Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • SDS

      Problems logging in?   11/05/2017

      I know a few people are getting logged out too quickly. I don't have the answer to that yet.   However, one change that occurred is that there is no longer a log in name and a separate display name. The upgrade discarded the log in name and now uses the display name. So, to log in:   Username: <display name> Password: <your password>   If you need to contact me to find out what your display name is use: Contact Us  and we can get things sorted out.
Steptide

Conspiracy theory fun (qb related)

Recommended Posts

Let me start by saying that I don't necessarily believe what I'm about to write, but that I could definitely see their being some truth to it. 

 

Let's go back a few weeks to before/after the Chargers game. McDermott gets killed by local and national media for benching Tyrod and starting Peterman. Then Peterman starts and has about the worst possible game a qb could have. No way he can start Peterman again the next week, but makes sure to say Tyrod is our guy "this week". Won't commit to Tyrod past the game that week. 

 

I believe McDermott is dying to get Peterman back out there, but has to do it in a way that won't get him killed by media, and also won't have his players questioning his coaching ability and leadership. Let's be honest, we see taylor every week and how bad he's been, I can only imagine it has to be that much more frustrating for the coaching staff. 

 

That brings us to this past week against the Patriots. I believe McDermott knew we didn't stand a chance against the Patriots, and only by some miracle would we win that game. Had Tyrod pulled off the win somehow, then yes he absolutely has the right to remain the starting qb. As McDermott suspected though, Tyrod was pretty awful (granted could be due to the early injury in the game) and now has an excuse to go back to Peterman with tyrods injury being an easy out. Tyrods play the past week warrants a change, but the injury is an even easier way out of starting Taylor 

 

Which brings me to my next point. We haven't seen Joe Webb all season long. While he didn't do anything spectacular in the Patriots game, he did get some good rushing yards, and had that pass been caught by cadet, some may even be clamoring for him to start. So what took the bills staff so long to bring in this wildcat/more creative offense? Could we have not used this against the saints and Chargers or even chiefs? This is the staff preparing to pad Peterman. What I mean is, they don't want another disaster game like the Chargers. They can't risk another 5 interception game. I am 100% confident that Peterman starts this week and we will see alot of Joe Webb with the wildcat and maybe a few pass plays to help take a little pressure off Peterman. If I'm wrong about Peterman starting, you can bump this thread and I will absolutely eat crow. 

 

Again, I don't necessarily believe everything I wrote. I do however believe that McDermott is dying to get Peterman back as starting qb and barring another disaster, he will remain there the next 4 weeks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ummmm, Peterman isn’t ready. He has looked good going against 2nd and 3rd stringers when games are out of reach. When it counted Peterman looked like a 5th round rookie. He needs time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if it was Dennison that wanted to start Peterman in SD, and he talked McDermott into it?  Tyrod is still better than Peterman at this point, but Tyrod has been really struggling as of late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Happy Gilmore said:

What if it was Dennison that wanted to start Peterman in SD, and he talked McDermott into it?  Tyrod is still better than Peterman at this point, but Tyrod has been really struggling as of late.

 

South Dakota?  He would have a better chance by showing up there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

South Dakota?  He would have a better chance by showing up there. 

Oops...LA.  Habit. :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steptide said:

Let me start by saying that I don't necessarily believe what I'm about to write, but that I could definitely see their being some truth to it. 

 

Let's go back a few weeks to before/after the Chargers game. McDermott gets killed by local and national media for benching Tyrod and starting Peterman. Then Peterman starts and has about the worst possible game a qb could have. No way he can start Peterman again the next week, but makes sure to say Tyrod is our guy "this week". Won't commit to Tyrod past the game that week. 

 

I believe McDermott is dying to get Peterman back out there, but has to do it in a way that won't get him killed by media, and also won't have his players questioning his coaching ability and leadership. Let's be honest, we see taylor every week and how bad he's been, I can only imagine it has to be that much more frustrating for the coaching staff. 

 

That brings us to this past week against the Patriots. I believe McDermott knew we didn't stand a chance against the Patriots, and only by some miracle would we win that game. Had Tyrod pulled off the win somehow, then yes he absolutely has the right to remain the starting qb. As McDermott suspected though, Tyrod was pretty awful (granted could be due to the early injury in the game) and now has an excuse to go back to Peterman with tyrods injury being an easy out. Tyrods play the past week warrants a change, but the injury is an even easier way out of starting Taylor 

 

Which brings me to my next point. We haven't seen Joe Webb all season long. While he didn't do anything spectacular in the Patriots game, he did get some good rushing yards, and had that pass been caught by cadet, some may even be clamoring for him to start. So what took the bills staff so long to bring in this wildcat/more creative offense? Could we have not used this against the saints and Chargers or even chiefs? This is the staff preparing to pad Peterman. What I mean is, they don't want another disaster game like the Chargers. They can't risk another 5 interception game. I am 100% confident that Peterman starts this week and we will see alot of Joe Webb with the wildcat and maybe a few pass plays to help take a little pressure off Peterman. If I'm wrong about Peterman starting, you can bump this thread and I will absolutely eat crow. 

