To everyone who was so adamant that the Bills start Peterman

[Wayne Arnold]

15 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Except, he's not very accurate. He's borderline flat out inaccurate.

 

Except, he's not very accurate. He's borderline flat out inaccurate.

 

If you say it enough times, maybe it will become true.

4 minutes ago, SaviorPeterman said:

I still think we are going to see NP play again this season as soon as the 2nd half in this weeks game if TT insists on playing the way he always does.

 

And as bad as his debut was people still need to consider it was his first NFL start, on the road against a team that now looks like one of the best in the NFL.

 

Also Casey Hayward (who picked off NP several times) is now graded out as the #1 DB in the entire NFL by PFF.

 

I still believe NP could be the answer but time will tell.

 

After the 7th loss, it will be "The Peterman caaaaaaan!" time.

 

Hell, maybe if Tyrod plays poorly enough vs. the Pats, Peterman will get the start vs. Colts.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

SMH   still arguing just to argue I see. 

 

Thank goodness I have a long list of chores to do this weekend (starting tomorrow) 

 

 

[SaviorPeterman]

2 minutes ago, Wayne Arnold said:

 

If you say it enough times, maybe it will become true.

 

After the 7th loss, it will be "The Peterman caaaaaaan!" time.

 

Hell, maybe if Tyrod plays poorly enough vs. the Pats, Peterman will get the start vs. Colts.

 

I think NP will start next week and the rest of the year if Taylor doesn't show anything different in this game which is pretty much expected to be another lopsided loss. Also why McD said TT is only the starter again this week and wouldn't comment beyond that.

 

Can't stick with a QB (whose not going to be here next year anyway) that has no guts and continues to run out of bounds and throw 2 yard passes on 3rd down. In fact I believe TT was quoted this week saying 16 points against the Pats won't cut it so there's some accountability right there.

[Kelly the Dog]

2 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

Oh, so now you know the play design?

 

When Peterman looked towards Clay, he sees the LB dropping in clear hook zone coverage with Clay running straight past him.  No DB is anywhere close to make a play on a led pass and the S was cheating towards the opposite side of the field.

 

In the NFL, sometimes players don't become "wide open" until the ball is thrown.  It was clear Clay was going to get WIDE OPEN when Peterman was looking at him, and thus, he missed him.

Most plays Peterman knows where he is going to throw before the ball is snapped. The Bills offense is designed this way, as are most. Peterman knew, and was right, that he was throwing it right all along because of the defensive alignment because there was only one safety deep who was moving and lined up to Peterman's left because of the motion. That left Holmes one on one with no safety help at all. There wouldn't be time for the safety to get over to the fly route. That is what Peterman and every QB would be coached to do. It's blatantly obvious. Peterman looks left a half beat just to make sure the safety doesn't start right earlier, which he is supposed to do. But he's not really even looking because he knows he's immediately going back to the right. 

[reddogblitz]

3 hours ago, JohnC said:

The better team won on the home field. You and many others are making the assumption because the HC resorted to going with the rookie qb that the results would have been different. In this game it didn't matter. The Chargers' DL, especially Bosa, overwhelmed our OL. With or without TT as the starter the home team, the better, would have won. What you and many others who are taking the same position refuse to acknowledge is that the coach resorted to a qb change for a reason. The starter was struggling and the offense was stuck. 

 

I agree with you that the Bills are a team whose roster is lacking talent. Yet they are winning their share of games because they are gritty. That's the point! This is a rebuilding process with its usual ups and downs. They are where they should be. There is still a lot to be done to upgrade the roster, especially at the qb position. 

 

Maybe maybe  not.  We'll never know because Hotrod didn't start.  A lot of posters on here, I'm speculating you may be one of them ( if not I apologize) thought we couldn't win against Atlanta, Denver, and KC games either.  So, one never knows ...

[BADOLBILZ]

3 hours ago, JohnC said:

The better team won on the home field. You and many others are making the assumption because the HC resorted to going with the rookie qb that the results would have been different. In this game it didn't matter. The Chargers' DL, especially Bosa, overwhelmed our OL. With or without TT as the starter the home team, the better, would have won. What you and many others who are taking the same position refuse to acknowledge is that the coach resorted to a qb change for a reason. The starter was struggling and the offense was stuck. 

