Would going into 2018 with Peterman & top rookie be that bad?

[PromoTheRobot]

2 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Thanks. 

 

I don't get it at all. This seems reckless.  I expected a little patience, recognition that there a building process going n I. And also recognition that some QB might grow into a real stsr, like Cousins, Keenum or Foles.  

 

This seems like a crap shoot on an untested rookie. 

 

The only other explanation is that McD really likes Peterman and that his one NFL outing was aberrational.  Maybe McD thinks Peterman will be as good as McCarron, which is the bare minimum the Bills need. 

 

Or.... Since you are planning on drafting a top QB in the draft and expect him to play at some point this season why flush $10-15MM of your limited cap on a QB that is marginally better than what you already have on the roster?

 

Go get Bradford, McCarron, McCown, Bridgewater, Hoyer, etc. But if the list becomes Cutler, Siemian, and similar, why bother?

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, apuszczalowski said:

I'm wondering if they are working to move up with the Broncos and part of the deal may include Siemian?

That would work for me. I’d like to get higher than 5 but could live with it.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

59 minutes ago, Cash said:

Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?

 

Hey, get your own line

 

7 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

So players get one half of football to prove themselves?

 

No one said that.  You said: " I don't want the Bills scraping the QB barrel and spending $10-15MM on whatever's left. Why not just roll with Nate Peterman and whoever we draft, with Joe Webb III your #3? The SD game aside, I thought NP was okay."

 

There are miles of difference between "you only get one half to prove yourself" and "you played a record-setting bad half of football and we'll put it aside when evaluating you"

 

51 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

that was silly the first time I read that posted.  

 

How did he play in relief in the Saints game? 

How did he play in relief in the NE game?  

How did he play in the blizzard in the Colts game?

 

Sorry, it's the OP that was silly.  Peterman played OK in the 4th Q of what some call "garbage time" vs NO and NE.  You don't have to define him by the 1st half of the Chargers game.  But you don't get to put it aside either.

 

[apuszczalowski]

12 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

There's a line somewhere between veteran presence and crap. When you start getting down to Trevor Siemian you are crossing it. 

 

Peterman makes Siemian look like Brady....

Peterman hasn't even shown he deserves a spot on the PS, yet there are some here who feel he deserves to start or compete to start right now?

[PromoTheRobot]

1 minute ago, apuszczalowski said:

 

Peterman makes Siemian look like Brady....

Peterman hasn't even shown he deserves a spot on the PS, yet there are some here who feel he deserves to start or compete to start right now?

 

Based on one half of football?

Albeit one of the worst halves ever.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

15 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

To be fair, they had Kevin Kolb. Also, these guys minus Allen and Jackson's should be more pro ready than EJ.

 

Kevin "German Word for Made of Glass" Kolb

[billsredneck1]

1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

that was silly the first time I read that posted.  

 

How did he play in relief in the Saints game? 

How did he play in relief in the NE game?  

How did he play in the blizzard in the Colts game? 

 

the way he played in the saints game gave me the feeling that under normal circumstances, this kid could give us that type of performance week in and week out....which is far and away better than what we had with tyrod.. now with another off season and camp, he is gonna change some minds.

[Kirby Jackson]

16 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Or.... Since you are planning on drafting a top QB in the draft and expect him to play at some point this season why flush $10-15MM of your limited cap on a QB that is marginally better than what you already have on the roster?

 

Go get Bradford, McCarron, McCown, Bridgewater, Hoyer, etc. But if the list becomes Cutler, Siemian, and similar, why bother?

The key words are “marginally better.” I don’t believe that any of those guys are “marginally better” than Peterman. They are WAY better (and that doesn’t mean that they are great). 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Just now, billsredneck1 said:

the way he played in the saints game gave me the feeling that under normal circumstances, this kid could give us that type of performance week in and week out....which is far and away better than what we had with tyrod.. now with another off season and camp, he is gonna change some minds.

 

I don't want to dump on the kid, but let's not puff what he did into something it wasn't.   The score was 40-3 or something like that when Peterman came in.  That had direct bearing on how he looked.   N'Orleans wasn't exactly pinning their ears back and going at it full bore by then. I expect, if we looked at a QbQ snap count, we might see a few D starters were chatting on the sideline.  NE*** probably wasn't resting starters 'cuz that's not how Belicheat*** rolls, but they were also leading nicely in the 4th and not exerting their full vim and vigor, plus all year they were a "bend don't break" offense who gave up a lot of yards.

 

I hope Peterman develops greatly but going into the season with Peterman and a rookie, any rookie, would be a Very Bad Plan and I'd be very disappointed if that's what Beane does.  I do think they had 2 guys in mind and were outbid for what they targeted.  I just hope they have a plan C.

[Kirby Jackson]

7 minutes ago, billsredneck1 said:

the way he played in the saints game gave me the feeling that under normal circumstances, this kid could give us that type of performance week in and week out....which is far and away better than what we had with tyrod.. now with another off season and camp, he is gonna change some minds.

Against a vanilla defense down 30 something points showed you that he could be an above average NFL starter?

[billsredneck1]

1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Against a vanilla defense down 30 something points showed you that he could be an above average NFL starter?

so if tyrod would have still been in the game, that defense would have still had all their starters trying to contain him from mounting a comeback?....and why was tyrod not still in the game?

 

after holding tyrod to 56 yds. after almost 4qtrs. they decided...hey nate's in, let's let him do good and put on a nice scoring drive! i get it now

[PromoTheRobot]

14 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The key words are “marginally better.” I don’t believe that any of those guys are “marginally better” than Peterman. They are WAY better (and that doesn’t mean that they are great). 

 

Here's who's left:

 

Jay Cutler

Drew Stanton

Chad Henne

Matt Cassel

Derek Anderson

Mark Sanchez

Matt Moore

Scott Tolzien

Geno Smith

Kellen Clemens

Tyler Bray

Joe Webb

Josh Johnson

Blaine Gabbert

Austin Davis

E.J. Manuel

Brock Osweiler

Brandon Weeden

T.J. Yates

Matt Barkley

Tom Savage

A.J. McCarron

 

After Moore and McCarron, who's worth $10-15MM?

 

Edited March 14, 2018 by PromoTheRobot

[TigerJ]

It's really a question of how much of a chance the GM and coach want to take.  Not having a veteran QB in the fold who has actually played a reasonable number of meaningful regular season snaps is taking a huge risk that Peterman or a highly drafted rookie can actually win games and look OK doing it.  Since they will have never done it at the pro level, you can't really know that they can.  If that's all you have come September, and they don't look good, you know the fan base is going to crucify McBeane.  If the fan base is sufficiently upset, the owner is going to notice, and he won't like it.  If the owner is upset, the leash around the neck of the GM and head coach gets much shorter and tighter, and eventually heads will roll.  I don't suspect that's something Beane and McDermott really want to happen.

[PromoTheRobot]

1 minute ago, TigerJ said:

It's really a question of how much of a chance the GM and coach want to take.  Not having a veteran QB in the fold who has actually played a reasonable number of meaningful regular season snaps is taking a huge risk that Peterman or a highly drafted rookie can actually win games and look OK doing it.  Since they will have never done it at the pro level, you can't really know that they can.  If that's all you have come September, and they don't look good, you know the fan base is going to crucify McBeane.  If the fan base is sufficiently upset, the owner is going to notice, and he won't like it.  If the owner is upset, the leash around the neck of the GM and head coach gets much shorter and tighter, and eventually heads will roll.  I don't suspect that's something Beane and McDermott really want to happen.

 

Crucify? Seriously? Even if the Bills get, say, Josh Rosen? 

[Golden*Wheels]

I'd  want a veteran in there even if I HADN'T seem Peterman play.

[Cash]

10 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

 

Hey, get your own line

 

 

Sorry, only read the first post and snap-responded. Obviously not quick enough on the trigger.

[PromoTheRobot]

Just now, Golden*Wheels said:

I'd  want a veteran in there even if I HADN'T seem Peterman play.

 

Maybe Hoyer will shake loose after New England signs McCarron.

[Kirby Jackson]

9 minutes ago, billsredneck1 said:

so if tyrod would have still been in the game, that defense would have still had all their starters trying to contain him from mounting a comeback?....and why was tyrod not still in the game?

 

after holding tyrod to 56 yds. after almost 4qtrs. they decided...hey nate's in, let's let him do good and put on a nice scoring drive! i get it now

No, when a team is up 30 something points late they play their reserves and vanilla defense trying to avoid injuries. Is that news to you? It happens a lot. 

[hemma]

Peterman started two games, not one.  One was as bad as bad can be, but the other was pretty good football under horrible conditions.

