Decision on starter vs. Chiefs is the fork in the road

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

9 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Life ain't fair.

 

its a business

[Houston's #1 Bills Fan]

10 hours ago, Dablitzkrieg said:

I know, I probably sound irrational.  Just jaded.  I think Hunt may run for close to 200 yards though, right up the gut

Without a doubt!

 

Two MAJOR problems on this team: OLINE and DLINE. Who's playing QB is pretty irrelevant with both lines so bad right now. I say go with Peterman and see if he can bounce back from this.

[CountDorkula]

11 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

Depends. Who ya gonna get? McCoy?

No. Find a young football mind who is creative ala Sean McVay.

 

If you have too, go to the college ranks. 

[Billsfan1972]

Again get it right a 5th round QB's upside is at the high end a Journeyman........  If lucky a competent back-up.  It is not a all-pro hall of famer.......

 

Only Bills fans......

 

 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

1 minute ago, Billsfan1972 said:

Only Bills fans......

love meh QB's 

[NewEra]

11 hours ago, Billzgobowlin said:

The team that scored 9 points against the Giants?  They haven't exactly been lighting it up on offense

The chargers were averaging 16 points a game prior the dropping 54.  Do you realize how bad our D (and O) is right now?  Kind of hard not to know. Anyone with a good qb and decent pass rush can drop 60 on us at the moment

[Billzgobowlin]

1 minute ago, NewEra said:

The chargers were averaging 16 points a game prior the dropping 54.  Do you realize how bad our D (and O) is right now?  Kind of hard not to know. Anyone with a good qb and decent pass rush can drop 60 on us at the moment

If you are comparing the Chargers and Chiefs, Chargers have the better QB and pass rush and it isn't even close.  So saying it would be more than 54 doesn't make sense

[Mat68]

I agree.  Sticking with Peterman would be commendable but in 1 week will he improve his pocket awareness and find that middle ground of throwing down the field and not turning the ball over every other toss.  

[NewEra]

16 minutes ago, CountDorkula said:

No. Find a young football mind who is creative ala Sean McVay.

 

If you have too, go to the college ranks. 

Probably easier said, than done tbh.  Which young football mind that is currently a position coach should we find?  Tough one.  McVay left his post as an OC to become a HC.  A current OC isn’t coming here to be our OC.  

[Billsfan1972]

2 hours ago, The Process said:

Don't get too down on The Peterman Catalogue  yet......

 

Not saying he's Farve....not saying he's bust.....just that the jury is out......

 

From Bleacher:

 

1992—Favre Becomes Green Bay's Starter

4 OF 19

 

 

It didn't take very long for Favre to get playing time in Green Bay. After a poor first half by quarterback Don Majkowski in the second game of the season, Favre got the duties for the second half.

However, Favre's unremarkable performance didn't win him the starting job for Game Three. Majkowski would suffer a ligament injury, though, and Favre would once again enter the picture. 

After four fumbles, Favre was almost removed in favor of Ty Detmer. Instead, he would lead the Packers to a comeback victory with 13 seconds remaining.

No. 4 was the starter for the next game against the Steelers and that would be the beginning of his record consecutive starts streak.

Again second round pick (from a small college) not fifth.  Didn't play rookie year so got to learn.  Came in mop up and did not get the job until an injury.......  Keep reaching.....

[Mat68]

6 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

Again second round pick (from a small college) not fifth.  Didn't play rookie year so got to learn.  Came in mop up and did not get the job until an injury.......  Keep reaching.....

Yet even with hi spoor display he rallied and led a game winning drive in his first start.

[Billsfan1972]

Just now, Mat68 said:

Yet even with hi spoor display he rallied and led a game winning drive in his first start.

And that maybe bought him some time (and game 2-3 of the year).

