Is there a rush to judgement on Peterman?

[suorangefan4]

1 minute ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Not even close to being accurate. and he cannot throw the deep ball even in a clean pocket.

 

 

Did you just really use one throw to support your argument about his deep ball?

 

And name one other game where he didn't look solid when he played. 

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, suorangefan4 said:

 

Did you just really use one throw to support your argument about his deep ball?

 

And name one other game where he didn't look solid when he played. 

 

Go look at his deep passing attempts at PIT

[suorangefan4]

1 minute ago, ScottLaw said:

And these same people bashed Tyrod incessantly.?

 

Tyrod was the one who played nearly 59 minutes and was garbage all game.

 

He left Peterman one minute with no timeouts to go half the field. 

 

 

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, suorangefan4 said:

 

Tyrod was the one who played nearly 59 minutes and was garbage all game.

 

He left Peterman one minute with no timeouts to go half the field. 

 

 

And his fumble, intentional grounding and INT was a “pretty solid” minute.

[suorangefan4]

1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:

And his fumble, intentional grounding and INT was a “pretty solid” minute.

 

I love how you keep talking about this "fumble" instead of accurately describing the play. Like being put in on 4th down and 3 and running for the first down and "fumbling" it out of bounds when he was near the sideline.

 

Intentional grounding was his fault and not the offensive line's fault? He's either getting sacked or taking an intentional grounding there.

 

INT should've been pass interference. Ramsey clearly went right through Thompson's back which popped it up into the air so he could intercept it.

 

And thank garbage Tyrod Taylor for giving Peterman such little time which limits what Peterman can do there. He has to work agains the clock against a good defense because TT left him one minute and no timeouts.

[Kirby Jackson]

3 minutes ago, suorangefan4 said:

 

I love how you keep talking about this "fumble" instead of accurately describing the play. Like being put in on 4th down and 3 and running for the first down and "fumbling" it out of bounds when he was near the sideline.

 

Intentional grounding was his fault and not the offensive line's fault? He's either getting sacked or taking an intentional grounding there.

 

INT should've been pass interference. Ramsey clearly went right through Thompson's back which popped it up into the air so he could intercept it.

 

And thank garbage Tyrod Taylor for giving Peterman such little time which limits what Peterman can do there. He has to work agains the clock against a good defense because TT left him one minute and no timeouts.

So you think it was “pretty solid.” Those are your words, not mine.

 

It’s laughable the excuses that Bills fans will make for this scrub. If they approached it like Zay and said “he was terrible but I’m not ready to give up on him” we’d probably let it be. Instead, we have an excuse for every one of his zillion mistakes. He probably has the most mistakes per snap of any QB ever!! It is always someone else’s fault. It’s okay that he just sucks. 

[CircleTheWagons99]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Which player do you think will have a better career? What percent chance do you think Peterman has of starting for 4 years? It was MAYBE 2% before the Chargers game (based on the history of guys picked there). In the middle of a playoff chase the 2% chance was a stupid decision and cost the OC his job. 

YOU can call TT's career better, in my eyes only because of the paydays will he be seen as the better QB.  Thing is, you only saw Peterman play 2 games, lost one playing like crap, won the next one in a blizzard, but yeah thats enough to pass judgement on him.

 

TT 7 years later, 3 starting, doing the same things wrong but that's fine.......

 

 

[prissythecat]

1 minute ago, CircleTheWagons99 said:

YOU can call TT's career better, in my eyes only because of the paydays will he be seen as the better QB.  Thing is, you only saw Peterman play 2 games, lost one playing like crap, won the next one in a blizzard, but yeah thats enough to pass judgement on him.

 

TT 7 years later, 3 starting, doing the same things wrong but that's fine.......

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure Joe Webb and his package helped win the blizzard game with some clutch throws.

[CircleTheWagons99]

1 hour ago, Ol Dirty B said:

 

Wow if I could ban you I would.

 

Starting Peterman is essentially watching the world burn. Your the reason that the saying "The most popular guy on a losing team is the back up QB" exists.

 

Tyrod is an NFL caliber QB. Peterman showed he wasn't 

Wow, what a dumb comment.....Ban me for my opinion.

 

Never said Peterman should start, just stated everyone gave up on him after 1 game, but TT  gets 7 years doing the same wrong things.....But keep thinking the way you think, you cant ban me but you can just ignore my comments since they are so disturbing to your Idol.....

 

[suorangefan4]

1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:

So you think it was “pretty solid.” Those are your words, not mine.

 

It’s laughable the excuses that Bills fans will make for this scrub. If they approached it like Zay and said “he was terrible but I’m not ready to give up on him” we’d probably let it be. Instead, we have an excuse for every one of his zillion mistakes. He probably has the most mistakes per snap of any QB ever!! It is always someone else’s fault. It’s okay that he just sucks. 

 

No it's laughable that you're using a game where he's given one minute with no timeouts against a good defense as your arguments.

 

And you describe his "fumble" to fit your narrative when the reality is he ran for a first down on that play when being inserted into the game on 4th and 3. The fumble went out of bounds. The play was a positive yet you're spinning it like a negative.

 

And did Ramsey not go through Thompson's back on that INT? He clearly hit him early. Even without the INT it's highly improbable the Bills score because they were almost out of time thanks to Tyrod.

 

The Chargers game Peterman clearly made some mistakes but if you can't admit after watching every play on the All-22 that his receivers were blanketed and the protection was horrendous then you have no credibility at all. He was set up to fail that game. 

[Kirby Jackson]

2 minutes ago, CircleTheWagons99 said:

YOU can call TT's career better, in my eyes only because of the paydays will he be seen as the better QB.  Thing is, you only saw Peterman play 2 games, lost one playing like crap, won the next one in a blizzard, but yeah thats enough to pass judgement on him.

 

TT 7 years later, 3 starting, doing the same things wrong but that's fine.......

 

 

I have seen a lot more of Peterman than just his snaps with the Bills. I don’t need to see more. He will be lucky at this point to be on a roster. That’s not a bad thing. He should just be viewed as a fringe roster player and not a serviceable option.

2 minutes ago, prissythecat said:

 

I'm pretty sure Joe Webb and his package helped win the blizzard game with some clutch throws.

Peterman was 5-10 for 50 something yards. Obviously the conditions were tough but that’s the game people are raving about.

[suorangefan4]

5 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I have seen a lot more of Peterman than just his snaps with the Bills. I don’t need to see more. He will be lucky at this point to be on a roster. That’s not a bad thing. He should just be viewed as a fringe roster player and not a serviceable option.

Peterman was 5-10 for 50 something yards. Obviously the conditions were tough but that’s the game people are raving about.

 

The receivers dropped 3 passes that him them right in the hands against the Colts. His team did nothing to help him every game he played in. Also one of the "incompletions" was a spike to stop the clock.

 

Every single throw was on the money except one that game.

 

 

Edited March 21, 2018 by suorangefan4

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, suorangefan4 said:

 

No it's laughable that you're using a game where he's given one minute with no timeouts against a good defense as your arguments.

 

And you describe his "fumble" to fit your narrative when the reality is he ran for a first down on that play when being inserted into the game on 4th and 3. The fumble went out of bounds. The play was a positive yet you're spinning it like a negative.

 

And did Ramsey not go through Thompson's back on that INT? He clearly hit him early. Even without the INT it's highly improbable the Bills score because they were almost out of time thanks to Tyrod.

 

The Chargers game Peterman clearly made some mistakes but if you can't admit after watching every play on the All-22 that his receivers were blanketed and the protection was horrendous then you have no credibility at all. He was set up to fail that game. 

I wasn’t unsing the Jags game until you said “he was pretty solid in every game but the Chargers.” Either you thought that he was pretty solid in the Jags game or you weren’t being honest earlier. I’m not the one trying to create a narrative. His stats speak for themselves. He is off to the worst start of any QB ever. You are the one trying to dress that up.

