Jump to content

Nathan Peterman to Start this Week.


26CornerBlitz

Recommended Posts

Just now, dave mcbride said:

The run game production was a huge product of TT's play and the way it was designed into the scheme. That's patently obvious.

Yes, TT has the running game churning yet again this year.......

 

Roman and Shady and Karlos and Gillislee were way more important than happy feet.

Edited by jmc12290
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, timekills17 said:

 

You realize Peterman is a whopping one inch taller than Tyrod.

 

I agree with your comments about a faster release and Tyrod's lack of anticipation/reluctance to throw to an "NFL open" receiver, but it isn't going to be better with Peterman because of the height difference.

 

See the posts earlier in the thread about:  1) the accuracy of that 1" height difference, 2) the differences in their respective postures and throwing techniques, and 3) what QB's like Brees do differently than Tyrod in order to pass over the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

If you want to play the “should be” game then we can also say we should have beaten Cincy and Carolina if we didn’t have atrocious QB play.

 

Please add TB and Oakland wins where the defense carried the team and TT's offense repeatedly couldn't capitalize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Foxx said:

no, not really. I just hope you realize how blind you were in your evaluation of Tyrod. It also a goo thing I didn't take you up on your bet you wanted to do when I proclaimed before the season started that Peterman would start at some point this season. you do remember that don't you?

 

You mean the one I lost to Wayne Arnold?

 

Yeah I remember. I already PMed him. 0:)

 

I embrace my defeat.

 

 I definitely don't root against players so I can't wait to see what the kid does. Been too long sans playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Good Grief,  Peppered in between a bad game every once in a while is a QB who has performed substantially better than TT on a week to week basis.Statistics aren't in TT's favor, he's a game manager at best,  his resume is complete...  Can he do the job, sure.  Is he going to change the team? No.

 

Bill Barnwell is a complete idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chris66 said:

Nope.now you rush 4 and flood the zone and force Peterman to read the defense. 

you wanna bet that we will actually see Peterman call an audible at the line of scrimmage? which if it happens will be the first audible called by the Bills in almost three years.

 

Peterman has shown he can read defenses more in his limited time than all the game tape compiled by Tyrod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jmc12290 said:

Yes, TT has the running game churning yet again this year.......

 

Roman and Shady and Karlos and Gillislee were way more important than happy feet.

McD and Dennison took away our running game. Changed the blocking and scheme and read option and a lot of the called Tyrod runs that made it work. But at least they added Tolbert. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

Surprising but not really surprising. NP might make some mistakes but I think he is a better fit for this offense. 

 

Go Peterman. Get us to the playoffs!

Any actual QB is better for this or any offense.  TT is a running back who occasionally throws...he's not a Quarterback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kelly the Dog said:

McD and Dennison took away our running game. Changed the blocking and scheme and read option and a lot of the called Tyrod runs that made it work. But at least they added Tolbert. 

I'm not here to defend Taylor, who has been exposed in the last couple of games, but Dennison sucks. He is a cookie-cutter OC who doesn't have half the brains of a Roman, who is genuinely creative. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dave mcbride said:

Um, they were seventh overall when he was benched after week 16 last year, and they finished 12th in 2015.

The point I'm making is that McDermott and Co. didn't make this decision based on a one bad game sample. TT's limitations as a QB limit the playbook by extension and I think they want the additional options available to a pocket QB that can get the ball out on time in an offense predicated on that concept. 

 

And I'm not persuaded by gross yards and gross points for as an indicator that TT is a good QB, either. When the running game was clicking and he was making amazing athletic plays and timely passes here and there, yeah, TT is all you can ask for in a game manager. 

 

But what is our record with TT when trailing by 4 or more? Poor defense and other contributors aside, a QB has to be able to put his team on his back in close games and make plays WITH HIS ARM and FROM THE POCKET and TT's game is just not geared for that. And because of that, he will always be a limited QB. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

No. They are light years away. The offense he ran, considering all factors, was surprisingly good his first two years. 

my contention to this reply would be... think how much better the offense could have been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Really?!? You wanted him to say “I agree with the coaches and think that Nate gives us a better chance to win than I do.” Come on man

:lol::lol: Yep , I want that guy leading my team! Of course he has to say he disagrees with it, and he damn well better disagree with it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...