Nate Peterman Update

[SaviorPeterman]

I heard from a well placed source of mine that if not for the concussion Peterman would have remained the starter for the Dolphins game last week.

 

Same source also told me that there is serious consideration right now to start NP this week in Foxboro, but even if Taylor starts he'll be on a short leash if the offense doesn't do anything against the Pats in the 1st half and the game is still close in the 3rd quarter.

 

Regardess it doesn't take a genius to figure out the Bills have very little chance of winning this game no matter who starts at QB. Although the thinking man certainly realizes that NP is the better option and always has been.

[Teddy KGB]

20 minutes ago, grb said:

 

You don't need hindsight on such an imbecilic decision. Let's review, shall we? Taylor played well against Tampa. He played well against Oakland. He played well against New York. Then he played poorly against the Saints and was benched. If that sounds bizarre, then maybe you see why some people today try to rewrite history and claim TT was bad in the Jets game. That narrative (however bogus) makes McDermott look a little less the fool. Meanwhile - over the same four game stretch - the Bills' defense was allowing a league worst four hundred yards of offense per game. So : quarterback change, of course.... Getting the sense some people weren't firing on all cylinders here? So why do it?

 

The answer is simple, but even more damning. It seems Dennison / McDermott thought Peterman fit more to their exalted system. Apparently that trumped talent, experience, skill, common sense and the evidence of their eyes. The Chargers' game was the result.......

 

And before the jv defenses of the bucs and raiders he got worked by the red rifle and the putrid Bungals ?

 

Then Taylor got tko’d by the tomato can named Mccown and then made a mockery of the position vs the Saints. 

 

Starting Peterman or anyone for that matter was the correct play.     Sorry Charlie.  

 

 

Edited December 19, 2017 by Air it out Fitzy

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Ok that's better.

 

I'll put you down for Peterman>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the field.

Now I see why you and Doc argue so much.  You read only what you want.  

 

There is no Peterman love, 

only a deep desire to be rid of Typical Taylor. 

Edited December 19, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan

[BADOLBILZ]

9 hours ago, Wayne Arnold said:

 

I would buy that excuse if he hadn't thrown for just 56 yards in the previous home game.

 

If Tyrod has the same stinkaroo against the Pats I wonder if McDermott will start Peterman at the Dolphins. Not likely, but you never know.

 

 

Doesn't Taylor have like 12 TD's and no turnovers in 5 career games versus Miami?  

 

And you really wonder if they'll start Peterman over him again against the Dolphins with a potential playoff berth on the line?

 

Really really?

 

 

8 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

 

The Chargers were as amped up as Miami was when the defeated the Patriots 2 weeks ago.

 

 

That's some good stuff.

 

San Diego was so amped that they scored a TD and then the Bills immediately marched down the field with a couple hand-offs for an easy TD.

 

The Chargers were looking for a reason to quit..........Peterman gave them 5 reasons not to.

[reddogblitz]

1 hour ago, Lfod said:

A lot of offensive possessions leading to no first downs isn't gonna win you a game either. Not 5 interception bad but not good either. 

 

Even when the defence was a turnover machine the team the Bills would barely win when it should of been total destruction. The Miami game should of been total destruction and it wasn't.

 

You can say it was a bad move after the fact but don't be afraid to acknowledge that the team was spanked two games in a row before the benching. Not exactly any easy sell to say it would of been a win if not for the benching of Tyrod.

 

We barely beat KC in the same fashion that we barely beat the Colts with a rookie and his backup. 

 

Not sure if you've heard this, but a W is a W is a W.  They all count as 1 in the W column.

[grb]

3 hours ago, SaviorPeterman said:

I heard from a well placed source of mine that if not for the concussion Peterman would have remained the starter for the Dolphins game last week.

 

Same source also told me that there is serious consideration right now to start NP this week in Foxboro, but even if Taylor starts he'll be on a short leash if the offense doesn't do anything against the Pats in the 1st half and the game is still close in the 3rd quarter.

 

Regardess it doesn't take a genius to figure out the Bills have very little chance of winning this game no matter who starts at QB. Although the thinking man certainly realizes that NP is the better option and always has been.

 

Let me guess : A celestial source, maybe? The Archangel Gabriel? The Prophet Elijah?

 

You're an entertaining troll, I'll grant you that. Over at BillsZone, a troll had his "well placed source" say Taylor reclaimed the starting job post-Chargers only because Kim Pegula insisted - afraid it would looked racially suspect otherwise. See what I mean? Your trolling is just as pathetic, but happily nowhere near as sordid. That guy managed to con a surprisingly large number of people into sputtering rage over his fantasy injustice. You'll just hook a few stray COPs (Cult of Peterman). 