 

We still need a vet, for sure, but just remember that Peterman started two games.

[Kirby Jackson]

8 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Here's who's left:

 

Jay Cutler

Drew Stanton

Chad Henne

Matt Cassel

Derek Anderson

Mark Sanchez

Matt Moore

Scott Tolzien

Geno Smith

Kellen Clemens

Tyler Bray

Joe Webb

Josh Johnson

Blaine Gabbert

Austin Davis

E.J. Manuel

Brock Osweiler

Brandon Weeden

T.J. Yates

Matt Barkley

Tom Savage

A.J. McCarron

 

After Moore and McCarron, who's worth $10-15MM?

 

No one, but why pay $10-$15M on any bridge guy? That was the point all along. Get Siemian for $1.5M or whatever and your rookie. 

[PromoTheRobot]

Just now, Kirby Jackson said:

No one, but why pay $10-$15M on any bridge guy? That was the point all along. Get Siemian for $1.5M or whatever and your rookie. 

 

Wouldn't any veteran QB cost you that much? How do you get Siemian when he's still under contract? Trade for him? Now you're wasting draft capital.

 

Here's an idea. Give Fitz a jingle.

[Shaw66]

8 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Crucify? Seriously? Even if the Bills get, say, Josh Rosen? 

Yup.  Say they get Rosen and start Peterman because he's better in camp.  Say Peterman sucks in September.  Okay, in comes Rosen, and he really isn't ready.  He sucks, too.  

 

Bills are 1-8 in November.  Cousins Keenum and Mayfield (whom the Bills passed on to take Rosen) or even Taylor are having good years.  You think the fans won't be berserk?  You think the Pegulas will continue to have total confidence in McBeane?  I don't.  

[Kirby Jackson]

10 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Wouldn't any veteran QB cost you that much? How do you get Siemian when he's still under contract? Trade for him? Now you're wasting draft capital.

 

Here's an idea. Give Fitz a jingle.

Fitz is under contract. Siemian is like $1.9M I think. You could probably give them your 6th for Siemian and their 7th. 

Edited March 14, 2018 by Kirby Jackson

[Golden*Wheels]

19 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Maybe Hoyer will shake loose after New England signs McCarron.

Think that's probably happenin? I'd think he'd want a shot to start but maybe we haven't even approached him.

 

I wouldn't want to see Hoyer have to play but OTOH he's been around the league and would probably be a good resource for the rookie. And could be relied upon to be plainly average for a game here and there.

[CaptnCoke11]

15 hours ago, Tyrod's friend said:

We are going into free agency with $40,000,000. 

I'm at a loss as to why having a veteran QB around is seen as bad thing. Write the veteran a check, tell your bright shiny new QB he has to beat him out in camp and either he does beat him out in year 1 or he doesn't. 

On some levels it almost seems like we're going to have a hard time spending to our cap.

40 million not including upcoming roster bonuses and Stars cap hit.  Cut that in half probably. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

26 minutes ago, billsredneck1 said:

so if tyrod would have still been in the game, that defense would have still had all their starters trying to contain him from mounting a comeback?....and why was tyrod not still in the game?

 

after holding tyrod to 56 yds. after almost 4qtrs. they decided...hey nate's in, let's let him do good and put on a nice scoring drive! i get it now

 

The starters were sitting whether or not Tyrod was still in.  Tyrod came out because the Bills coaches declared a loss and wanted to see Peterman.

 

There are several analyses out there pointing out Dennison was slow to recognize and adjust to what the Saints were actually doing in coverage, and that he ran several of the routes Peterman was successful with for the 1st time in the 4th quarter.

 

 

7 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Fitz is under contract. Siemian is like $1.9M I think. You could probably give them your 6th for Siemian and their 7th. 

 

Siemian actually would not be the worst they could do.  He has shown he can at least play 500 ball, which is what you want from your backup, and he's shown flashes of playing decently.

 

[Chuck Wagon]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

That would work for me. I’d like to get higher than 5 but could live with it.

 

 

Get up to 5 and then go up from there.  The Giants or Colts might be MUCH more receptive to trading to 5 since they know they are likely walking out with Nelson or Chubb as worst case scenario.

 

I just don't know I can believe Denver is comfortable with Keenum / Lynch / Osweiler / maybe later draft pick as their QB room.

 

Pick #5 is basically "worth" #12 / #53 / #96, toss in Siemien here with a player going there (we could give them Richie and save $6 mil).

