Coach Tuesday

It was an epically bad performance that should be the end of his dream to be an NFL starter. It reminded me of horror shows we've seen through the years, mostly on other teams - Ryan Lindley, Spurgeon Wynn, Aaron Brooks, Babe Laufenberger... Peterman showed yesterday that, in addition to being a reckless moron (he just threw balls up for grabs into the middle of the field while under pressure), he can't put any zip on balls to the sidelines. Pete Naterman is not an NFL starter and never will be.

The Pegulas should take a knee as owners.

McDermott with the epic faceplant. He may not get a second season.

McDermott may not get a second season.

Dawkins ate a dude for dinner on that run.

“I took a calculated risk.”

I fear he may be playing himself into a top ten pick at this point. He is The One.

“I’m taking a calculated risk.” Remember that quote from McD if Pete Naterman flails tomorrow. I’ll say it again: McD is doing his bosses a big favor with this move. McD may find out what he has at QB; the Pegulas are definitely about to find out what they have at head coach.

This is precisely my concern - Pete Naterman plays just ok, maybe puts up more garbage time stats against KC and NE, and McD talks himself into bypassing a QB in round one. Given McD’s stubbornness for rolling with “his guys” and his insistence on a very specific personality type for the players he’ll put up with, don’t be surprised to see them use their two first rounders on an Eric Wood and a Donte Whitner... i will be fine with Peterman faceplanting. It’s almost just as good as him playing lights out. The worst is that he plays mediocre and they still don’t know what they’ve got...

I'll start calling him Pete Naterman.

Because Ike had no skills. He was stiff and slow.

I honestly thought you two were the same poster until just now. Huh.

They are incredibly stubborn about the RB position. Incredibly.

You're right Dave, although it may not be as black and white as your post suggests. They have a number of contingencies they're worrying about as they approach the offseason, and the front seven is certainly high up there on the list. They need to see what they have at the QB position. Whether they needed to get themselves into this situation is another matter...

Stating the obvious: the coach and GM now get to evaluate their rookie QB to see what they have in him in advance of their first full offseason. Stating the less-than-obvious: the owners are now being given a ton more data to evaluate their coach and GM, who have made several "calculated risks" this season and continue to assure the fanbase and players (and, I firmly believe, ownership) that this team has what it takes to be in the playoffs. The timing of this switch, the reasons for it, and most importantly, how it plays out, will tell the Pegulas a TON about the two men they hired to steer their franchise. It will also inform them about the offensive coordinator, who will now have had two quarterbacks (a rookie and a vet) exposed to his "system." Given the fact that this team wasn't going to win the Super Bowl this season no matter what, McBeane just did the Pegulas a huge favor. Lots of important information being given to the folks in charge.

Ok... did he obfuscate to Terry?

John, when McD says “we’re built to be better than 5-4,” is he lying?

McD justified benching Tyrod as follows: "We were made to be better than 5-4." The way I read that: McBeane promised the Pegulas that the team would be competitive this season. The rebuild narrative may or may not be correct - but I don't think it was sold to the Pegulas that way. They were told that the team would make aggressive moves for the future AND would also be competitive this year. Very, very dangerous of McBeane if that's what was said.

So McD justified the move by saying, "We were made for better than 5-4." Gulp. I continue to wonder what the Pegulas think they were promised...

But then you get to the playoffs and you have to go play on the road against a team smart enough to play a five-man front and take away the boundaries, and you're toast. Tyrod can succeed in a place like Baltimore or Denver, perhaps. But he's not going to carry this team to where it needs to go.

I have deep concerns about this past offeason's strategy, the schemes they're using and whether they're a fit for the talent on hand, etc. But I do appreciate the lack of stubbornness from McBeane - this week was a key test for me, I wanted to see whether the coaches would dig in and ignore clear evidence that what they were doing wasn't working. I give them credit for making the switch.

Kirbs, they must have decided they know what they have in Tyrod - they know his floor (last Sunday) and his ceiling. Time to find out for sure what they have in Nate, so that they can soberly design strategy for the QB position in the offseason.

The problem John is that rebuilds shouldn't be done this way. The front office is now scrambling to plug the leaks that it elected to spring. This team badly needs a #2RB, quality WRs, another decent corner, and run-stopping DTs and LBs. That's precisely what they've traded away. BADOL is right that a better approach would've been managing the talent on hand - there was no need to purge all of it in the name of "culture." McBeane went full Pol Pot on this roster and the players have stopped buying in. When you consider that this team could've had DeShaun Watson throwing to Woods and Watkins, it's just too much to take.

So if the Pats now sign Worthy...

They're hitting us over the head with our own shoe.