 

Also : A "thinking man" might look at what Peterman did against New England three games ago. On two good legs and playing much of the game in the purest Garbage Time, he accomplished this : 6-15, 40% 50 yds 3.3 ypa. If Taylor has two good legs, I'm thinking he's the best choice. Of course, I'm not buds with Gabriel or Elijah, so what do I know?

Edited December 20, 2017 by grb

[Lfod]

1 hour ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Not sure if you've heard this, but a W is a W is a W.  They all count as 1 in the W column.

I never once said a win was a loss. I was only saying that those wins could of been more dominant and that wasn't an attempt to discredit those wins, just an observation.

 

My point was that even though it was a bad move to start Nate Peterman I though that it was justified at the time at least in my opinion because the season was slipping away. 

 

I also pointed out that the Bills beat KC and Colts in a similar fashion to back up my point that we beat two teams that also were struggling, in the same fashion with different quarterbacks so maybe the benching didn't make the kind of difference that would merit holding it over the HC head forever. 

 

I wouldn't expect a rookie to be better then a guy that is established and had more reps and experience at professional football. Then again when I just compare the KC game and Colts game in a vacuum the games looked very similar to me. That's just how I look at it as a fan. 

 

Just for the record I respect Tyrod Taylor a lot and can list all the things I admire about him instantly. I want him to take the Bills to the playoffs. I want the dudes dreams to come true. It just wasn't looking like it was a strong possibility going into L.A.

Edited December 20, 2017 by Lfod

[Mr. WEO]

3 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Now I see why you and Doc argue so much.  You read only what you want.  

 

There is no Peterman love, 

only a deep desire to be rid of Typical Taylor. 

 

 

Oh you made that quite clear---and right on schedule. 

Edited December 20, 2017 by Mr. WEO

[Bills757]

16 hours ago, SaviorPeterman said:

I heard from a well placed source of mine that if not for the concussion Peterman would have remained the starter for the Dolphins game last week.

 

Same source also told me that there is serious consideration right now to start NP this week in Foxboro, but even if Taylor starts he'll be on a short leash if the offense doesn't do anything against the Pats in the 1st half and the game is still close in the 3rd quarter.

 

Regardess it doesn't take a genius to figure out the Bills have very little chance of winning this game no matter who starts at QB. Although the thinking man certainly realizes that NP is the better option and always has been.

So a "thinking man" believes a guy who completes less than 50% of his passes, has 2 TD's to 5 picks and a rating of 38.4 is the better option?!  Hahahaha.  Okay.  "Thinking man" needs to put down the crack pipe.

 

I think it's hilarious how Taylor should be the one on the short leash and not a rookie.  Even in the LAC game, if Taylor had thrown two picks right away in that game, he likely would've been pulled yet Peterman get's to throw five picks in one half.  What McD needs to do is grow a pair and tell Dennison to use his QB's mobility to move the chains.  Trying to make him a pocket passer isn't the goal....the goal is to move the football and win games.  Whatever happened to Dennison and rolling out his QB, getting him into space to make the defense defend the whole field.  All I see is five step drops for the most part when we should be seeing Taylor roll out, QB designed runs etc...  If he get's hurt, he get's hurt.  Another upside to letting Taylor be Taylor is showcasing him for other teams from a trade standpoint because it's been obvious since McD came to town he's not planning on keeping Taylor. 

[Mrbojanglezs]

19 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

Ok time to do it:

 

Rank 'em:

 

Peterman love

 

EJ love

 

JPL love

 

Put them in order and magnitude (>>>>, etc)

 

Its not Peterman love, its Tyrod apathy. 

[Bills757]

13 hours ago, Lfod said:

I never once said a win was a loss. I was only saying that those wins could of been more dominant and that wasn't an attempt to discredit those wins, just an observation.

 

My point was that even though it was a bad move to start Nate Peterman I though that it was justified at the time at least in my opinion because the season was slipping away. 

 

I also pointed out that the Bills beat KC and Colts in a similar fashion to back up my point that we beat two teams that also were struggling, in the same fashion with different quarterbacks so maybe the benching didn't make the kind of difference that would merit holding it over the HC head forever. 

 

I wouldn't expect a rookie to be better then a guy that is established and had more reps and experience at professional football. Then again when I just compare the KC game and Colts game in a vacuum the games looked very similar to me. That's just how I look at it as a fan. 

 

Just for the record I respect Tyrod Taylor a lot and can list all the things I admire about him instantly. I want him to take the Bills to the playoffs. I want the dudes dreams to come true. It just wasn't looking like it was a strong possibility going into L.A.