 

I agree with you that the Bills are a team whose roster is lacking talent. Yet they are winning their share of games because they are gritty. That's the point! This is a rebuilding process with its usual ups and downs. They are where they should be. There is still a lot to be done to upgrade the roster, especially at the qb position. 

 

 

It's MORE than safe to assume that not turning the ball over 5 times has a significant impact on the scoreboard. 

 

The result of those 5 turnovers was a franchise record 37 first half points for a San Diego team that came into the game 3-6 and had shown a knack for playing in close games......whether that was playing up or down to the level of competition.

 

Yeah the defense quit in the Chargers game.   They quit after half-time of the Jets game.   I do think that a lack of offensive momentum was at play in both of those games but little of that had to do with Taylor.  

 

Taylor was probably the only good offensive player on the field in the Jets game.    The game where they were thoroughly dominated was the Saints game.........New Orleans was great on both sides of the ball.    

 

The Chargers were not.   If the Bills had been able to continue to implement their running game they might have been able to put up their own 200+ yard rushing game against that vulnerable rush defense but instead they turned the ball over at a record rate for two quarters and the momentum swept them up defensively.

 

I have no idea if they win that game but I know that Chargers team has been finding ways to lose games all season when put in position to.   Simple as that.  Those are the type of teams Jauron Ball is designed to prey upon.   It's idiotic to suggest that a bumbling 3-6 team was just too good to be beaten.  It was a dumb decision by McD.   

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Fare Thee Well Tyrod Taylor. 

 

May your last 3 to 5 games in Buffalo be memorable.  

[reddogblitz]

19 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Fare Thee Well Tyrod Taylor. 

 

May your last 3 to 5 games in Buffalo be memorable.  

 

You got it all figured out, don't you.

 

I'm working from the disadvantage that I can't predict the future, so I'm gonna wait and see what happens.

 

Dumping Hotrod is far from certain I would suspect.

 

But win 8 or 9 games and be close and dump the QB would be typical Bills.  Worked out great for us in 2000, 2004, and 2014.

Edited November 30, 2017 by reddogblitz

[Billsfan1972]

1 hour ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Most plays Peterman knows where he is going to throw before the ball is snapped. The Bills offense is designed this way, as are most. Peterman knew, and was right, that he was throwing it right all along because of the defensive alignment because there was only one safety deep who was moving and lined up to Peterman's left because of the motion. That left Holmes one on one with no safety help at all. There wouldn't be time for the safety to get over to the fly route. That is what Peterman and every QB would be coached to do. It's blatantly obvious. Peterman looks left a half beat just to make sure the safety doesn't start right earlier, which he is supposed to do. But he's not really even looking because he knows he's immediately going back to the right. 

Again you miss (as did others) the sarcasm in the post.

 

Peterman had time and threw a bad pass, which vs. SD was actually a great result as it was not intercepted (pretty sure the next one was).  By pointing out Clay being open I was using the crap everyone uses when they highlight Tyrod's missed plays and then minutiae associated with every throw.

 

BTW way Clay was open and would have been a big play.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

1 hour ago, reddogblitz said:

 

You got it all figured out, don't you.

 

I'm working from the disadvantage that I can't predict the future, so I'm gonna wait and see what happens.

 

Dumping Hotrod is far from certain I would suspect.

 

But win 8 or 9 games and be close and dump the QB would be typical Bills.  Worked out great for us in 2000, 2004, and 2014.

No, I don't.  But, I do see the writing on the wall and some friends with inside info kind of agree with my assumption.  

 

When will you Tyrod fans come to understand that the rest of us Bills Fans  want more than .500  QB.  

 

He got benched just before one of THE most important games on the schedule.  I say it was important because it would have locked the Bills into the 5th seed if they could have pulled off an upset with TT.  

 

Because of his ineptitude we got Nate Peterman and a circus show.    Bosa - He literally didn't try to block me!! 

Edited November 30, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan

[BuffaloHokie13]

7 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

No, I don't.  But, I do see the writing on the wall and some friends with inside info kind of agree with my assumption.  

 

When will you Tyrod fans come to understand that the rest of us Bills Fans  want more than .500  QB.  

