Stank_Nasty Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 2 minutes ago, HappyDays said: I actually don’t want Tyrod being more aggressive. We don’t have receivers that can reward aggressiveness. If they aren’t open don’t throw them the ball. The scheme is what needs to go. We’re making the same mistake on offense that we made with Rex’s defense. I agree 100% schematically. But at this point with how bad everything else is and him maybe being in “f*** it” mode” maybe he walks a little closer to that edge and it opens things up a bit. Just wishful thinking really. I’m not expecting much from anyone the rest of the way out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fadingpain Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 Depends on what their intentions are. If they want to maximize our chances to lose this season, start Peterman. If they want to maximize our chances to win this season, start Tyrod. Both are valid approaches depending on your mindset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 Just now, McNubbins said: Can this be documented anywhere? Also, Tyrod, if it's true that McDermott wants to win now. I mean, I don’t know what documentation you want to see but I read it. Boyst can probably vouch for me (or maybe Augie) because they met the recipient of the text in Atlanta. I didn’t know this to be the case but saw it late in the game from her brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 2 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: So, Tyrod sent a text to a friend at halftime (he probably shouldn’t do that) saying that it was 100% Dennison’s decision to bench him. Apparently Dennison basically told McDermott that he wanted Nate. I am sure this is true. Buffalo Fanatics has the same story on their Instagram yesterday. You think Dennison could be fired tomorrow? His call, his ass on the line I would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 1 minute ago, Fadingpain said: Depends on what their intentions are. If they want to maximize our chances to lose this season, start Peterman. If they want to maximize our chances to win this season, start Tyrod. Both are valid approaches depending on your mindset. This is one of the truest and most honest posts this board has ever seen. It’s an interesting dilemma. Just now, HappyDays said: I am sure this is true. Buffalo Fanatics has the same story on their Instagram yesterday. You think Dennison could be fired tomorrow? His call, his ass on the line I would think. Don’t know what will happen with it but it can’t sit well with McDermott. He stuck his neck out and got completely embarrassed and destroyed over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 Just now, Kirby Jackson said: This is one of the truest and most honest posts this board has ever seen. It’s an interesting dilemma. I don't see McD regaining the respect of the lockeroom if they play Peterman. Too much of an intentional tank move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manther Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 1 hour ago, PastaJoe said: If DiMarco catches that first pass we may have had a completely different game. That may have rattled Peterman, and then the next 2 Ints were in the OL. That and maybe a TE to help block Bosa on the right side against Ducasse and Mills. That seemed like poor coaching and game plan. I don't know if the coaches had a poor plan developed this week working through their process. Don't get me wrong Peterman was not good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 Just now, jmc12290 said: I don't see McD regaining the respect of the lockeroom if they play Peterman. Too much of an intentional tank move. That was Sullivan’s point in the press conference. It is probably true but it may end up being in their best interest. I just don’t think that they can straight face it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stank_Nasty Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 1 minute ago, jmc12290 said: I don't see McD regaining the respect of the lockeroom if they play Peterman. Too much of an intentional tank move. I have a hard time seeing him get it back regardless. Although I must admit I have no clue how an nfl locker room works. And hiw how much of the roster is even gonna be around next year? This was just one offseason and it was a legit overhaul already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said: Don’t know what will happen with it but it can’t sit well with McDermott. He stuck his neck out and got completely embarrassed and destroyed over it. I’m actually okay with McDermott letting his coordinators make those kinds of decisions but the axe has to fall after such a miserable failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manther Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 1 hour ago, Dr.Sack said: White privilege would be throwing 5 first half picks and getting rewarded with a start next week at KC. Ridiculous and unnecessary 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phypon Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 Okay, I thought about this one. You start Peterman. Why? Because...draft. TT is not the long term answer, neither is NP. I don't think the W/L column changes with either QB at the helm but you may as well start the rook, see what kind of backup he could be. I know this will not be a popular point of view, but it's the most logical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodman19 Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 If I am McDermott, you stick with Peterman. You already made the move and made your bed and you might as well see what you have. Yes, Peterman had an awful day. Rookie QB in his first NFL game that had a fluke Int in the first drive and then tried to keep forcing the ball from that point on. Give him some more reps and see if you can work on his aggressiveness. Take your extreme, the QB who won't take risk or the QB who takes too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 On a side note was that the worst half quarterbacked in franchise history? I thought that I remember Brohm being bad but maybe not this horrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 4 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: That was Sullivan’s point in the press conference. It is probably true but it may end up being in their best interest. I just don’t think that they can straight face it. Exactly. He was so bad they can't get away with it. 2 minutes ago, Stank_Nasty said: I have a hard time seeing him get it back regardless. Although I must admit I have no clue how an nfl locker room works. And hiw how much of the roster is even gonna be around next year? This was just one offseason and it was a legit overhaul already. A decent chunk, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7975 Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: On a side note was that the worst half quarterbacked in franchise history? I thought that I remember Brohm being bad but maybe not this horrible. It was the worst half QBed of any NFL QB since the merger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent 91 Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 Just now, jmc12290 said: We'll steal a game from the Colts and Miami probably. i was thinking 1 v Miami. Brissett is putting up real qb numbers. it's no gimme. unfortunately our pass defense wentfrom good togiving whatever you want Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatdrinks Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 (edited) Nope. This move was made to win a football game... today. It made sense and when asked if it was long term earlier in the week McD said taking it day by day or something. Look, Lynn knows the book on Taylor and it would have been the last two weeks redux. It was worth a shot because there is no way you could throw the rook into a hornets nest stadium at Arrowhead. Or vs the hoodie. You have to try to make the playoffs , and therefore since the results were awful you play Taylor next week. He'll have a new fire under his bippy and the Chiefs are struggling in a major way. Keep the season alive until you are eliminated then play the other guy. This was the only game you could play NP while you're still in it. Had to try it. Edited November 20, 2017 by Boatdrinks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
100DollarBills Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 Get ready to get upset, Peterman is here to start for the remainder of the season. Will be looking at a 1st round QB next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7975 Posted November 20, 2017 Share Posted November 20, 2017 5 minutes ago, phypon said: Okay, I thought about this one. You start Peterman. Why? Because...draft. TT is not the long term answer, neither is NP. I don't think the W/L column changes with either QB at the helm but you may as well start the rook, see what kind of backup he could be. I know this will not be a popular point of view, but it's the most logical. Players don't respect coaches that sabotage a team for better draft position. If he hasn't lost the locker room already, he will if he continues with your thought process. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts