The overreaction toward McDermott from the media is why football coaches are so conservative

[BuffaloBill]

9 hours ago, Perry Turtle said:

 

 

McDermott is on run of bad decisions, and he's being justifiably criticized.

 

A run of bad decisions?  Starting Peterman, according to McDermott, was his decision.  Play execution against the Jets and Saints was not his decision. This to me does not seem to be a run of bad decisions as much as it is the reality that a misaligned, if not poor roster of players has been exposed.

 

The Jets figured out exactly what they needed to do to shut the Bills down offensively.  The Saints probably did not much more than borrow form their gameplan.

 

The Bills have sucked on both lines for three games now.  

 

The problems go far deeper than the QB though I would argue the QB situation makes the entire situation worse than it really is.  The Bills do not have an NFL caliber QB on their roster.  The decision to go into the season with Tyrod Taylor and try to feature a run first offense in a league where nearly everyone else is a pass first or balanced concept is the first point of derailment. 

[Jackington]

29 minutes ago, DriveFor1Outta5 said:

The media and some posters have ignored one fact. We got crushed last week, and we got crushed again this week. This team just isn’t good enough. 

One team is the best in the NFC, one has a losing record in the bad AFC... 

[DriveFor1Outta5]

Just now, Jackington said:

One team is the best in the NFC, one has a losing record in the bad AFC... 

We got crushed by the Jets as well. The Saints are really good, but they aren’t that good. Brees and the Saints historically struggle on the road. NFL teams aren’t supposed to lose home games that badly to anyone. 

[dave mcbride]

10 hours ago, Wayne Arnold said:

The odd crucifixion of Sean McDermott by the media simply because he decided to try something different by seeing if a rookie QB could spark the offense is strange to me...but far from surprising. 

 

I'm always on football coaches (especially in the NFL) for being too conservative. I call most of them gutless meatheads because they ignore analytics when they punt on 4th and 2 from the opponent's 39 yard line.

 

But it's obvious why they are the way they are.

 

Because football coaches are much more likely to be ridiculed when they go for it and don't convert than they are when they punt.

 

Coaches who take risks put themselves out there. And are blasted when that risk doesn't work out. Meanwhile, the coaches who never take risks are able to skate by with little attention. Sure, they'll rarely succeed...but they at least keep their jobs and collect a paycheck for a while before getting fired.

 

And I'm sick of people treating the quarterback position like something sacred. As if replacing the starting QB for a game (or even just a half) is some sort of travesty like the coach is destroying the sanctity of football by doing it. It's one position. If the QB plays poorly then the next guy should be given a chance. Who cares?

 

Say what you want about McDermott - but I applaud him for his willingness to try something to turn around an anemic offense. It didn't work and it was wrong.

 

McDermott went for it and the conversion failed.

I take your point about taking chances, but this wasn't like going for it on 4th and 2 at the opponent's 39 yard line -- it was more like deciding to punt on 3rd and 11 from your own 30 yard line in a fit of (wrongheaded) cleverness. 

[Mr. WEO]

So the "media" considers the QB change a bad idea (for all of the obvious reasons at the time), and then, after it is graphically exposed as a bad idea on gameday, the "media's" reaction to this predictable disaster is what alters the nature of head coaches to be more conservative?

 

That's a tough one to understand logically.

[Buddy Hix]

10 hours ago, Wayne Arnold said:

The odd crucifixion of Sean McDermott by the media simply because he decided to try something different by seeing if a rookie QB could spark the offense is strange to me...but far from surprising. 

 

I'm always on football coaches (especially in the NFL) for being too conservative. I call most of them gutless meatheads because they ignore analytics when they punt on 4th and 2 from the opponent's 39 yard line.

 

But it's obvious why they are the way they are.

 

Because football coaches are much more likely to be ridiculed when they go for it and don't convert than they are when they punt.

 

Coaches who take risks put themselves out there. And are blasted when that risk doesn't work out. Meanwhile, the coaches who never take risks are able to skate by with little attention. Sure, they'll rarely succeed...but they at least keep their jobs and collect a paycheck for a while before getting fired.

 

And I'm sick of people treating the quarterback position like something sacred. As if replacing the starting QB for a game (or even just a half) is some sort of travesty like the coach is destroying the sanctity of football by doing it. It's one position. If the QB plays poorly then the next guy should be given a chance. Who cares?