 

He got benched just before one of THE most important games on the schedule.  I say it was important because it would have locked the Bills into the 5th seed if they could have pulled off an upset with TT.  

 

Because of his ineptitude we got Nate Peterman and a circus show.    Bosa - He literally didn't try to block me!! 

Do you want Eli?

[LABILLBACKER]

This Sunday will be Tyrod (Custers) last stand. He'll need to play the best game of his career. Even better than last year's Seattle game. 9 wins will not cut it this year. So if there is even a glimmer of hope for Tyrod and the Bills, it will require beating the GOAT in Buffalo. As far as NP goes it was an embarrassing debut, but I know he's better than that.  Neither qb has the benefit of a good oline or wr's. We'll need a miracle.

[reddogblitz]

48 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

No, I don't.  But, I do see the writing on the wall and some friends with inside info kind of agree with my assumption.  

 

When will you Tyrod fans come to understand that the rest of us Bills Fans  want more than .500  QB.  

 

He got benched just before one of THE most important games on the schedule.  I say it was important because it would have locked the Bills into the 5th seed if they could have pulled off an upset with TT.  

 

Because of his ineptitude we got Nate Peterman and a circus show.    Bosa - He literally didn't try to block me!! 

 

We do. 21-18 .553  .750 when the D show up this year.

 

Again, the problem is the defense, not the QB and has been the last 2 years before that?  Do you dispute that?

 

I'd love have a better QB and think we should go full hog on finding one.  Just don't cut a pretty darn good one, the best we've had since Flutie got cut.  Let's get some depth at QB for a change.  If our starter is struggling would be nice to have someone we could put in that wouldn't throw 5 picks in the first half

 

However cutting a decent QB after a good season where we're close is so Bills.  Worked so well in 2000, 2004,  and 2014..

Edited November 30, 2017 by reddogblitz

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

2 hours ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Do you want Eli?

Not at this stage.  

1 hour ago, reddogblitz said:

We do. 21-18 .553  .750 when the D show up this year.

Oops I rounded down.05 %

 

which is what I have been saying for a long time.    

 

He needs a top 10  ball hawking Defense to win.    

 

How do you factor in the 1/2 game we had to throw away because coach needed to make a statement?

[transplantbillsfan]

4 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

SMH   still arguing just to argue I see. 

 

Thank goodness I have a long list of chores to do this weekend (starting tomorrow) 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Fare Thee Well Tyrod Taylor. 

 

May your last 3 to 5 games in Buffalo be memorable.  

 

2 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

No, I don't.  But, I do see the writing on the wall and some friends with inside info kind of agree with my assumption.  

 

When will you Tyrod fans come to understand that the rest of us Bills Fans  want more than .500  QB.  

 

He got benched just before one of THE most important games on the schedule.  I say it was important because it would have locked the Bills into the 5th seed if they could have pulled off an upset with TT.  

 

Because of his ineptitude we got Nate Peterman and a circus show.    Bosa - He literally didn't try to block me!! 

 

Shady, for a guy who argues that we're beating dead horses with Taylor... I think you post about him waaaAAAAAaaaaayyyy more than anyone else.

 

You're also like a child:

 

 

"Fare Thee Well Tyrod Taylor" ... ?

 

(What happens if he's back next year?  Hmmmm?)

 

Seriously, you're sounding like a kid pointing fingers on the playground at this point.

 

You have chores to do this weekend?  Maybe take a break from posting about Taylor, who you must secretly admire, and start those chores now.  He'll be there to dissect after the game for you on Sunday.

 

It's okay, I'm sure you've had enough dopamine rushes to your head getting your post count up to last you through your chores

Edited November 30, 2017 by transplantbillsfan

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

1 minute ago, transplantbillsfan said:

You're also like a child:

 

 

"Fare Thee Well Tyrod Taylor" ... ?

 

(What happens if he's back next year?  Hmmmm?)

Then good sir I will freely admit that I was wrong (again) 

 

The innocence of childhood.  

No hesitation telling you what they think.  

 

 

#higherground

[Bill from NYC]

7 hours ago, JohnC said:

 Why did it come to starting a rookie? 

Does this question imply that you think that starting Peterman was NOT an attempt at tanking?

