Jump to content

Again, how can a switch to Peterman be any worse?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 777
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

So, I was watching Petermans YouTube highlights from the preseason. There are throws he makes into tight coverage that I wouldnt expect Tyrod to make. Specifically talking about the first 2 throws in the highlight video from the Eagles game. In rhythm and on time.

Edited by Bangarang
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you always refer to him as Tygod? Is it just for attention or to annoy people? You do know how horrible of a nickname that is right?

I must say, I don't get that in any intelligent conversation... Maybe it's just me. Is there a point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What people dont want to mention is Tyrods actual improvement in this area....he has been throwing the ball away when nothing is there much more this season....but some people sadly cant remember past the last game

 

He's throwing the ball away when he's incapable of finding an open man - not when nothing is there. Week after week (for 2.25 seasons) the all 22 shows that there WAS something there. "Protecting the Ball," to the team's detriment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, Peterman is BETTER option for this offense.


Peterman is the Quicker thrower.

Peterman makes faster reads and faster decisions.

Peterman can run just as well as Tyrod does,

 

Argument for Tyrod is that he is ball safe. I'd argue Peterman is even better in this respect. Over their collegiate careers, Peterman had better TD-INT ratio than Tyrod:

 

47-17 vs 44-20.

 

Peterman >>> Tyrod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, Peterman is BETTER option for this offense.

 

Peterman is the Quicker thrower.

Peterman makes faster reads and faster decisions.

Peterman can run just as well as Tyrod does,

 

Argument for Tyrod is that he is ball safe. I'd argue Peterman is even better in this respect. Over their collegiate careers, Peterman had better TD-INT ratio than Tyrod:

 

47-17 vs 44-20.

 

Peterman >>> Tyrod.

Peterman can run as well as Taylor. Right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OUTSIDE THE BOX:

 

I know this approach has hardly ever been used, but why not play both depending on the opponent? Each QB has skills that are better suited to attack different teams.

 

Why not put both in at once? Not regularly, but sporadically.

 

Why doesn't Tyrod ever go out as a receiver? Brady did it and he can't run!

Edited by The Process
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I was watching Petermans YouTube highlights from the preseason. There are throws he makes into right coverage that I wouldnt expect Tyrod to make. Specifically talking about the first 2 throws in the highlight video from the Eagles game. In rhythm and on time.

And a few throws had Zay making great catches :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I was watching Petermans YouTube highlights from the preseason. There are throws he makes into right coverage that I wouldnt expect Tyrod to make. Specifically talking about the first 2 throws in the highlight video from the Eagles game. In rhythm and on time.

Peterman did not look like your typical deer in the headlights rookie during the preseason. (not at all)

 

I was very impressed despite what the stat sheet says.

 

Kid was composed, accurate and decisive IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, Peterman is BETTER option for this offense.

Peterman is the Quicker thrower.

Peterman makes faster reads and faster decisions.

Peterman can run just as well as Tyrod does,

 

Argument for Tyrod is that he is ball safe. I'd argue Peterman is even better in this respect. Over their collegiate careers, Peterman had better TD-INT ratio than Tyrod:

 

47-17 vs 44-20.

 

Peterman >>> Tyrod.

Peterman has not played 1st string defence in live action NFL.....this is not preseason....you dont know...nobody knows.....just a best guess that is all......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peterman did not look like your typical deer in the headlights rookie during the preseason. (not at all)

 

I was very impressed despite what the stat sheet says.

 

Kid was composed, accurate and decisive IMO.

I agree, I think this system is perfect for him
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peterman did not look like your typical deer in the headlights rookie during the preseason. (not at all)

 

I was very impressed despite what the stat sheet says.

 

Kid was composed, accurate and decisive IMO.

Barely completing 50% of his passes is not being accurate. Composed and decisive yes. Made some nice quick throws yes. He also made a bunch of terrible throws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barely completing 50% of his passes is not being accurate. Composed and decisive yes. Made some nice quick throws yes. He also made a bunch of terrible throws.

 

It's nothing more than preseason hero worship this time in the form of Petermania.

Nonetheless, he's still on the bench where he belongs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barely completing 50% of his passes is not being accurate. Composed and decisive yes. Made some nice quick throws yes. He also made a bunch of terrible throws.

Fair assessment Scott7975,

 

If you add the dropped balls its probably up over 60%

 

Sometimes WR's run the wrong route and it reflects on the QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hope is a waking dream : Aristotle

 

Not to be a sourpuss, but there are three problems with Petermania :

 

(1) Never has so many back-up dreams been based on so little. Usually the backup makes a splash in preseason with big-time plays and gaudy numbers - by (yes) facing third-stringers, future Sears salesmen, and vanilla defenses. But Peterman completed just 54% of his passes for 5.4 yards per attempt. His longest throw was only 28 yards. Petermanics thrill to the memory of a ten yard slant (it was soooooo perfect), forgetting the wildly inaccurate throws it was sandwiched between. Taylor's bad outtings playing meaningful games against some of the league's most brutal defenses are barely worse than Peterman's entire preseason record.

 

(2) Right now the Bills have no running attack, an offensive line which frequently implodes, a (temporary, we hope) head case for one receiver, several punt returners for other receivers, and the very definition of a journeyman pulled off the scrap heap topping the group off. Prior to Cincinnati, Taylor was in the top-quarter of the NFL making plus-twenty yard pass plays with pretty much a tight end and running back alone. Then, of course, he lost the tight end. Instead of dreamily believing Nathan can make more of this dung hill, why not ask how Taylor 's been able to accomplish what he has? Setting aside raw attempts, who has made more with less? And here's a question : How exactly is poor NP going to stretch the field? If you found the 4.7 ypa Bengal's game ugly, what do you expect Peterman to produce? Ya ain't seen nutt'n yet, dink and dunk-wise.

 

(3) Taylor and Peterman were both late-round picks for a reason. In both cases there were / are problems with their game. Believe it or not, Taylor is at least an average quarterback today. Given decent NFL-grade talent to play with, he's looked pretty solid. But that has been an accomplishment of years of hard work on both his strengths and weaknesses. If Flacco had gone down Taylor's rookie year, I'd bet anything TT would have flamed-out years ago. Peterman has a chance to beat the odds too, but I don't think it will come from being dumped into the Bills' cesspool offense. The Petermanics' dreamy best wishes may kill their man with kindness.....

 

./thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's nothing more than preseason hero worship this time in the form of Petermania.

Nonetheless, he's still on the bench where he belongs.

 

Relying on preseason stats - good or bad - to assess a player is silly.

 

You look for things like footwork, decisiveness, accuracy, leadership, etc. In preseason, the stats could be good or bad based on many factors.

 

When I watched Peterman, he looked better than Tyrod at all of the things at which Tyrod stinks.

 

Obviously, Tyrod is more mobile/dangerous with his feet. But that's not what we need. Obviously.

Edited by Gugny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...