 

Say what you want about McDermott - but I applaud him for his willingness to try something to turn around an anemic offense. It didn't work and it was wrong.

 

McDermott went for it and the conversion failed.

I appreciate the point you are making but think it misses the mark in this situation.

 

Peterman is so bad that you can't equate throwing him in there to going for it on 4th and 2. After seeing how completely inept and unprepared Peterman is the equivalent scenario would be going for it on 4th and 50 from your own goal line in a game that you are winning.

 

The result of that decision is epic...the Bills regain their standing as the joke of all pro sports, our 1st year head coach undoubtedly lost the team, Peterman is probably ruined and the fan base is disgusted.

 

If McD thought Peterman was prepared for an NFL start, what does that say about the man who has been given more power than any coach in recent memory? Let me answer that....he is clueless.

 

Same old Bills.

[SoTier]

1 hour ago, Wayne Arnold said:

A veteran quarterback who performed terribly in his previous start. With the way the defense is performing, the team's QB can't be checking down or eating the ball. He has to take chances, which Peterman did (obviously to poor results).

 

It was the wrong decision in hindsight ("Hindsight is 20/20.") but stop pretending as if it was some sort of travesty.

 

Get a clue.   I criticized your lame attempt to absolve McDermott of the responsibility for his poor decision, not McDermott himself.    I'm not even sure it really was his decision, but as HC, falling on his sword to protect his superiors' butts when they do something stupid is part of his job description, so he has to own the decision and face the consequences.

 

The decision was wrong for several reasons, not the least of which was that it told the players that the coaching staff had given up on the season themselves.  Inserting a rookie QB as starter is something that teams do when they have no hope of having a winning season not when they're sitting as the sixth seed in the playoff races.

[TheElectricCompany]

21 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

I appreciate the point you are making but think it misses the mark in this situation.

 

Peterman is so bad that you can't equate throwing him in there to going for it on 4th and 2. After seeing how completely inept and unprepared Peterman is the equivalent scenario would be going for it on 4th and 50 from your own goal line in a game that you are winning.

 

This is play I immediately thought of:

[SoTier]

59 minutes ago, BuffaloBill said:

 

A run of bad decisions?  Starting Peterman, according to McDermott, was his decision.  Play execution against the Jets and Saints was not his decision. This to me does not seem to be a run of bad decisions as much as it is the reality that a misaligned, if not poor roster of players has been exposed.

 

The Jets figured out exactly what they needed to do to shut the Bills down offensively.  The Saints probably did not much more than borrow form their gameplan.

 

The Bills have sucked on both lines for three games now.  

 

The problems go far deeper than the QB though I would argue the QB situation makes the entire situation worse than it really is.  The Bills do not have an NFL caliber QB on their roster.  The decision to go into the season with Tyrod Taylor and try to feature a run first offense in a league where nearly everyone else is a pass first or balanced concept is the first point of derailment. 

 

The Bills do not have an NFL caliber roster period.  McDermott and Beane have seen to that by getting rid of virtually all of the Bills young talent since they arrived on the scene.

[Buddy Hix]

20 minutes ago, TheElectricCompany said:

This is play I immediately thought of:

 

 

The Peterman decision is worse...I can't believe anything could be worse but somehow we managed it.

[CodeMonkey]

11 hours ago, Wayne Arnold said:

The odd crucifixion of Sean McDermott by the media simply because he decided to try something different by seeing if a rookie QB could spark the offense is strange to me...but far from surprising. 

 

I'm always on football coaches (especially in the NFL) for being too conservative. I call most of them gutless meatheads because they ignore analytics when they punt on 4th and 2 from the opponent's 39 yard line.

 

But it's obvious why they are the way they are.

 

Because football coaches are much more likely to be ridiculed when they go for it and don't convert than they are when they punt.

 

Coaches who take risks put themselves out there. And are blasted when that risk doesn't work out. Meanwhile, the coaches who never take risks are able to skate by with little attention. Sure, they'll rarely succeed...but they at least keep their jobs and collect a paycheck for a while before getting fired.

 

And I'm sick of people treating the quarterback position like something sacred. As if replacing the starting QB for a game (or even just a half) is some sort of travesty like the coach is destroying the sanctity of football by doing it. It's one position. If the QB plays poorly then the next guy should be given a chance. Who cares?

 

Say what you want about McDermott - but I applaud him for his willingness to try something to turn around an anemic offense. It didn't work and it was wrong.

