The Red King

Look at Bills vs. Pats. The NFL will get one of three outcomes. The Pats will crush the Bills like they normally do, which allows the announcers to gush about Brady and showcase NE. Win for the NFL. It will be a close-fought game that people will stay glued to, to see if Brady can pull out another clutch win...or if the upstart Bills can finally dethrone the Pats. Also a win for the NFL. Or, the Bills crush the Pats, and everyone that hates the Pats will get the see the skinny kid that got beat up for lunch money every day finally beat the crap out of the bully. Again, a win. That game, regardless of outcome, is ratings gold for the league. Honestly, I think the NFL wants Buffalo to win that one. It's a feelgood story, and they can work hard on the "end of a dynasty" storyline in the media.

The problem is, we're arguing apples and oranges. You are arguing whether or not it was a good decision to make. My last several replies have not argued that point at all. I have simply said that regardless of whether or not it was a good decision, it ended up working out in the Bills' favor. That doesn't reflect on whether or not it was a good decision. It is possible to have good things come from bad decisions. If I'm up to my eyeballs in debt, spending what little money I have left in the casino is a terrible idea, but if I hit the jackpot and win a million, that bad decision still worked out for the best. You are discussing the decision. At this point, all I've been discussing is the outcome, and I've not been using it to justify anything.

TT's supporters will say that he does not lose games for you. His detracters will say he does not win games for you. Both are absolutely correct. He elevates bad teams and drags good teams down. He is the baseline, absolute zero, a black hole sitting at 8-8 exerting gravity on all teams above and below, and so was a perfect fit for Buffalo until last season and a perfect fit for Cleveland this one.

We play the 'phins and Jets twice each and he has Buf at 2-14? Bold indeed. I could get a more credible prediction for the season from a magic 8-ball. XD ...wait, he has the Bills, Jets and 'phins with a combined eight wins. Those three play each other a combined six times...so his "bold" prediction is that those three will only produce two wins total outside of playing each other? O.o

Honestly? Yes, on both counts. I wasn't sold on Atlanta and KC was in a tailspin as bad as we were at the time. The Bolts shredded our D, same as the two weeks prior. Nothing on the other side of the ball was going to overcome that. It was winnable, but only if the D showed up, which they didn't. Starting QB had no bearing on that.

I dunno, the Titans went to black helmets, I think instead of doing the same, the Jags should have gone full gold. Still, credit for killing the half-and-half helmets. I think gold helmets would be more unique then black, and help establish a franchise identity. As for the 'phins, if you're going to change a uniform, make a significant change, colors, helmet logos or such, rather then just a couple subtle little tweaks. Ah well.

Buffalo wasn't winning that game with TT under center. Hell, given how badly the D got carved up I don't think Buffalo wins that game with Brady under center.

I have no desire to go into whether or not it was a good decision. People have their opinions and are pretty much locked into them at this point. Point remains that for good or for ill, starting Peterman that game worked out better (in the long run) for the Bills then starting Tyrod would have, unless you think the Bills would have actually outright won that game with TT under center, and precious few people here think that. Edit: Since the above post was edited after I posted... My opinion is just that. My opinion. I am as entitled to mine, and as entitled to post it as you are yours. I believe the staff made the right move, but I respect those fans who believe they got it wrong. I can see their (your) points and can see merit in them. I just happen to disagree with them. No need to go overdramatic.

If the Pats keep playing well, the NFL gets their powerhouse on prime time week after week. If the Pats crash and burn, we get to see the gory drama play out week after week in prime time. Either way, it's win-win for the league.

If Peterman hadn't started that game (or any others), the calls for him to start would have escalated as TT's performance continued on par and this board would currently have a good number of "We should be giving Peterman a chance! Don't draft a QB, draft a team around him!" threads. Whether or not it was ill-advised at the time (we share differing opinions on that), you cannot say the Bills would have and would be better off had they not started Peterman when they did.

They knew TT wasn't going to win a playoff game. They knew what they had in TT, they didn't in Peterman and so gave him a start. Thanks to that decision we have absolutely zero "Give Peterman the start and don't draft a QB" threads on the board right now. Let's say for arguement's sake TT started that game, and the rest. We'd still have gone 9-7, still lost to JAX, and Peterman would have been an unknown quality going into this draft. Hell, if TT didn't play well, there may have been more calls for Peterman to start against KC, a move that could have cost us that game and our playoff birth. How anyone could say starting TT that game would have made things better for the Bills with the advantage of hindsight is beyond me.

Given how Tyrod played vs. NO and the NYJs the weeks prior, do you honestly think he would have played any better vs. the Chargers? As for the INTs, the first actually bounced off the receiver, the second he was falling backwards. Following three were on Peterman, but let's not make it sound like he just threw five picks in a vacuum.

9-7, Bills snag a Wild Card slot with another Week 17 win against Miami, though this time they won't need help to get in.