 

I think that what the Giants are doing with Eli proves tanking is now a fad of sorts. Tyrod isn't so good, but Peterman was too bad for words, and probably never will be any good. Why are the Giants starting one of the worst QBs to ever play in the NFL? To win football games?

 

McDermott cannot come out and admit that he is and has been tanking. Bills fans have already used up much of their emotional expenditures rooting for a sad, sub-par franchise. But do you think that he traded away the #10 (passing on at least 1 quality qb) and most of our top players because he was trying to win this year and have late round picks? Can anyone conceivably believe this?

 

But you see, a funny thing happened on the way to the toilet.....the Bills were winning games.  So, what to do? They started a quarterback who probably will never have any business in the NFL. If he wasn't such a disgrace, maybe they could have left him in to lose more football games and tank as planned.

 

The Bills, with Peterman at the helm, did a good job of sucking I must say. But John, Tyrod just beat the Chiefs lol. Tyrod is a good enough qb for the Bills to win some games and possibly, in a division that is a joke,  squeak their way into the playoffs.

 

Bottom line to this post? My thing is that the Bills even suck at sucking but of course, I still love them.

 

GO BILLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

1 minute ago, Bill from NYC said:

Does this question imply that you think that starting Peterman was NOT an attempt at tanking?

My 2 cents.  

 

I think it was to send a message to the entire team.  

 

 

Trust the process. 

[Bill from NYC]

15 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

My 2 cents.  

 

I think it was to send a message to the entire team.  

 

 

Trust the process. 

I'm not sure what you mean.....

[JohnC]

24 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

Does this question imply that you think that starting Peterman was NOT an attempt at tanking?

 

I think that what the Giants are doing with Eli proves tanking is now a fad of sorts. Tyrod isn't so good, but Peterman was too bad for words, and probably never will be any good. Why are the Giants starting one of the worst QBs to ever play in the NFL? To win football games?

 

McDermott cannot come out and admit that he is and has been tanking. Bills fans have already used up much of their emotional expenditures rooting for a sad, sub-par franchise. But do you think that he traded away the #10 (passing on at least 1 quality qb) and most of our top players because he was trying to win this year and have late round picks? Can anyone conceivably believe this?

 

But you see, a funny thing happened on the way to the toilet.....the Bills were winning games.  So, what to do? They started a quarterback who probably will never have any business in the NFL. If he wasn't such a disgrace, maybe they could have left him in to lose more football games and tank as planned.

 

The Bills, with Peterman at the helm, did a good job of sucking I must say. But John, Tyrod just beat the Chiefs lol. Tyrod is a good enough qb for the Bills to win some games and possibly, in a division that is a joke,  squeak their way into the playoffs.

 

Bottom line to this post? My thing is that the Bills even suck at sucking but of course, I still love them.

 

GO BILLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gotham Bill, I have a high regard for you but you have missed the points I have made regarding this new regime taking over for the Whaley regime (a GM you have for a very long time scathingly criticized). It's very apparent to me that Pegula hired McDermott because he presented a comprehensive plan that was diametrically different from the Whaley approach to building a roster. The organization has been completely blown up by the new staff. Whaley and all his hires, including all of the scouts, were dismissed. While Whaley and the HCs that the owners hired were often at odds philosophically and personality wise the new HC had the authority to hire his own GM. So that is an obvious example of an organization in alignment instead of in dissonance.

 

As I have said right from the start of the new staffing this is a major rebuilding job from addressing the roster and the cap distribution. Gilmore, Watkins and Dareus  are examples of not only shedding players for scheme reasons but also for cap reasons. The new HC wants players who want to be in Buffalo and he wants players who are committed. The primary strategy to restock the roster is through the draft. Last year the team traded down in the first round to get an extra first round pick this year. Watkins was dealt for a second round pick and a starting CB. Ragland, who I believe is going to be a good player in a more conducive scheme, was dealt for a third round pick in this year's draft. The strategy is to accumulate picks and use them to fill holes with younger and cheaper players and to better position for a high level qb prospect in this year's draft. 