 

McDermott went for it and the conversion failed.

One reason for the crucifixion is the inept way he went about it.  

1) The coaching staff, including him, should have known the kid was not ready.

2) Even if they thought maybe he was marginally ready, you don't start a kid on the road like that.  It's setting him up for failure.

 

 

[ddaryl]

I have no issue with starting Peterman

 

but there is always an ax to grind... I probably wouldn't have had any excitement for the chargers game if TT was the QB, at least I had a few days ot look forward to this game.

 

As for talent being traded away or let go.. Not so sure that happened. We perceived it as talent but this is what happens when you switch coaches and GM's.. Most who complained wanted Rex and Whaley gone, and they brought in players to match that style of play... You signed on for it now we have to let this one ride out.  Dareus' contract was insane for what he was bringing. Watkins was average and rarely great and bottom line fact is McDermott was hired and he doesn't do defense the Rex Ryan way so parts were swapped out.

 

I never phathomed this type of collapse after our 1st 7 weeks but this painful.. and officially we are in full rebuild mode

 

[starrymessenger]

10 hours ago, MURPHD6 said:

He made the decision to start an unproven rookie QB that was drafted in the 5th round when his team was in playoff contention against one of the more talented defensive lines in the league when his franchise left tackle was out with an injury. In doing so he probably lost the respect of the locker room, and most certainly lost the respect of most of the league. If he wanted to roll the dice on Peterman, maybe, just maybe, he should have waited until he was at home with a functioning line, cause he may have just ruined this kid.

No wait its a media conspiracy. FAKE NEWS. FAKE NEWS.

 

I agree. After the Jets/Saints debacles I was in favour of making the change. I was wrong. More importantly of course Coach was wrong. Its not just that the Bolts are good at getting after the QB its that our pass pro is porous and susceptible to disaster. Not having your starting LT made a bad situation worse, as you point out. Although it could not have been forseen, losing your main weapon in the passing game immediately was the kiss of death. In retrospect it probably would have made sense to stick with Tyrod until we were eliminated from playoff contention, if such was the case, and then given Peterman playing time. 

I give Coach credit for having the courage to shake things up but it was an ill advised move. Now probably the best thing for him to do is show the lockerroom some humility by implicitly acknowledging his mistake by starting Tyrod. In the long run that will buy him more respect where he needs to have it. 

As for Nate, if he has been ruined by this experience then it really never was meant to be. I think he is smart enuf and has enuf character to treat this as a hard lesson. Unlike many posters I'm by no means writing him off as a prospect. Not yet anyway. Forcing throws when he should have taken sacks is a classic rookie mistake and is all part of acclimating to the speed of the NFL game. The out was a poor throw and the same DB had a chance to pick another poor toss. Can NP make the necessary adjustment/improvement to his game? Idk.

Edited November 20, 2017 by starrymessenger

[dubs]

To the OP: I think that’s definitely somewhat true. 

 

The funny thing is though, who needs the media anymore. Rather than provide news or insight about anything, the media is just a cacophony of loud hot takes. In an age of data and information, most of the media has become useless and what we are witnessing is just a loud death rattle. 

 

I get much more information and insight from TBD. 

 

Point of clarification: I’m not saying media is going to completely go away, just totally change. Just Away from this current biased, editorialized, and sensational media. 

[BuffaloHokie13]

12 hours ago, Wayne Arnold said:

 

He looked pretty competent until our fullback let a ball go through his hands and into the arms of a defender. He shouldn't have thrown the second pick but it didn't result in anything worse than punting from the 1. The third pick was Jordan Mills being Jordan Mills. The fourth pick he was run into by Shady as he was throwing. By the fifth pick he was shell-shocked.

 

A mixture of bad luck, terrible teammates, and inexperience. Should the coaching staff have seen that coming? Debatable. 

Yes, the 2 passes he threw before that pick looked competent. Then he finished with 11 completions, 6 to us and 5 to them...

[Billsfan1972]

Don't even need to read a single post as the title and author tells me all I need to know.

 

That was the single stupidest decision ever made and the results speak for themselves.

 

And actually some still want Peterman to start vs. KC......

 

Wow just wow.....

[Wayne Arnold]

3 hours ago, Buddy Hix said:

I appreciate the point you are making but think it misses the mark in this situation.