 

The receivers were blanketed and the OL rough all year!! That’s not a check mark for him. Every Bills QB played with that line and those receivers. 

Just now, suorangefan4 said:

 

The receivers dropped 4 passes that him them right in the hands against the Colts. His team did nothing to help him every game he played in. Also one of the "incompletions" was a spike to stop the clock.

 

Every single throw was on the money except one that game.

 

 

Oh good, more excuses for him...

[suorangefan4]

1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:

 

Oh good, more excuses for him...

 

So it's an excuse when you correctly state that the receivers dropped three passes that hit them right in the hands and another "incompletion" was a spike to stop the clock"?

 

He was excellent against the Colts.

[Kirby Jackson]

I’m going to bow out of this thread as I’ve given my opinion. Feel free to hold out hope for Peterman. I’ll continue to think that he is a scrub. One of us will end up right and one of us will end up wrong. 

Just now, suorangefan4 said:

 

So it's an excuse when you correctly state that the receivers dropped three passes that hit them right in the hands and another "incompletion" was a spike to stop the clock"?

 

He was excellent against the Colts.

They dropped passes all year!! We heard that it was “Tyrod’s fault that the receivers struggled.” Now we are hearing that Peterman was held back by the receivers. So which is it? The answer is that they were all bad. 

[JohnC]

24 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

He trusted his OC to make that call. He ultimately will take the responsibility but the decision wasn’t driven by McDermott (it was accepted by him).

 

Still no no one has given what they like about his play. Again, the guys that have seen and evaluated him the most like him the least. There are a lot of people here saying, “we need to see more.” The guys like GB and Blokes that have thoroughly evaluated him think less of him than those that don’t like him!!  That’s scary to me. 

 

You (nor anyone) still hasn’t answered why he will add more value to the team than Reilly (or whoever is player 53)? Outside of a disaster, Peterman won’t play a snap. The best endorsement people have had so far is “he probably isn’t as bad as he looked.” No one is saying “I think he will be an asset.” The hope is that at some point he can be a backup. Is he more likely to be a serviceable QB at this point than some like Logan Woodside? Not necessarily and there are young guys available like that all of the time. 

No one is claiming that Dennison wasn't the driving force for the replacing of the starter. So I don't understand why you are belaboring the point. McDermott as the HC had the final say. That is an unalterable fact! McDermott is not a fool. He is not prone to doing irrational things. The arguments that Dennison made to the HC were not farfetched arguments that the HC didn't also see. 

 

The Peterman argument you are vociferously making isn't about Peterman. It is the emotional trauma resulting from not accepting that he replaced Taylor. The argument isn't that Peterson is so good because few people are making that claim. It is that a person who you believe to be so bad replaced a qb that you are fond of. 

 

The issue of who is more worthy to be on the roster than Peterman doesn't resonate to me. I simply don't care. I believe Peterman is going to be on the roster as a backup qb, probably the backup to the backup. If he isn't then so be it. I'm not as invested in him as you are trying to make it out to be. 

 

The core of our conflict on Peterman really over Peterman. It's really about TT. That's the source of your energy on this issue. The reality is you and I have an unbridgeable disagreement over Tyrod. My position on him is unlikely to change. It is concrete hardened. He is what he is and it wasn't good enough for me or for the home team that dealt him. You simply had a different view on this issue. 

[26CornerBlitz]

The Bills are contemplating drafting a Franchise QB to finally fill the void that has held the team back since 1996 and were arguing over Nathan FN Peterman.  

 

I'm on to the 2018 draft.  

[Ramza86]

I think hes shown a lot of good things out there...

 

The one glaring weakness is how he handles pressure. I think you saw his worst plays when he was affected by pressure. 

 

Im not gonna be banging the table for peterman to play...but if he has a good camp and shows the coaches something...i wont go crazy if he ever starts.

Edited March 21, 2018 by Ramza86

[LABILLBACKER]

I just have a gut feeling it's too early to turn the page on Nate. We'll leave it up to McD.