[NewEra]

7 minutes ago, Billzgobowlin said:

If you are comparing the Chargers and Chiefs, Chargers have the better QB and pass rush and it isn't even close.  So saying it would be more than 54 doesn't make sense

You act as if there’s a science to scoring points.  The saints have a better QB and defense than sD and SD outscored NO against us.  With as bad as this defense and offense has played the last 3 games, anyone could put up 60.  The Chiefs will have a serious home field advantage, while the Chargers had little (I was there, seemed close to 50/50 crowd).  Don’t underestimate how bad a team can be if they’ve given up.  Can’t say for sure that they’ve given up but it doesn’t look good.  I wouldn’t be shocked if a team scored 70 on us this year

[Nick the Greek]

12 hours ago, nedboy7 said:

I don't get fans who quit on a season when we are in the playoff hunt.  Yes it has been bad.  But quitting?  Come on man! 

The writing is on the wall. The team isn’t good. The defense is bad and we don’t have a good QB. 

 

Yes, we are mathematically alive but you can tell who has what it takes to make it to the next level. We aren’t there. 

[BarleyNY]

What the Bills do about their QB situation in the offseason is the fork in the road.  Not much or real consequence can be done before then.

[Shaw66]

12 hours ago, BillnutinHouston said:

that forces McD to finally show his cards: is he all in on this year, or is he packing it in and making decisions for the future?

 

Personally, with our D collapsing as it has lately, I'm ready to move on from this year, stick with the process and see if you have anything in Peterman.  And I'd be thinking real hard about whether I want Dennison to be the one entrusted with developing my first round QB.

 

I don't agree.   Last week was the fork in the road, and he took it.   Whether McD knew it or not, benching Taylor last week meant that it's a virtual certainty that Taylor will not be a Bill in 2019, and maybe not even 2018.   If the Bills don't cut him, he's going to get out as soon as his contract permits, which is the end of 2018.    What can McDermott possibly say to Taylor or do that will make Taylor believe anything other than that he's the QB only until the next warm body comes along?   In Taylor's eyes, McDermott is so desperate to replace him that McDermott actually started a guy who was totally unprepared for live NFL action, so why would Taylor believe that McDermott won't do it again?   

 

So from that point of view, I suppose the only choice at QB is Peterman.  Why,?  Because it's now a certainty that Taylor isn't the QB of the future, so you may as well play the next guy in line, even if he looks like an incredible longshot.   The problem with that is McDermott risks losing the rest of the team, because as the HC you're asking 44 other guys to go out there, play hard and risk injury when you've left your best chance to win at your most important position on the bench.   Do I want to play for that guy?   If I'm Kyle do I want to come back for another year?  If I'm Incognito?  If I'm Matthews?   Who wants to play for a coach who doesn't play the best players. 

 

Starting Peterman was a colossally stupid decision.   It made sense only if McD was sure that Peterman is an NFL starter, and if McD was sure Peterman is an NFL starter, then there are serious questions, huge questions, about his ability to evaluate talent.   

[Billzgobowlin]

1 minute ago, NewEra said:

You act as if there’s a science to scoring points.  The saints have a better QB and defense than sD and SD outscored NO against us.  With as bad as this defense and offense has played the last 3 games, anyone could put up 60.  The Chiefs will have a serious home field advantage, while the Chargers had little (I was there, seemed close to 50/50 crowd).  Don’t underestimate how bad a team can be if they’ve given up.  Can’t say for sure that they’ve given up but it doesn’t look good.  I wouldn’t be shocked if a team scored 70 on us this year

I think it is funny how some people lose objectivity like we will give up 60 this year.  This is the same team that was leading the league in defense at 5-2.  I understand they have been very bad these past few weeks but that won't be maintained.  Could it be bad against the Chiefs?  Sure but all I am saying is the Chiefs have been equally bad and the Giants are a close second to the Browns as the worst team in the league.  As much as you hate to admit it we aren't the Giants.

[Real McClappy]

12 hours ago, BillnutinHouston said:

that forces McD to finally show his cards: is he all in on this year, or is he packing it in and making decisions for the future?

 

Personally, with our D collapsing as it has lately, I'm ready to move on from this year, stick with the process and see if you have anything in Peterman.  And I'd be thinking real hard about whether I want Dennison to be the one entrusted with developing my first round QB.