Faster ball means less time for defenders to close on it. If he can keep his accuracy a faster ball might cut down on his INTs. Just look at that pick in the JAX game that had to go to video review. Had that ball been any faster, it wouldn't have been picked. Not saying this will automatically transform Peterman into our next starter or such, just pointing out that if he can indeed speed up delivery without sacrificing accuracy he will be a better QB then last year, with a chance to cut down on the INTs.

It's Rodak, that's about what I expected. Remember, this is the same guy that a year ago said Buffalo's season was over before it started. XD

The Bills knew TT was not going to win them a playoff game. They had no idea if Peterman could, and after TT absolutely stank up the field on my daughter's first live NFL game (birthday present on her birthday), they decided to see if Peterman was any better. He obviously wasn't, so they went back to TT and prayed that if they made the playoffs TT would play better then expected. He didn't. So, basically, what the coaching staff feared with TT came to pass...they were right about him, and thanks to them starting Peterman we sit here just before the draft with absolutely zero "Peterman should be our starter, don't draft a QB" posts on this board. There was no sabotage, just a staff that knew what they already had in TT, knew it wasn't good enough, and wanted to see what they had in Peterman. We are in a far better position now thanks to that decision.

...and their argument is immediately invalid. Also, the Bills did not make the playoffs because of the football gods, they made it thanks to coaching and a team that played with more guts, heart and pride then they had any right to. That culture will make them a little tougher then people think.

I hold by my prior prediction, 9-7 with (and this sounds familiar >.>) a Week 17 win against the Dolphins to sneak into a Wild Card (this time without help).

We went 9-7 and made it to the playoffs. Taylor elevates bad teams and drags good teams down. He is the ultimate median. If you need a QB that is not going to lose games, who can keep the ship sailing with consistency, TT is your man. When you get good enough to transition to a team that can win enough games and you reach a point where you need your QB to win a few games for you, TT has consistently shown he can't. The Bills finally crested the plain and reached a point where TT's mediocrity has gone from benefit to liability. The JAX game last season was the best example of it. Cleveland, however, has gone 1-31 the last two seasons. A strong leader at QB can elevate the play of those around him, and his ability to play near mistake-free football will make the Browns a better team next year. And to that team and it's fans, 6-8 wins this year will not only be acceptable, it will be welcome and even heralded. 6-8 wins here will be unacceptable. Trading TT to the Browns I think will work out well for the Bills, Browns and TT.

Going from bad to the textbook defenition of outright average is technically an improvement, but not a success. I want better then average, and TT is average. Precious little terrible, precious little amazing. We've finally outgrown that, Cleveland hasn't. They will be thrilled when he gets them to 8-8 eventually, then they will move on like we did.

No Thursday night, no Sunday night. One Monday night, but I feel that was setup to show off NE more then BUF. No love for the Bills. Understandable, though. The NFL is leery on the Bills. There was a 17-year drought. Far easier and safer for them to chalk last year up to a fluke and cute story...and expect us to go right back to sub-par but not terrible form this year. Going to take more then one big season to convince them. That being said, while the start of the schedule is definately tough, I'm not about to write them all off as losses. I'm not convinced the Vikes new QB is going to instantly gel with the team, and while the Ravens may have a chip on their shoulder about the no-playoff thing, I'm sure they blame the Bengals and themselves more then us. I like the fact that it looks like an easier end if we can just stay in the hunt earlier on.

Keep in mind Belli posted a record with Matt Cassel that would have gotten the Pats into the playoffs most any other year. The Pats are not dead in the water without Brady. I think Brady fears that, and it's why Jimmy G had to go, so his ego wouldn't be bruised by Belli succeeding without him.

Actually, give me NE before Bellie has too much tape on our newly retooled teams. Think about it, we haven't beaten NE much, but when we have? Weeks 1-3. (Not counting the game in NE where they pulled their starters). Big week 3 win to break the complete domination streak (and down went the goalposts), week 1 massive upset when Adams intercepted Brady and lumbered down the sideline like Frankenstein's monster for a pick-6. Hell, we almost/should have beaten them on MNF week 1 the year after Brady's injury, until we fumbled away a five point lead with two minutes to play. Look at it another way, if we end up in a dogfight for a playoff spot, don't you want as many NE games behind us as possible? I would highly prefer an early NE game.

Wants to keep the signing bonus without playing a down for it? Reminds me of a song... "Aw, that ain't working, that's the way you do it...get your money for nothing and your checks for free." ...or something like that. ;-)

If we cut him, we get absolutely nothing out of it, open the door for other players to try the same scumbag negotiating tactics and face the very real possibility of playing against him twice this season in a Pats uniform. You can't justify that. I agree with prior posters who suggest we package him up in a trade with the Giants to lighten the cost of their #2 overall draft pick.