 

Watch Beane really draft day this thing and get up to #2 without giving up #22 or any 2019 picks.

[PromoTheRobot]

12 minutes ago, CaptnCoke11 said:

40 million not including upcoming roster bonuses and Stars cap hit.  Cut that in half probably. 

Yeah. That $40MM doesn't include what we are paying our pre-freeagency signings, then the rookies. We don't have that much cap space left.

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Or.... Since you are planning on drafting a top QB in the draft and expect him to play at some point this season why flush $10-15MM of your limited cap on a QB that is marginally better than what you already have on the roster?

 

Go get Bradford, McCarron, McCown, Bridgewater, Hoyer, etc. But if the list becomes Cutler, Siemian, and similar, why bother?

I tend to agree with you, at this point.  I think the right move was to get someone with experience and potential.  There's not much potential in the market now.  

 

If it had been me, I would have spent some money on Keenum. I would have spent a lot on Cousins.  

 

These  guys seem to be rolling the dice.  

[PromoTheRobot]

Seems I'm not the only one floating the idea.

 

https://t.co/QSgELnecdc?amp=1

Edited March 14, 2018 by PromoTheRobot

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

Is it possible that Nathan Peterman will be the Bills' opening day quarterback?

Sal Maiorana, @salmaioranaPublished 9:57 a.m. ET March 14, 2018

The Bills may be willing to give Nathan Peterman a chance to be their starting quarterback.

 

 

 

The other name still floating around western New York is Super Bowl MVP Nick Foles, who might be available from the Eagles via a trade. But if the Bills are going to draft a quarterback high, then giving up assets to acquire Foles doesn’t make much sense.

 

It’s one thing to sign a free agent, that’s just money. Trading for Foles would be costly in terms of money, and what the Bills would have to relinquish in draft picks because the Eagles have all the leverage and are going to play hardball.

 

Beane may sign a veteran Wednesday, and as long as he doesn’t pay a silly sum, no one will argue, just so long as the Bills are able to get the high-end rookie come April 26.

 

But if he continues to sit out the quarterback frenzy, it’s a risk because there’s no guarantee the rookie will be ready to play in Week 1, and there’s certainly no guarantee that Peterman is competent enough to hold down the position while the Bills wait for the rookie to emerge. 

 

Push comes to shove, if you asked me what I would do at this stage of the game if I was Beane, I’d lean toward not signing a low-level veteran and roll the dice with Peterman and the rookie.

 

I’ll hang up and listen to your thoughts.

[Boatdrinks]

6 minutes ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:

Is it possible that Nathan Peterman will be the Bills' opening day quarterback?

Sal Maiorana, @salmaioranaPublished 9:57 a.m. ET March 14, 2018

The Bills may be willing to give Nathan Peterman a chance to be their starting quarterback.

 

 

 

The other name still floating around western New York is Super Bowl MVP Nick Foles, who might be available from the Eagles via a trade. But if the Bills are going to draft a quarterback high, then giving up assets to acquire Foles doesn’t make much sense.

 

It’s one thing to sign a free agent, that’s just money. Trading for Foles would be costly in terms of money, and what the Bills would have to relinquish in draft picks because the Eagles have all the leverage and are going to play hardball.

 

Beane may sign a veteran Wednesday, and as long as he doesn’t pay a silly sum, no one will argue, just so long as the Bills are able to get the high-end rookie come April 26.

 

But if he continues to sit out the quarterback frenzy, it’s a risk because there’s no guarantee the rookie will be ready to play in Week 1, and there’s certainly no guarantee that Peterman is competent enough to hold down the position while the Bills wait for the rookie to emerge. 

 

Push comes to shove, if you asked me what I would do at this stage of the game if I was Beane, I’d lean toward not signing a low-level veteran and roll the dice with Peterman and the rookie.

 

I’ll hang up and listen to your thoughts.

Wow. I would really hate this. NP isn't even good enough to be the backup for this team. If a veteran FA was signed, they would be the starter and NP would be 3rd after the rookie draft pick.

[Captain Hindsight]

17 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

I don't want the Bills scraping the QB barrel and spending $10-15MM on whatever's left. Why not just roll with Nate Peterman and whoever we draft, with Joe Webb III your #3? The SD game aside, I thought NP was okay.