 

Starting to feel this way as well along the JUAN who is our Oline coach.

 

Castillo should be canned today IMO. Kromer caught a lot of heat from fans for his off field antics but was a pretty damn good Oline coach. This hire has been absolutely horrible. This Oline play is also a direct resemblance to TT and NP's failures. We can't execute anything on O when our right side of the line get's destroyed every play, which in turn makes Dennison look bad as well.

 

Being and OC, why didn't Dennison get to pick his staff? Castillo was hired if not mistaken before he was.

Edited November 22, 2017 by Real McCoy

[Billzgobowlin]

1 minute ago, Shaw66 said:

I don't agree.   Last week was the fork in the road, and he took it.   Whether McD knew it or not, benching Taylor last week meant that it's a virtual certainty that Taylor will not be a Bill in 2019, and maybe not even 2018.   If the Bills don't cut him, he's going to get out as soon as his contract permits, which is the end of 2018.    What can McDermott possibly say to Taylor or do that will make Taylor believe anything other than that he's the QB only until the next warm body comes along?   In Taylor's eyes, McDermott is so desperate to replace him that McDermott actually started a guy who was totally unprepared for live NFL action, so why would Taylor believe that McDermott won't do it again?   

 

So from that point of view, I suppose the only choice at QB is Peterman.  Why,?  Because it's now a certainty that Taylor isn't the QB of the future, so you may as well play the next guy in line, even if he looks like an incredible longshot.   The problem with that is McDermott risks losing the rest of the team, because as the HC you're asking 44 other guys to go out there, play hard and risk injury when you've left your best chance to win at your most important position on the bench.   Do I want to play for that guy?   If I'm Kyle do I want to come back for another year?  If I'm Incognito?  If I'm Matthews?   Who wants to play for a coach who doesn't play the best players. 

 

Starting Peterman was a colossally stupid decision.   It made sense only if McD was sure that Peterman is an NFL starter, and if McD was sure Peterman is an NFL starter, then there are serious questions, huge questions, about his ability to evaluate talent.   

I've said it before but it's possible he looked prepared in practice, the problem with that is that our Offensive line is facing our defensive line

[Mat68]

Just now, Billsfan1972 said:

And that maybe bought him some time (and game 2-3 of the year).

 

Very rarely do players fail miserably in there pro debuts and blossum into good starters atleast at the QB position.  I cant remember a case where that happens.  Even with Farve's fumbles they were not in terrible positions and he played well enough to over come those,.  At the end of the day you only remember that he led a drive and scored the game winning points at the end.  

[cd1]

Badlandsmeanie posted this in another thread:

 

Quote

  

- In 2004 Drew Bledsoe, The First overall pick,  who was at that time an 11 year veteran starter, who had play in the Superbowl, was learning to get rid of the ball in 3 seconds.

 

 

 

- In July 2012, Bledsoe was named the 30th greatest quarterback of the NFL's post-merger era by Football Nation.[17]

 

 

 

- Nov 19 Nathan Peterman 5th round pick starting his first ever NFL game, had between 1.5 and 2.5 seconds to read the field and throw the ball before being hit.

 

It is a great dis-service to not look at the whole picture. Mills was totally ineffective at stopping a pass rush. 

 

How on earth do you judge the poor rookie who was thrown to the wolves by a "rookie" coaching staff who somehow can hold their collective heads up while fielding such an inadequate team.

 

Really - no attempt to replace Mills or Ducausse?  Are these the folks that we are suppose to trust with "the Process"?

 

GMAB!

[YesPlayoffs]

7 minutes ago, cd1 said:

How on earth do you judge the poor rookie who was thrown to the wolves by a "rookie" coaching staff who somehow can hold their collective heads up while fielding such an inadequate team.

 

It hasn't stopped people from judging poor Tyrod when he plays on the exact same "inadequate" team.