 

The argument that the Bills have to tank or not makes little sense to me. Why not try to be competitive in the short run while in the long run build a more talented and sustaining roster? You change the culture by being reasonably competitive. The Browns have demonstrated how not to rebuild a roster. If you totally blow up the roster without having some residual talent you don't get anywhere. The Browns also have demonstrated what not to do by passing on high quality qb prospects (as have the Bills) and extend the period of time for a search for a franchise qb. The Browns passed on either Goff or Wentz a couple years ago and they passed on Watson who could have been had with their second first round pick last year. Securing that position is an essential requirement to being successful. 

 

As far as the Taylor vs Peterman argument I have simple response: I simply don't give a shiiiit. Neither are franchise qbs and neither will ever be. Too much energy is wasted on that meaningless topic for players that will get you nowhere. It's clear that Whaley and McDermott have very different football visions. However, both came to the same conclusion on the running qb as a franchise qb. 

 

While you might look at the Bills organization as being inept in being either a tank team or a competitive team I have a very different perspective. In my mind this is a stripped down team that is overachieving. You may complain about that but I'm not. I give the HC credit for keeping this less than average talented team in the playoff hunt. 

 

I realize how challenging this rebuilding process is. While others lament and are in a state of despair I am enthusiastically embracing it.It is a pathway that should have been taken years ago. I hope this response might give you a better understanding on how I see things developing with this woebegone franchise. 

[reddogblitz]

1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Not at this stage.  

Oops I rounded down.05 %

 

which is what I have been saying for a long time.    

 

He needs a top 10  ball hawking Defense to win.    

 

How do you factor in the 1/2 game we had to throw away because coach needed to make a statement?

 

Actually, I checked my work and it's really .539.  So you only rounded down .4%

 

I factored in the Charger debacle as a D didn't show up.  But of course Nate Peterpan and Hotrod didn't help them very much.  But still.  NO one says they couldn't have not rolled over and gave up so many TDs.  Our D has got to be the laziest bunch of snowflakes around.  The other team scores a TD or two and they melt, or so the legend goes.

 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

50 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

I'm not sure what you mean.....

Live up to expectations or get ready to step aside.  

 

The repercussions can be dire.  

 

Now look at where we sit. 

 

Your guess is as good as mine.  

[Wily Dog]

18 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Gotham Bill, I have a high regard for you but you have missed the points I have made regarding this new regime taking over for the Whaley regime (a GM you have for a very long time scathingly criticized). It's very apparent to me that Pegula hired McDermott because he presented a comprehensive plan that was diametrically different from the Whaley approach to building a roster. The organization has been completely blown up by the new staff. Whaley and all his hires, including all of the scouts, were dismissed. While Whaley and the HCs that the owners hired were often at odds philosophically and personality wise the new HC had the authority to hire his own GM. So that is an obvious example of an organization in alignment instead of in dissonance.

 

As I have said right from the start of the new staffing this is a major rebuilding job from addressing the roster and the cap distribution. Gilmore, Watkins and Dareus  are examples of not only shedding players for scheme reasons but also for cap reasons. The new HC wants players who want to be in Buffalo and he wants players who are committed. The primary strategy to restock the roster is through the draft. Last year the team traded down in the first round to get an extra first round pick this year. Watkins was dealt for a second round pick and a starting CB. Ragland, who I believe is going to be a good player in a more conducive scheme, was dealt for a third round pick in this year's draft. The strategy is to accumulate picks and use them to fill holes with younger and cheaper players and to better position for a high level qb prospect in this year's draft. 

 

The argument that the Bills have to tank or not makes little sense to me. Why not try to be competitive in the short run while in the long run build a more talented and sustaining roster? You change the culture by being reasonably competitive. The Browns have demonstrated how not to rebuild a roster. If you totally blow up the roster without having some residual talent you don't get anywhere. The Browns also have demonstrated what not to do by passing on high quality qb prospects (as have the Bills) and extend the period of time for a search for a franchise qb. The Browns passed on either Goff or Wentz a couple years ago and they passed on Watson who could have been had with their second first round pick last year. Securing that position is an essential requirement to being successful. 

 

As far as the Taylor vs Peterman argument I have simple response: I simply don't give a shiiiit. Neither are franchise qbs and neither will ever be. Too much energy is wasted on that meaningless topic for players that will get you nowhere. It's clear that Whaley and McDermott have very different football visions. However, both came to the same conclusion on the running qb as a franchise qb. 

