very much so. Josh Allen had a very good last showing but that doesn't negate what Peterman put together. I do believe Peterman is the frontrunner in the minds of McDermott and Daboll to lead the first team offense come training camp, with Allen being brought along gradually. The final day of minicamp was Allen's 'wow' moment of minicamp, we know he has the tools to be a very good QB but there still will be no rush to throw him into the fire. They will continue to be patient with his development.

Sarcasm noted. But tell me what exactly at this very moment, has you believing that Allen is the frontrunner in the QB competition to lead the offense, given how OTAs played out, with Peterman being arguably the most consistent QB of the three during that time? You waited way too long to get snarky...but it's expected. Great timing.

Who's trying to sell that he has an advantage because he was on the team last season?

Joe Buscaglia Peterman outplays McCarron once again "For the majority of the practice, A.J. McCarron took the first-team reps with the offense as it was his turn during their spring-long rotation, but as the veteran quarterbacks on the team go, Nathan Peterman outperformed McCarron just as he did on Tuesday as well. McCarron had several passes batted down at the line of scrimmage and was having some trouble connecting with his receiver. He salvaged the day with a pair of big plays, one to Andre Holmes in the end zone in a jump ball situation, and another in a one-minute drill to end practice where he just lofted up a pass as time expired and Rod Streater miraculously came down with it in the back of the end zone. On the other hand, Peterman was solid in both his reads and his accuracy all day long. He gunned in a touchdown to Austin Proehl in the back of the end zone, and had a pretty pass that he dropped into a bucket on a deep pass to Robert Foster. Those that don't think Peterman has a legitimate chance to win the job to start the season are sorely mistaken. Now, this is only the spring, and training camp often brings us a bit of a different story as the battles play out, but of the five practices the media has been able to watch, Peterman has been the top guy between the two". It's the first bolded piece of text that I think is really being overlooked ...and by choice in a lot of cases in here.

That's them wanting to nail the coffin shut with him in it... Unfortunately for them, Peterman is showing more life now than ever before. And both McDermott and Daboll see it.

Yet you still chose to respond. Missed or ignored, your response wasn't within the context of the conversation.

You missed the scenario I laid out perhaps. As unrealistic as you may feel it is, in it Peterman has led the Bills to a perfect 10-0 record, throwing for 15tds against 4ints heading into the bye week. Letting Allen take his lumps from the start to gain that experience is one thing, but to pull a successful Peterman or McCarron from the lineup and possibly kill team chemistry and momentum just for the sake of getting a more developed, more complete Allen on the field is something totally different. It was being suggested that coaches would do such a thing and from the sound of things, such a move would be supported on these boards. I can understand the excitement surrounding Josh Allen, but championing Allen at the expense of team: on-field chemistry, momentum, and a unified locker room, is something I just could not do.

It was clearly a hypothetical question being posed to a get definitive stance on the matter out of you. You've essentially revealed that you believe Josh Allen getting on the field comes before team success, although you will no doubt deny it. You're merely using the coaches as a cover to hide your personal views as a fan and Josh Allen supporter.

You know what Nathan Peterman's mom would laugh at even more than my hypothetical? Your notion that the Bills' coaches would pull him from the lineup in favor of Allen If this scenario played out. What do you say would constitute Allen being ready and deserving of taking over the reins from Peterman, in McDermott and Daboll's minds in this given scenario? I'm just curious.

Joe Buscaglia Nathan Peterman shines again - "Don't look now, but Nathan Peterman is putting together a pretty solid spring. For the second straight practice that the media was allowed to see, Peterman was slinging the ball around incredibly well and both his accuracy and knowledge of the playbook has been evident. Several times on Tuesday, he would help instruct the receivers where they should be, or what they should have done on a given play. That part of his approach has to be music to the Bills ears at this point, with nothing set in stone at the quarterback position. It's only the offseason workouts, and you should take everything with a grain of salt, but Peterman has been impressive -- as shocking as that may be for some fans to read. In the four practices we've seen, Peterman has been more impressive than veteran quarterback A.J. McCarron". That's huge for any offensive coordinator.