[hondo in seattle]

43 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I don't agree.   Last week was the fork in the road, and he took it.   Whether McD knew it or not, benching Taylor last week meant that it's a virtual certainty that Taylor will not be a Bill in 2019, and maybe not even 2018.   If the Bills don't cut him, he's going to get out as soon as his contract permits, which is the end of 2018.    What can McDermott possibly say to Taylor or do that will make Taylor believe anything other than that he's the QB only until the next warm body comes along?   In Taylor's eyes, McDermott is so desperate to replace him that McDermott actually started a guy who was totally unprepared for live NFL action, so why would Taylor believe that McDermott won't do it again?   

 

So from that point of view, I suppose the only choice at QB is Peterman.  Why,?  Because it's now a certainty that Taylor isn't the QB of the future, so you may as well play the next guy in line, even if he looks like an incredible longshot.   The problem with that is McDermott risks losing the rest of the team, because as the HC you're asking 44 other guys to go out there, play hard and risk injury when you've left your best chance to win at your most important position on the bench.   Do I want to play for that guy?   If I'm Kyle do I want to come back for another year?  If I'm Incognito?  If I'm Matthews?   Who wants to play for a coach who doesn't play the best players. 

 

Starting Peterman was a colossally stupid decision.   It made sense only if McD was sure that Peterman is an NFL starter, and if McD was sure Peterman is an NFL starter, then there are serious questions, huge questions, about his ability to evaluate talent.   

 

 

I agree with much of this.

Hindsight is 20-20 as they say.  And with hindsight we now see what a bad decision it was to start Peterman.  As things turned out, this wasn't good for Peterman who's confidence must be shaken.  It wasn't good for Tyrod.  It wasn't good for the older vets who are considering whether to play on or retire at the end of the year.  It wasn't good for McD who's credibility took a shot when  he controversially decided to start a QB who then produced a historically bad first half.

McD bet big, rolled the dice, and lost.  

 

 

 

[YoloinOhio]

 

[buffaloboyinATL]

so are we forked yet?

[Rocky Landing]

There's a lot of hay being made that "Tyrod will be gone next year, so it doesn't matter..." But, really? With the exception of the bizarre notion that we "need to see what we have in Peterman" notwithstanding, let's assume we that we draft our "QB of the future" in 2018. Then what? Do we start whoever that is right out of the gate? Can we assume that whoever we get is going to be immediately NFL ready? (Like Peterman supposedly was???) Are we going to go out shopping for whatever version of Brian Hoyer might be out there, and start the career backup while out future franchise QB sits like Goff did? Would that be better than Taylor for another season?

 

If we're really building for the future, it would be smart to have Tyrod playing for this team next season, and I have to believe he is pissed as hell. IMO, McD has mismanaged this situation about as badly as he could have. I certainly hope he is in full on damage control mode at this moment. This is the fork in the road, indeed. If McD can't get this thing back on track, I sincerely hope he, and his entire staff is canned at the end of this season, and not the obligatory Bills' two-year-coach tenure. It's hard to trust someone who has screwed things up this badly.

[cba fan]

13 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

Mathematically we are in a playoff hunt... but in reality, the Buffalo Bills ain’t huntin’ nothin’. 

100% correct. All indications are they are done. Only math keeps them alive.

 

Browns are still in the hunt. https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-playoff-picture-heres-how-the-0-10-browns-can-still-miraculously-get-in/

 

Sometimes I just look at "math" and laugh at math.

[NewEra]

2 hours ago, Billzgobowlin said:

I think it is funny how some people lose objectivity like we will give up 60 this year.  This is the same team that was leading the league in defense at 5-2.  I understand they have been very bad these past few weeks but that won't be maintained.  Could it be bad against the Chiefs?  Sure but all I am saying is the Chiefs have been equally bad and the Giants are a close second to the Browns as the worst team in the league.  As much as you hate to admit it we aren't the Giants.

IS this the same team that went 5-2?  The chiefs have been “equally” bad??  There’s objectivity then there’s reality.  The reality is, we’ve been the worst team in football the last 3 weeks......and it hasn’t really been close.  We’ve lost our last 3 games by 80 points.  The chiefs last 4 losses are by a combined 21 points I believe. While they’ve been off stride, an Andy Reid coached offense could put up 60 on us and no one here would be surprised, except maybe those that haven’t lost their objectivity.