 

While you might look at the Bills organization as being inept in being either a tank team or a competitive team I have a very different perspective. In my mind this is a stripped down team that is overachieving. You may complain about that but I'm not. I give the HC credit for keeping this less than average talented team in the playoff hunt. 

 

I realize how challenging this rebuilding process is. While others lament and are in a state of despair I am enthusiastically embracing it.It is a pathway that should have been taken years ago. I hope this response might give you a better understanding on how I see things developing with this woebegone franchise. 

 

This is a synopsis of exactly what the Bill's are going to do and what they have done. I would disagree with only one point and i could be wildly wrong , In stating that Peterman cannot be a Franchise QB , I do not believe he has had enough time and games to prove anything.We should look toward next year and beyond for our nirvana.

 

[JohnC]

7 minutes ago, Wily Dog said:

 

This is a synopsis of exactly what the Bill's are going to do and what they have done. I would disagree with only one point and i could be wildly wrong , In stating that Peterman cannot be a Franchise QB , I do not believe he has had enough time and games to prove anything.We should look toward next year and beyond for our nirvana.

 

We may disagree on Peterman's potential but what is obvious is that this organization has already made a determination on Taylor. I agree with their judgment. 

[Wily Dog]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

We may disagree on Peterman's potential but what is obvious is that this organization has already made a determination on Taylor. I agree with their judgment. 

 

I totally agree

[Wayne Arnold]

5 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

However cutting a decent QB after a good season where we're close is so Bills.  Worked so well in 2000, 2004,  and 2014..

 

Is Taylor having a good season?

 

If the Bills had the 18th best record in the NFL, would you consider that a "good season"?

 

[reddogblitz]

3 hours ago, Wayne Arnold said:

 

Is Taylor having a good season?

 

If the Bills had the 18th best record in the NFL, would you consider that a "good season"?

 

 

I'm not sure what you're saying, but presently the Bills have the 4th best record in the AFC.

 

Patsies** 9-2

stealers 9-2

Jacksonville 7-4

Titans 7-4

 

That's it, there are no other AFC teams with a better record. 9 have worse records.

 

I really don't care about some goofy QB ranking.  Give me the Ws.

 

We're .539 with Hotrod with a bad defense most of the time.  When the D has played well this year we're .750.

 

We're close.

 

Let's try to fix up that D and win this thing.

 

Edited December 1, 2017 by reddogblitz

[Canadian Bills Fan]

 

 

 

 

[Bing Bong]

On ‎11‎/‎30‎/‎2017 at 8:22 AM, ShadyBillsFan said:

Sarcasm??              

 

FWIW - Copypaste hates and I mean he really hates Nate.  

That was Peterman "throwing players open". AKA throwing quickly and inaccurately for no reason.

[SoTier]

On 11/29/2017 at 8:29 PM, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

That's not the way football works John.

 

There have been weeks where you have to wonder how the Bills hung in defensively against a number of teams they've played.........but they did because they play football one series at a time.

 

That's how the Bills have managed to win or be in most of their games.

 

They are out-talented most weeks and yet have managed to win more than they've lost by playing one series-at-a-time Jauron Ball.

 

The philosophy behind it is that bad teams.......which a 3-6 team has been........will beat themselves if you don't help them.

 

You can pretend the Chargers are actually an immensely better team....like the Patriots.....but they aren't.   

 

I will add that the Chargers have staked their current claim to being a "hot team" on beating the Bills with Peterman and beating the Cowpies without Elliott and without their LT Smith.   This week they get to play the winless Browns.

[Kirby Jackson]

We had people banging the drum to start EJ for 2 years and now Peterman. Anyone that believes either of those is a better option is an idiot. I’m sorry but you are. That doesn’t mean we can’t upgrade from Tyrod, but those guys are way worse. 

 

What do you think the Bills record would be if they had started EJ and Peterman since the start of 2015? My guess is that they would have beaten the Dolphins twice and the Colts in 2015, the Cardinals, Patriots, Rams, 49ers and Browns last year and the Jets and Raiders this year. That would have them at 10-33 over that span. That’s a .233 win percentage. Tyrod has a .538 win percentage in a Bills uniform with the same guys. 