[rodneykm]

24 minutes ago, prissythecat said:

I'm pretty sure Joe Webb and his package helped win the blizzard game with some clutch throws.

 

No need to be crude....lol

[prissythecat]

22 minutes ago, rodneykm said:

 

No need to be crude....lol

 

 

Am sure you know that is a mocking reference to Dunkirk Don and his lies about there being special plays involving Joe Webb ;-)

[Chuck Wagon]

I'm sure when Peterman throws for 3 TDs in some XFL game some on here will pop up to say "See, I told you he could do it!"

[Lfod]

Peterman wasn't ready. He couldn't last a full game. He was thrown in early on his first year on an offence that wasn't being productive with Tyrod. The guy wasn't given a chance to be successful. He was thrown in the dumpster fire.

 

I'm still glad we did it. Had to see what the kid had. Nothing much else was going on so why not. He did make a few good throws on a mostly terrible offensive side of the ball. He made a few rookie mistakes.

 

Time will tell. It's not like the Bills have an answer yet.

 

 

Edited March 21, 2018 by Lfod

[rodneykm]

11 minutes ago, prissythecat said:

 

 

Am sure you know that is a mocking reference to Dunkirk Don and his lies about there being special plays involving Joe Webb ;-)

 

Absolutely not. I have no idea who that guy even is honestly. 

[reddogblitz]

5 hours ago, prissythecat said:

Peterman is not an Aikman or a Manning who were top QB prospects and selections.  Those guys were cut some slack because their coaches knew they had a lot more going for them.    What are we supposed to hope for from a 5th round pick?

 

Aikman and Manning played on some really bad teams as rookies, not playoff teams like Nasty Nate did. Yet none of them had 5 pick halves in their first start.

 

The San Diego start was THE WORST since the merger.  I started Nasty Nate on my imaginary football team that week and he got -7.  the worst ever in the history of Fantasy Football.  I forgot to change the next week and he scored more.  A 0, but it was better. 

 

If I were in charge I'd cut him and either draft someone else late or sign a UFA. Maybe find out what Vernon Adams Jr. is up to these days.  Why waste development time on him that could be spent on someone else?

 

 I have a new bottle of Tabasco in my pantry in case I need to eat some crow later. Seriously doubt I'll need it. 

 

 

1 hour ago, suorangefan4 said:

 

I love how you keep talking about this "fumble" instead of accurately describing the play. Like being put in on 4th down and 3 and running for the first down and "fumbling" it out of bounds when he was near the sideline.

 

Nasty Nate has fumbled in every game he has ever played for us.  Even in his magical pre season of 2017.  He's been able to get most of them back however.

[folz]

I am just surprised by how short-sighted people have become these days.

 

It's one thing to have an opinion on if you think someone will become a good player or not (that's fine), but to label players as busts, trash, etc. after one game or even one season is ridiculous. Why is there the old adage of not evaluating a draft until 3 years has passed, or the myth of the 3rd year WRs ready to bust out, etc. It is because 98% of the guys that come into this league need some development, need to get used to the speed of the game, etc. There are only a small group of guys that come into the league each year that ball out right away, and usually it is partly because they were drafted into a great situation.

 

Every job in this world takes time to learn. I don't care if you are a doctor or flipping burgers at McDs, first day on the job you aren't doing everything right, someone needs to show you the ropes, you need to gain experience doing it. This notion that players should come in and not make mistakes and light it up right away or they are a bust is truly baffling to me. In the old days, most fans recognized that it would take some time for rookies to come along and they were patient with them. Some of you guys would have sent Bruce Smith packing after one overweight, mediocre first season.

 

I don't know if Peterman will ever develop into a starting QB, probably not as the odds are against him, but none of us knows for sure. Why would you dump a 2nd year player on a rookie contract if just a few months ago (as a staff) you thought there was something there you could develop? Let's at least give these kids a chance to develop before calling for their heads. Because, ya know, It's a funny thing about humans...when they practice something they usually get better at it.