 

Again, I don't necessarily believe everything I wrote. I do however believe that McDermott is dying to get Peterman back as starting qb and barring another disaster, he will remain there the next 4 weeks 

 

I remember the local media being pretty understanding with the move, since they actually watch Bills games. The national media were the ones that couldn't understand the move, since they don't watch the games and just see the stat sheet. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mike in Horseheads said:

Always be San Diego to me. LAC in a sports line means the Clippers

 

Ha Ha.  They were the LA Chargers 1st and the Clippers were in San Diego before moving to LA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, uticaclub said:

 

I remember the local media being pretty understanding with the move, since they actually watch Bills games. The national media were the ones that couldn't understand the move, since they don't watch the games and just see the stat sheet. 

They still don't get it. I think Romo does now after that **** show by TT

1 minute ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Ha Ha.  They were the LA Chargers 1st and the Clippers were in San Diego before moving to LA. 

If ya want to get picky, they were in Anaheim b4 LA

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

They still don't get it. I think Romo does now after that **** show by TT

If ya want to get picky, they were in Anaheim b4 LA

 

Who was in Anaheim? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

The Clippers

 

They were in San Diego and played at the San Diego Sports Arena. 

That's after they left Buffalo as the Braves. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, uticaclub said:

 

I remember the local media being pretty understanding with the move, since they actually watch Bills games. The national media were the ones that couldn't understand the move, since they don't watch the games and just see the stat sheet. 

 

You mean 5 ints on 14 pass attempts? 

Edited by Mr. WEO
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

They were in San Diego and played at the San Diego Sports Arena. 

That's after they left Buffalo as the Braves. 

That I knew, I thought they called Anaheim home in between LA, but played games in Anaheim as LA Clips. According to Wiki they almost moved there permanent in 96 but Sterling turned them down. Oh well, can't win them all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mike in Horseheads said:

That I knew, I thought they called Anaheim home in between LA, but played games in Anaheim as LA Clips. According to Wiki they almost moved there permanent in 96 but Sterling turned them down. Oh well, can't win them all

 

I was wondering where you got that from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

honestly I believe you. They friggin' love Peterman. Like I'm worried they don't even draft a quarterback.

 

 

I will absolutely cherish this screen name if he ends up a successful starter.

Edited by PetermanThrew5Picks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

I was wondering where you got that from.

The Clippers, however, nearly moved to Anaheim permanently in time for the 1996–97 season, but according to a Los Angeles Times article published in June 1996,[17] owner Donald Sterling turned down a deal that would have paid the team $95 million over 12 years. Odgen Corporation, who at the time managed the Pond, and the city of Anaheim offered the Clippers a multi-tiered deal that would have included upwards of $33 million paid to the team over the first six years of their Pond agreement, plus other monies allocated towards new locker rooms, team offices, and a practice facility. In another related Times article,[18] Odgen and Sterling were in talks to have the management company take care of the Clippers' day-to-day operations for a $4 million a year fee. Also at the time, the Walt Disney Company, owners of the Ducks and Anaheim Angels baseball team during that period, were pursuing at least a partial ownership of the Clippers, with the key element being that its game telecasts would be part of a planned ESPN regional network for Southern California. However, as the planned ESPN West network never came to reality, all three teams had continued to maintain broadcast partnerships with Fox Sports West and Prime Ticket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

The Clippers, however, nearly moved to Anaheim permanently in time for the 1996–97 season, but according to a Los Angeles Times article published in June 1996,[17] owner Donald Sterling turned down a deal that would have paid the team $95 million over 12 years. Odgen Corporation, who at the time managed the Pond, and the city of Anaheim offered the Clippers a multi-tiered deal that would have included upwards of $33 million paid to the team over the first six years of their Pond agreement, plus other monies allocated towards new locker rooms, team offices, and a practice facility. In another related Times article,[18] Odgen and Sterling were in talks to have the management company take care of the Clippers' day-to-day operations for a $4 million a year fee. Also at the time, the Walt Disney Company, owners of the Ducks and Anaheim Angels baseball team during that period, were pursuing at least a partial ownership of the Clippers, with the key element being that its game telecasts would be part of a planned ESPN regional network for Southern California. However, as the planned ESPN West network never came to reality, all three teams had continued to maintain broadcast partnerships with Fox Sports West and Prime Ticket.

 

Got it.  Never came to fruition.  At any rate, what I posted stands correct with the Chargers back in LA where they started and the Clippers in LA also two jumps removed from Buffalo. 

Edited by 26CornerBlitz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

They still don't get it. I think Romo does now after that **** show by TT

If ya want to get picky, they were in Anaheim b4 LA

And Buffalo before all of them.

Edited by yungmack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Ha Ha.  They were the LA Chargers 1st and the Clippers were in San Diego before moving to LA. 

And for those old enough to remember, before that  the Buffalo Braves RIP. John Y?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Who was in Anaheim? 

 

I was one time.....stayed at the Holiday Inn Express ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ticketssince61 said:

And for those old enough to remember, before that  the Buffalo Braves RIP. John Y?

 

4 hours ago, ticketssince61 said:

And for those old enough to remember, before that  the Buffalo Braves RIP. John Y?

Remember them well.  Trivia:  who was their first draft pick?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×