 

 

 

[Billzgobowlin]

1 hour ago, NewEra said:

IS this the same team that went 5-2?  The chiefs have been “equally” bad??  There’s objectivity then there’s reality.  The reality is, we’ve been the worst team in football the last 3 weeks......and it hasn’t really been close.  We’ve lost our last 3 games by 80 points.  The chiefs last 4 losses are by a combined 21 points I believe. While they’ve been off stride, an Andy Reid coached offense could put up 60 on us and no one here would be surprised, except maybe those that haven’t lost their objectivity.

 

 

 

If they had beat the Giants I might agree with you but the Giants are very very bad this year with no WRs and no RB and a very bad defense.  This Bills team has lost a lot of their momentum as have the Chiefs.  Since the 5-2 start we have lost Dareus but gained Benjamin otherwise it is still the same team.  

[NewEra]

1 hour ago, Billzgobowlin said:

If they had beat the Giants I might agree with you but the Giants are very very bad this year with no WRs and no RB and a very bad defense.  This Bills team has lost a lot of their momentum as have the Chiefs.  Since the 5-2 start we have lost Dareus but gained Benjamin otherwise it is still the same team.  

I still wouldn’t be shocked to see us get destroyed on Sunday.  I fully expect KC to put up at least 30.

[The Frankish Reich]

15 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:

Well, as suggested by Yogi Bera, I think McDermott should take it.. 

And we just literally lived the Yogi joke, taking the Peterman fork AND the Tyrod fork.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

......despite my advancing years, something still is not passing the smell test about the Peterman start.....on the road against a Chargers team whose W/L record may not clearly indicate the close games they lost......I STILL think this was Dennison's doing.......his inconsistent game plans relative to TT are suspect.....pretty sure it was the Oakland game and perhaps one other where he appeared to take advantage of Taylor's mobility, resulting in more well rounded game(s)...think TT spread the wealth to 9 different receivers vs Oakland...and then the flexible plan stopped......he is not and never will be a 3 step drop pocket passer especially if you factor in the stellar OL Coach Cast-gotta-go and his Wikileaks zone blocking scheme.....and if McD let Dennison call the shot, which if so, was more personal than to the benefit of the team, we have "who the hell is in charge" issues.....

[Billzgobowlin]

57 minutes ago, NewEra said:

I still wouldn’t be shocked to see us get destroyed on Sunday.  I fully expect KC to put up at least 30.

I definitely could see 30 plus.  I hope they figure out what they lost though and look like they did earlier this year

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 minute ago, Billzgobowlin said:

I definitely could see 30 plus.  I hope they figure out what they lost though and look like they did earlier this year

 

...Arrowhead has never been a friendly barn.....it is reminiscent of The Rich in the 90's when the "W" was never in question versus by "how much"...........

[Shaw66]

7 hours ago, Billzgobowlin said:

I've said it before but it's possible he looked prepared in practice, the problem with that is that our Offensive line is facing our defensive line

I agree with this.   He must have looked good in practice, because otherwise the decision makes absolutely no sense at all.   I think he looked good in practice and then he did some good things against the Saints.

 

But an NFL head coach is supposed to know the difference between taking reps in practice and playing under live fire when the game is on the line during the regular season.   All kinds of guys look good in practice.   

 

I've always said I give McDermott credit for having no fear.   However, he should have been able to see that his entire team had played poorly for two games, the entire team, and he should have been able to see at a minimum that whatever it was that Peterman was doing in practice wasn't so outstanding as to be likely to make a difference against the Chargers. 

 

And as I've thought about it talked about it with others, I think having made the decision he made, he now has closed the door on Taylor being his quarterback beyond 2018.   Closing the door on any starter is a bad thing, and closing it on your quarterback when you have no one waiting in the wings is really bad.   Maybe Peterman has a future, but we've seen Dak as a rookie step in for a starter and we've seen Watson as a rookie step in for a starter and we've seen Wentz as a rookie step in for a starter, and Peterman didn't look anything like those guys.