So you think it's a good idea, when your team is still in contention, to go to a rookie?  He clearly wasn't ready yet McD thinks it'll work out?  That's the scary part.....that McD thought he could spark the offense.  Is McD that bad of a talent evaluator?  

 

What you do is stay the course until the team is eliminated from playoff contention or the chances are so remote you decide to see what you have in a guy like Peterman.  You don't flush it down the toilet so early in the playoff run.  I'm not saying the Bills would've won that game with Taylor at the helm but I'd be willing to bet it would've been a much closer game and it wouldn't have been a shock if the Bills won.

[Billsandhorns]

On 12/18/2017 at 9:21 PM, BillsFan692 said:

I'd take Peterman on Sunday makes no difference to me.

 

Taylor had what 70 yards total passing LAST time against the pats? Hard to be worse then that.

 

I think our odds are the same either way, they are long but we still got a chance!

 

Let's do this Buffalo!

Did you wipe the Chargers game from your memory?

[BigDingus]

On 12/18/2017 at 9:40 PM, Augie said:

I know he wanted the 1st down, and I respect that. However.... LEARN HOW TO SLIDE! 

 

Every QB has to learn that the hard way. Both Tyrod & EJ took nasty hits that took them out of games their first season due to not sliding.

 

1 minute ago, Billsandhorns said:

Did you wipe the Chargers game from your memory?

1 half of 1 game from a rookie QB is not the end-all-be-all for a QB's resume. Nobody "forgot" that game, but they understand the likelihood of that EVER happening again is slim to none.

Edited December 20, 2017 by BigDingus

[billsredneck1]

17 hours ago, SaviorPeterman said:

I heard from a well placed source of mine that if not for the concussion Peterman would have remained the starter for the Dolphins game last week.

 

Same source also told me that there is serious consideration right now to start NP this week in Foxboro, but even if Taylor starts he'll be on a short leash if the offense doesn't do anything against the Pats in the 1st half and the game is still close in the 3rd quarter.

 

Regardess it doesn't take a genius to figure out the Bills have very little chance of winning this game no matter who starts at QB. Although the thinking man certainly realizes that NP is the better option and always has been.

if we go into the 2nd half down by only 10, i think we'll be lucky.  i sure hope that if the offense isn't getting it done, they make the switch. if i had to put money on which qb is able to succeed at running a two minute offense, my money is on nate.

[BigDingus]

1 minute ago, billsredneck1 said:

if we go into the 2nd half down by only 10, i think we'll be lucky.  i sure hope that if the offense isn't getting it done, they make the switch. if i had to put money on which qb is able to succeed at running a two minute offense, my money is on nate.

 

The Bills defense usually keeps it close for a half before they get tired from being on the field for 80% of the game while the offense does nothing. So it's likely we will be close at half.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

29 minutes ago, Mrbojanglezs said:

 

Its not Peterman love, its Tyrod apathy. 

WEO doesn't buy that.    I get the impression (not hard to miss) that if you are tired of Typical Taylor you must be a Nate Lover. 

 

ABT

 

Why anyone pays SaviorPeterman any serious mind is mind boggling. 

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, ShadyBillsFan said:

WEO doesn't buy that.    I get the impression (not hard to miss) that if you are tired of Typical Taylor you must be a Nate Lover. 

 

ABT

 

Yes!

 

Look, you can be apathetic about TT without being enthusiastic about the Peterman Era to date.  But that's not what NP love is about---it is true, irrational love.

 

But I will admit that at least part of the post was to flush out the knee jerk TT haters.  It worked too well in that regard.

[billsredneck1]

5 minutes ago, BigDingus said:

 

The Bills defense usually keeps it close for a half before they get tired from being on the field for 80% of the game while the offense does nothing. So it's likely we will be close at half.

i agree but with a great defensive effort, i can see a 13-3 halftime score.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

So apathy is hate?    Good to know. Thanks WEO.   I'll mark that down and I'll start using referring to myself as Tyrod apathetic. 

 

8 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Yes!

 

Look, you can be apathetic about TT without being enthusiastic about the Peterman Era to date.  But that's not what NP love is about---it is true, irrational love.

 

But I will admit that at least part of the post was to flush out the knee jerk TT haters.  It worked too well in that regard.

 

There is no Peterman Era.  Its a figment of the imagination of the Taylor Faithful.  

 

 

Edited December 20, 2017 by ShadyBillsFan

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

28 minutes ago, BigDingus said:

 

Every QB has to learn that the hard way. Both Tyrod & EJ took nasty hits that took them out of games their first season due to not sliding.