 

Again, upgrading this offseason is something that we are all fine with. Pretending that he is as bad as EJ or Peterman is ridiculous. Let’s stop using those two interchangeably.

[Bangarang]

59 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

We had people banging the drum to start EJ for 2 years and now Peterman. Anyone that believes either of those is a better option is an idiot. I’m sorry but you are. That doesn’t mean we can’t upgrade from Tyrod, but those guys are way worse. 

 

What do you think the Bills record would be if they had started EJ and Peterman since the start of 2015? My guess is that they would have beaten the Dolphins twice and the Colts in 2015, the Cardinals, Patriots, Rams, 49ers and Browns last year and the Jets and Raiders this year. That would have them at 10-33 over that span. That’s a .233 win percentage. Tyrod has a .538 win percentage in a Bills uniform with the same guys. 

 

Again, upgrading this offseason is something that we are all fine with. Pretending that he is as bad as EJ or Peterman is ridiculous. Let’s stop using those two interchangeably.

 

Instead of being a mediocre team who doesn’t make the playoffs we could have been a bad team who doesn’t make the playoffs. If it means we have a better shot at drafting a good QB then I can live through a worse than usual season.

[BringBackOrton]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

We had people banging the drum to start EJ for 2 years and now Peterman. Anyone that believes either of those is a better option is an idiot. I’m sorry but you are. That doesn’t mean we can’t upgrade from Tyrod, but those guys are way worse. 

 

What do you think the Bills record would be if they had started EJ and Peterman since the start of 2015? My guess is that they would have beaten the Dolphins twice and the Colts in 2015, the Cardinals, Patriots, Rams, 49ers and Browns last year and the Jets and Raiders this year. That would have them at 10-33 over that span. That’s a .233 win percentage. Tyrod has a .538 win percentage in a Bills uniform with the same guys. 

 

Again, upgrading this offseason is something that we are all fine with. Pretending that he is as bad as EJ or Peterman is ridiculous. Let’s stop using those two interchangeably.

Better for what?  To scrape out some games to 8-8 this year?  Probably not.

 

To find the QB of the future while losing on our way to a top pick?  Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better.

[Kirby Jackson]

10 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

Better for what?  To scrape out some games to 8-8 this year?  Probably not.

 

To find the QB of the future while losing on our way to a top pick?  Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better.

To give the team a chance to win. The Bills haven’t been trying to tank. This year you could argue that they were as a lot of the talent has been jettisoned. At the same time why bring back Tyrod, Shady and Kyle? Why would you extend Wood? The Bills went half pregnant this year. I don’t believe in “winning now and winning into the future.” They work against each other in my opinion. You either try to win or tank and get your QB. 

[BringBackOrton]

1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:

To give the team a chance to win. The Bills haven’t been trying to tank. This year you could argue that they were as a lot of the talent has been jettisoned. At the same time why bring back Tyrod, Shady and Kyle? Why would you extend Wood? The Bills went half pregnant this year. I don’t believe in “winning now and winning into the future.” They work against each other in my opinion. You either try to win or tank and get your QB. 

I agree.

 

Some folks think we can win now and win later. I don't think we'll accomplish either.

[Fan in Chicago]

25 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

You either try to win or tank and get your QB. 

I am certainly not a fan of tanking as the draft results of perennial basement dwellers has been less than stellar. There are other reasons too (and I am sure you have thought of all of these Kirby):

- Its about who you draft when you are on the board more so then where you draft. While the success rate of top-10 picks @ QB are better, it is still not a science and recent history has shown that competent QBs can be found after Round 1

- Most QB-hungry teams have a terrible record to begin with (duh) and have had changes to the coaching staff. It is tough for a new coach to sell a tanking season to the fans. See McAdoo

- Financially it is a bad choice for the owners and they have to be totally on board to sacrifice a lucrative season in the hopes of future glory

- You do face the race-to-the bottom scenario when you may tank and still not be in a position to draft the QB you want

 

Having said all that, this is a great season to end up with a  top-5 or top-10 pick, if you are desperate for a QB

Edited December 2, 2017 by Fan in Chicago

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, Fan in Chicago said:

I am certainly not a fan of tanking as the draft results of perennial basement dwellers has been less than stellar. There are other reasons too (and I am sure you have thought of all of these Kirby):