 

Peterman is so bad that you can't equate throwing him in there to going for it on 4th and 2. After seeing how completely inept and unprepared Peterman is the equivalent scenario would be going for it on 4th and 50 from your own goal line in a game that you are winning.

 

The result of that decision is epic...the Bills regain their standing as the joke of all pro sports, our 1st year head coach undoubtedly lost the team, Peterman is probably ruined and the fan base is disgusted.

 

If McD thought Peterman was prepared for an NFL start, what does that say about the man who has been given more power than any coach in recent memory? Let me answer that....he is clueless.

 

Same old Bills.

 

Just a tad overstated.

 

Quarterback evaluation is a total crapshoot. You don't know how a QB is going to fair when his number is called. Finding fault with McDermott for how Peterman performed like he should've known that Peterman would have thrown 5 picks is disingenuous at best.

2 hours ago, CodeMonkey said:

One reason for the crucifixion is the inept way he went about it.  

1) The coaching staff, including him, should have known the kid was not ready.

2) Even if they thought maybe he was marginally ready, you don't start a kid on the road like that.  It's setting him up for failure.

 

 

 

It was a neutral site game.

2 hours ago, dubs said:

To the OP: I think that’s definitely somewhat true. 

 

The funny thing is though, who needs the media anymore. Rather than provide news or insight about anything, the media is just a cacophony of loud hot takes. In an age of data and information, most of the media has become useless and what we are witnessing is just a loud death rattle. 

 

I get much more information and insight from TBD. 

 

Point of clarification: I’m not saying media is going to completely go away, just totally change. Just Away from this current biased, editorialized, and sensational media. 

 

By "media" I don't just mean major news outlets and publications. I'm also including social media. It's all one and the same in this context.

[Jauronimo]

The "crucifixion" of McDermott must seem odd to a certain contingent of fans who canonized McBeane and the Process after he traded away all their favorite whipping boys. 

 

McDermott thought Peterman was ready to start and gave the Bills a better chance to win than Tyrod.  When you bench your starter in a playoff race and basically forfeit a game your judgment may get called into question. 

 

Beyond personnel moves, I find major issues with the weekly game plan.  If your plan is to cover the Chargers #1 WR with a combination of Humber and Lorax just because he's lining up in the slot, then you're going to have a bad time.  Even after getting torched by Allen it still took a full half of football to even consider putting a DB on Allen.  So who gets tasked with covering Allen? Leonard Johnson which is less of a mismatch I suppose, but still a total mismatch.  But hey, at least we shut down Benjamin and the two Williams and kept the rushing yards under 200. 

[Buddy Hix]

44 minutes ago, Wayne Arnold said:

 

Just a tad overstated.

 

Quarterback evaluation is a total crapshoot. You don't know how a QB is going to fair when his number is called. Finding fault with McDermott for how Peterman performed like he should've known that Peterman would have thrown 5 picks is disingenuous at best.

 

I disagree.

 

This isn't a case where the QB was bad, the QB put on the worst performance the merged NFL has ever seen. Peterman responded to pressure by closing his eyes and throwing the ball up for grabs off his back foot. It was like watching a JV high school QB.

 

The Chargers talked about the pre-season game film showing Peterman struggling with pressure. How come McD didn't realize over 6 months what the Chargers picked up on in a few film sessions?

 

If anybody is being disingenuous I think it is you and your attempts to justify or downplay a decision that, given the circumstances, will go down as one of the worst in franchise history. And for a franchise mired in one of the worst playoff droughts in league history (maybe the worst, too lazy to check), that is saying something.

[Wayne Arnold]

3 minutes ago, Buddy Hix said:

I disagree.

 

This isn't a case where the QB was bad, the QB put on the worst performance the merged NFL has ever seen. Peterman responded to pressure by closing his eyes and throwing the ball up for grabs off his back foot. It was like watching a JV high school QB.

 

The Chargers talked about the pre-season game film showing Peterman struggling with pressure. How come McD didn't realize over 6 months what the Chargers picked up on in a few film sessions?

 

If anybody is being disingenuous I think it is you and your attempts to justify or downplay a decision that, given the circumstances, will go down as one of the worst in franchise history. And for a franchise mired in one of the worst playoff droughts in league history (maybe the worst, too lazy to check), that is saying something.

 

It's not as if Peterman threw five picks in five clean pockets. The kid got crushed - not to mention Dimarco's incompetence. Bosa was absolutely dominant.