 

1 half of 1 game from a rookie QB is not the end-all-be-all for a QB's resume. Nobody "forgot" that game, but they understand the likelihood of that EVER happening again is slim to none.

 

...LMAO....that's a CAREER 'round these parts....legitimate window for BUST determination.............

[Figster]

1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

So apathy is hate?    Good to know. Thanks WEO.   I'll mark that down and I'll start using referring to myself as Tyrod apathetic. 

 

 

There is no Peterman Era.  Its a figment of the imagination of the Taylor Faithful.  

 

 

Figsters figment of the imagination,

 

I like it...

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

55 minutes ago, Figster said:

Figsters figment of the imagination,

 

I like it...

Nice to know I was helpful.  

 

it has a certain je ne sais quoi ring to it.  

[Mr. WEO]

3 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

So apathy is hate?    Good to know. Thanks WEO.   I'll mark that down and I'll start using referring to myself as Tyrod apathetic. 

 

 

There is no Peterman Era.  Its a figment of the imagination of the Taylor Faithful.  

 

 

 

You should go back to read the many NP threads started before his fateful game.  Refresh your memory...It was not "TT apathy".

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

26 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

You should go back to read the many NP threads started before his fateful game.  Refresh your memory...It was not "TT apathy".

For me it is "TT apathy".   Its boring and dull and inept and frustrating as hell to watch TT let play after play after play slip past him when the game is on the line.

 

It was so bad that we were willing to see Nate play (that disastrous 1st half).  If it continues again this Sunday we will be willing to see Nate throw another 5 INTs against Miami.  

 

 

Any  Nate Peterman thread started by SaviorPeterman wasn't worth reading the first time. 

[Lfod]

7 hours ago, Bills757 said:

So you think it's a good idea, when your team is still in contention, to go to a rookie?  He clearly wasn't ready yet McD thinks it'll work out?  That's the scary part.....that McD thought he could spark the offense.  Is McD that bad of a talent evaluator?  

 

What you do is stay the course until the team is eliminated from playoff contention or the chances are so remote you decide to see what you have in a guy like Peterman.  You don't flush it down the toilet so early in the playoff run.  I'm not saying the Bills would've won that game with Taylor at the helm but I'd be willing to bet it would've been a much closer game and it wouldn't have been a shock if the Bills won.

Well I wouldn't say it was a good idea. In fact it turned out to be a bad idea. I wouldn't even say that Taylor loses that Chargers game. I know Taylor doesn't throw 5 interceptions. Starting Nate Peterman got as bad as it could get. 

 

I think the head coach had the same feeling I did after the Jets and Saints game. The hot 5-2 start was fading away. It's hard to defend starting Nate Peterman now after the fact. I just can't bring myself to hate it because of reguardless of how it turned out he made a move to shake things up instead of sitting on his hands.

 

It was a calculated risk to get better on offence and it failed. I still think the HC made the move in an attempt to make the team better and he even called it a risk so I am sure he was aware it could fail. 

 

I want a head coach like that. A guy that worries about winning more then reputation. A Captain that will run to scoop water out of the sinking ship instead of running for the lifeboats to be safe. The ship was sinking and he ran for a bucket.

 

If everyone is being honest then you have to admit it had a possibility to work. I applaud anyone who predicted Nate Peterman was gonna play poorly. 

 

I don't blame anyone for thinking it was a bad move. History proves it. We won't ever know if Taylor would of won. We won't ever have to wonder if Nate Peterman would. The coach left no stone unturned and it cost a game but it was trending that way anyway. That's why I ultimately wouldn't hold it against the coach. It's not the criticism of it that would bother me, it's that I think he deserves a little credit for putting his reputation on the line to make a bold move.

Edited December 20, 2017 by Lfod

[Mr. WEO]

On December 20, 2017 at 3:12 PM, ShadyBillsFan said:

For me it is "TT apathy".   Its boring and dull and inept and frustrating as hell to watch TT let play after play after play slip past him when the game is on the line.

 

It was so bad that we were willing to see Nate play (that disastrous 1st half).  If it continues again this Sunday we will be willing to see Nate throw another 5 INTs against Miami.  

 

 

Any  Nate Peterman thread started by SaviorPeterman wasn't worth reading the first time. 

 

 

If the Bills make the playoffs with TT, will you not be watching the Bills' playoff game?  Or will the risk of boredom keep you away?

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

I’ll risk the boredom.

 

thanks for asking. 

[Bing Bong]

On ‎12‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 2:12 PM, ShadyBillsFan said:

It was so bad that we were willing to see Nate play (that disastrous 1st half)

I wasn't willing to see Nate play.