- Its about who you draft when you are on the board more so then where you draft. While the success rate of top-10 pics @ QB are better, it is still not a science and recent history has shown that competent QBs can be found after Round 2

- Most QB-hungry teams have a terrible record to begin with (duh) and have had changes to the coaching staff. It is tough for a new coach to sell a tanking season to the fans. See McAdoo

- Financially it is a bad choice for the owners and they have to be totally on board to sacrifice a lucrative season in the hopes of future glory

- You do face the race-to-the bottom scenario when you may tank and still not be in a position to draft the QB you want

 

Having said all that, this is a great season to end up with a  top-5 or top-10 pick, if you are desperate for a QB

Good post!! It’s definitely a tricky situation especially in football. You need to build a lot back up once you’ve been gutted. It’s not like the NBA where you can tank, draft a franchise player, and be good 3 months later. You need way more talent around you. If you’ve noticed the teams that turned it around with a franchise QB (Philly & Rams) they both traded up for those guys. They had a talent base in place. The year before the the Bucs bottomed out and kept the pick. They are still a bad team.

[BringBackOrton]

4 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Good post!! It’s definitely a tricky situation especially in football. You need to build a lot back up once you’ve been gutted. It’s not like the NBA where you can tank, draft a franchise player, and be good 3 months later. You need way more talent around you. If you’ve noticed the teams that turned it around with a franchise QB (Philly & Rams) they both traded up for those guys. They had a talent base in place. The year before the the Bucs bottomed out and kept the pick. They are still a bad team.

Jax turned it around by tanking.

 

So did the Titans.

 

The Texans tanked one year and turned it around to being a good team. 

 

KC was a basement dweller and turned it into yearly postseason contenders

 

Panthers got Cam.

 

Colts got Luck (recent struggles with health notwithstanding)

 

Lions got Stafford.

 

All in the last 10 years.

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, jmc12290 said:

Jax turned it around by tanking.

 

So did the Titans.

 

The Texans tanked one year and turned it around to being a good team. 

 

KC was a basement dweller and turned it into yearly postseason contenders

 

Panthers got Cam.

 

Colts got Luck (recent struggles with health notwithstanding)

 

Lions got Stafford.

 

All in the last 10 years.

Jacksonville has picked in the top 5 for about a decade. I don’t know how we can classify that tanking as working. They still don’t have a QB.

 

The Titans are in the same boat. They MAY have their franchise guy but it’s certainly debatable.

 

The Texans tanked when Watt went out for the season. He might have been the single best player in football at that point. They are good when healthy. They still haven’t won a thing though.

 

When did KC tank? When they drafted Eric Fisher 1st overall? That has nothing to do with why they are better. 

 

Panthers I agree with.

 

The Colts are the PERFECT example of why it’s tough to tank in football. They got a guy that most thought was the best prospect since Peyton. They haven’t won a damn thing and are pretty much a trash football team.

 

I would agree on the Lions too. It has benefitted them for sure. 

 

 

[BADOLBILZ]

6 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

Jax turned it around by tanking.

 

So did the Titans.

 

The Texans tanked one year and turned it around to being a good team. 

 

KC was a basement dweller and turned it into yearly postseason contenders

 

Panthers got Cam.

 

Colts got Luck (recent struggles with health notwithstanding)

 

Lions got Stafford.

 

All in the last 10 years.

 

Another awful, awful take by jmc.

 

Jax tanked for 5 straight years and got Blake Bortles and now their salary cap is bloated.(Rams also tanked for 5 years and got nothing out of it from 2007-2011).

 

Marcus Mariotta has been awful.   Titans aren't really any better than the Bills and worse at the QB position by a considerable amount.  

 

Texans didn't tank........they traded up with Cleveland to get Watson.   Remember?  Bills could have just selected Watson.

 

KC got Eric Fisher for tanking......that was a complete fail........they turned it around by hiring Reid and acquiring Alex Smith for picks.

 

Cam and Luck are outstanding but they are the exceptions and have not been anywhere near the consistent level of a Manning, Brady, Rodgers etc.

 

Stafford will enter his TENTH season in Detroit next year with a career losing record as a starter.   He's proof that you can get what you want in tanking and still not be a contender over the course of the next decade.