 

Edited March 21, 2018 by folz

[grb]

5 hours ago, JohnC said:

No one is claiming that Dennison wasn't the driving force for the replacing of the starter. So I don't understand why you are belaboring the point. McDermott as the HC had the final say. That is an unalterable fact! McDermott is not a fool. He is not prone to doing irrational things. The arguments that Dennison made to the HC were not farfetched arguments that the HC didn't also see. 

 

The Peterman argument you are vociferously making isn't about Peterman. It is the emotional trauma resulting from not accepting that he replaced Taylor. The argument isn't that Peterson is so good because few people are making that claim. It is that a person who you believe to be so bad replaced a qb that you are fond of. 

 

The issue of who is more worthy to be on the roster than Peterman doesn't resonate to me. I simply don't care. I believe Peterman is going to be on the roster as a backup qb, probably the backup to the backup. If he isn't then so be it. I'm not as invested in him as you are trying to make it out to be. 

 

The core of our conflict on Peterman really over Peterman. It's really about TT. That's the source of your energy on this issue. The reality is you and I have an unbridgeable disagreement over Tyrod. My position on him is unlikely to change. It is concrete hardened. He is what he is and it wasn't good enough for me or for the home team that dealt him. You simply had a different view on this issue. 

 

You've got it bassackwards. Taylor supporters have no "source of energy" over Mr. Peterman. We don't have any "emotional trauma" over the benching. We thought it moronic and were proved right. It's kinda hard to be traumatized when you're incredibly obviously blatantly completely 100% correct. All the snowflake symptoms here come from the other side - from the people embarrassed and wrong. They're the ones arguing that a fumble, intentional grounding, and interception in four plays was a "solid outing", or that 54.4% completion with 5.7 ypa and 28 yards as longest completion constitutes a "fantastic preseason", or that 5-10 for 57 Yards is a heroic game, whatever the weather. 

 

Look, we get it: Poor Nate was the un-Taylor, and thus a cult was born. But Tyrod is gone and Nate is heading for the practice squad, so what's the point of so much comic aggrandizement? Stand by Your Man worked for Tammy Wynette, but here it looks pretty damn silly......

 

 

Edited March 22, 2018 by grb

[prissythecat]

4 minutes ago, folz said:

I am just surprised by how short-sighted people have become these days.

 

It's one thing to have an opinion on if you think someone will become a good player or not (that's fine), but to label players as busts, trash, etc. after one game or even one season is ridiculous. Why is there the old adage of not evaluating a draft until 3 years has passed, or the myth of the 3rd year WRs ready to bust out, etc. It is because 98% of the guys that come into this league need some development, need to get used to the speed of the game, etc. There are only a small group of guys that come into the league each year that ball out right away, and usually it is partly because they were drafted into a great situation.

 

Every job in this world takes time to learn. I don't care if you are a doctor or flipping burgers at McDs, first day on the job you aren't doing everything right, someone needs to show you the ropes, you need to gain experience doing it. This notion that players should come in and not make mistakes and light it up right away or they are a bust is truly baffling to me. In the old days, most fans recognized that it would take some time for rookies to come along and they were patient with them. Some of you guys would have sent Bruce Smith packing after one overweight, mediocre first season.

 

I don't know if Peterman will ever develop into a starting QB, probably not as the odds are against him, but none of us knows for sure. Why would you dump a 2nd year player on a rookie contract if just a few months ago (as a staff) you thought there was something there you could develop? Let's at least give these kids a chance to develop before calling for their heads. Because, ya know, It's a funny thing about humans...when they practice something they usually get better at it.

 

 

 

Hmm.  If there were true,  we wouldn't have such a dearth of franchise QBs right.     Would just have needed to wait for EJ Manuel or Jeff Tuel to practice enough until they became All Pros?

[DFT]

4 minutes ago, folz said:

I am just surprised by how short-sighted people have become these days.