You mean when he didnt have to play? Yeah he was great 

[xRUSHx]

14 minutes ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:

Is it possible that Nathan Peterman will be the Bills' opening day quarterback?

Sal Maiorana, @salmaioranaPublished 9:57 a.m. ET March 14, 2018

The Bills may be willing to give Nathan Peterman a chance to be their starting quarterback.

 

 

 

The other name still floating around western New York is Super Bowl MVP Nick Foles, who might be available from the Eagles via a trade. But if the Bills are going to draft a quarterback high, then giving up assets to acquire Foles doesn’t make much sense.

 

It’s one thing to sign a free agent, that’s just money. Trading for Foles would be costly in terms of money, and what the Bills would have to relinquish in draft picks because the Eagles have all the leverage and are going to play hardball.

 

Beane may sign a veteran Wednesday, and as long as he doesn’t pay a silly sum, no one will argue, just so long as the Bills are able to get the high-end rookie come April 26.

 

But if he continues to sit out the quarterback frenzy, it’s a risk because there’s no guarantee the rookie will be ready to play in Week 1, and there’s certainly no guarantee that Peterman is competent enough to hold down the position while the Bills wait for the rookie to emerge. 

 

Push comes to shove, if you asked me what I would do at this stage of the game if I was Beane, I’d lean toward not signing a low-level veteran and roll the dice with Peterman and the rookie.

 

I’ll hang up and listen to your thoughts.

 I would be fine with one of the top 3 QBs from this draft and Peterman this year over a low end vet but I would also draft another this year like Washington did the year they drafted RG3 and Cousins. Having 3 rookie QBs is cheap and could also bring in a trade of one in a few seasons of grooming. IMO

 

Might get lucky and end up with Rosen,Peterman,Rudolph 

 

Edited March 14, 2018 by xRUSHx

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Wouldn't any veteran QB cost you that much? How do you get Siemian when he's still under contract? Trade for him? Now you're wasting draft capital.

Here's an idea. Give Fitz a jingle.

 

Fitz is under contract.  Re-signed with Tampa Bay on Friday per report.

 

20 minutes ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:

Is it possible that Nathan Peterman will be the Bills' opening day quarterback?

Sal Maiorana, @salmaioranaPublished 9:57 a.m. ET March 14, 2018

The Bills may be willing to give Nathan Peterman a chance to be their starting quarterback.

(....)

Beane may sign a veteran Wednesday, and as long as he doesn’t pay a silly sum, no one will argue, just so long as the Bills are able to get the high-end rookie come April 26.

 

My thoughts are that if you listen to Beane carefully, he will usually tell you something.  In this case, he has said repeatedly that they want a vet, and something to the effect of "it's desireable to have a vet in the QB room". 

 

I think that means they plan to sign a vet signal caller, but they aren't planning to go for someone they see as wanting or desireable to start.

Edited March 14, 2018 by Hapless Bills Fan

[Go-Bills]

17 hours ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...nice assessment.....Peterman and the rook QB draftee would never be ready.......with the Kolb disaster, EJ got thrown to the wolves (so did Losman when Tom Terrific tried to cover his sorry azz) and both moves worked "wonders"..........

And Peterman didn't get thrown to the wolf's?  Peterman is better than everyone gives credit for! The snow game every pass was in the receivers hands... ROLL WITH PETERMAN! 

[Elite Poster]

"Hey let's trade Tyrod and let's start Nathan Pickerman, also, let's make sure we re-sign a 6M DT to a one year deal so he can come crashing right back down into the valley of piss poor football." - Beane

 

"DNA DNA DNA DNA" - McDermott

[Yav]

Don't forget Webb. He's still on the roster and is a QB. 

[Wily Dog]

Peterman will be the starter, the rookie will get a chance to learn from a veteran QB , not a perceived starter , and depending on what the rookie and Peterman do , we will see who the Qb is after a few games.

[The Avenger]

I'd be very concerned with just Peterman and a rookie. Few rookies, even those at the top, can really come out and play well as a rookie (we could get lucky). That said, I've seen a ton of talented QBs get thrown into action as rookies and just get destroyed - they have their development stunted or destroyed because they haven't had time to adjust to the NFL and the weight or the world is on them as a very high draft pick. Unless Peterman has made tremendous strides you can start him all you want but if he does poorly they'll be too much pressure not to play the rookie and that could ruin him.

 

I'm not saying you have to go sign Foles, just get someone who will be adequate so you can protect and develop your rookie.