Oh so were taking it there? Very report-worthy stuff, but I'll pass. Not my style. Wouldn't want to make TSW's 'Top 5 Rats List' the way it was discovered you did two weeks ago. On a another note: Peterman with another strong performance.

Oh it becomes complicated, very difficult to understand when your stance seems to defy logic...I actually need clarity. So if the scenario I laid out plays out, you believe the Bills pull Peterman in favor of Allen because Allen's now 'ready'? I just need a 'yes' on that if that's your stand. Peterman had yet another solid day of workouts from all accounts.

What do you mean by as soon as he's ready? If Peterman is Bills starting QB week one and leads the Bills to a perfect season leading up to bye, where Peterman has, let's say a 15 tds 4 ints stat line, Allen isn't replacing him after the bye week at that point barring injury, even if he looks as fine and finished a product as the coaches could have ever imagined. Just wouldn't happen. That's why I disagree with you when you say this is solely about Josh Allen, how fast he can pick things up, and that they aren't testing out each guy. They are. If Allen's their guy heading into the season they are going to determine that early. They are testing out each QB to see how each performs during certain competition to determine who's best suited to fill that starting role this season. Perhaps you think I'm suggesting that they are in search of their franchise QB with the current QB competition. I am not. Knowing how to respond better to adversity having faced it, is greater than never having faced adversity. Of the 6 INTS that you so like to mention, 5 came in one game. Peterman never had another multiple INT game after that game vs. the Chargers. Not even one two-interception game to speak of.

If you say so. The better QB will win. Both McCarron and Peterman have played in regular season games that Josh Allen has yet to. They have the advantage over Allen in the experience department...which goes a long way.

Yep...it's all about development. That's why I don't know why you continue to harp on Peterman's rookie INTS instead of moving forward and acknowledging the improvement he's displayed this off-season. That's Daboll's plan for Allen's development and it seems like a solid plan to gradually integrate in with the starters. The move doesn't negatw what Peterman has shown. The guy best suited for the job will win. They're testing them all out.

I didn't say he played a full NFL season though I'm sure he still gained something positive each and every week he took part in team activities. He gained experience having played in meaningful games as a rookie.

It's all about development. Peterman has a full NFL season under his belt that he actually played in, could learn and develop from. And he's looking good in the off-season so far.

If Peterman performs best you start Peterman. You don't get Allen experience at the expense of the team if he looks every bit the rookie, with guys ahead of him that can lead the offense right now. You continue to bring him along patiently as Daboll and McDermott seem content with doing until they feel he's up.

I agree. But if Allen looks shellshocked, confused, and overwhelmed then he won't start. Pretty obvious. I'm not talking "raw", I'm talking outright being referred to as a "project" by people in the media who cover NFL prospects. I think you're the one dodging the reality that Allen may not be as up to speed as soon as a lot of fans may hope for.

Having experience gives an advantage to the experienced QB over the inexperienced QB. If Allen doesn't look ready, it'll likely be because he isn't ready, due to lack of experience. I don't think Allen will show that he's ready to be handed the reins this early on and I believe Nathan Peterman has a very good chance coming out of this thing being the guy better suited to lead the offense due to off-season development and improved play. I already suggested that it's Allen's job to lose when he shows that he's ready to take over as starter...but not before then.

I'm talking Peterman specifically, based on his potential and QB situation specifically.

Fair enough, but how many of them were considered "projects" leading up to the draft?

I'm talking potential and productivity. If they were to let Lawson go it would be due to what they see him failing to develop into down the road considering where he was drafted just as was the case with Sammy Watkins and Reggie Ragland. Of course cap figures will play a part, but it's what the players show on the field that will be the quick decider on how fast they move on from a player. Peterman is relevant in that he has potential just as Lawson, despite the difference in draft round selection, but especially when considering he plays at a position that's up in the air with a rookie and a vet with limited action as his competitors. Not an ill-conceived notion at all.