 

It's one thing to have an opinion on if you think someone will become a good player or not (that's fine), but to label players as busts, trash, etc. after one game or even one season is ridiculous. Why is there the old adage of not evaluating a draft until 3 years has passed, or the myth of the 3rd year WRs ready to bust out, etc. It is because 98% of the guys that come into this league need some development, need to get used to the speed of the game, etc. There are only a small group of guys that come into the league each year that ball out right away, and usually it is partly because they were drafted into a great situation.

 

Every job in this world takes time to learn. I don't care if you are a doctor or flipping burgers at McDs, first day on the job you aren't doing everything right, someone needs to show you the ropes, you need to gain experience doing it. This notion that players should come in and not make mistakes and light it up right away or they are a bust is truly baffling to me. In the old days, most fans recognized that it would take some time for rookies to come along and they were patient with them. Some of you guys would have sent Bruce Smith packing after one overweight, mediocre first season.

 

I don't know if Peterman will ever develop into a starting QB, probably not as the odds are against him, but none of us knows for sure. Why would you dump a 2nd year player on a rookie contract if just a few months ago (as a staff) you thought there was something there you could develop? Let's at least give these kids a chance to develop before calling for their heads. Because, ya know, It's a funny thing about humans...when they practice something they usually get better at it.

 

It’s a cruel world.  It’s much, MUCH more cruel if you’re a potential rookie QB, headed to Buffalo.   Peterman has his mettle tested, but I know he’ll rise above it.  I don’t think he’s done at all.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

1 hour ago, suorangefan4 said:

 

I love how you keep talking about this "fumble" instead of accurately describing the play. Like being put in on 4th down and 3 and running for the first down and "fumbling" it out of bounds when he was near the sideline.

 

Intentional grounding was his fault and not the offensive line's fault? He's either getting sacked or taking an intentional grounding there.

 

INT should've been pass interference. Ramsey clearly went right through Thompson's back which popped it up into the air so he could intercept it.

 

And thank garbage Tyrod Taylor for giving Peterman such little time which limits what Peterman can do there. He has to work agains the clock against a good defense because TT left him one minute and no timeouts.

 

TT sucks because he sucks, but Peterman is worse because of the same team around him. This is priceless...???

[JohnC]

4 minutes ago, grb said:

 

You've got it bassackwards. Taylor supporters have no "source of energy" over Mr. Peterman. We don't have any "emotional trauma" over the benching. We thought it moronic and were proved right. It's kinda hard to be traumatized when you're incredibly obviously blatantly completely 100% correct. All the snowflake symptoms here come from the other side - from the people embarrassed and wrong. There're the ones arguing that a fumble, intentional grounding, and interception in four plays was a "solid outing", or that 54.4% completion with 5.7 ypa and 28 yards as longest completion constitutes a "fantastic preseason", or that 5-10 for 57 Yards is a heroic game, whatever the weather. 

 

Look, we get it: Poor Nate was the un-Taylor, and thus a cult was born. But Tyrod is gone and Nate is heading for the practice squad, so what's the point of so much comic aggrandizement? Stand by Your Man worked for Tammy Wynette, but here it looks pretty damn silly......

This regime traded Taylor and picked up McCarron. The qb position even before the draft has been upgraded. 

[Elite Poster]

Yes let's compare a fifth round pick to the number one overall pick. 

 

Logic here is incredible sometimes. Why did we trade Cardale then? He was about 450 million times better than Peterbum in his start. Where is the Cardale uproar? 

 

Petercrap had a -11 average yard per attempt that game, but man did he look promising!

Edited March 21, 2018 by Elite Poster

[4BillsintheBurgh]

With a new OC I will be shocked if there isn't some quality competition brought in for Peterman, especially with the supposed depth in this qb class. Hopefully we'll have enough draft picks to do that.

[folz]

56 minutes ago, prissythecat said:

 

 

Hmm.  If there were true,  we wouldn't have such a dearth of franchise QBs right.     Would just have needed to wait for EJ Manuel or Jeff Tuel to practice enough until they became All Pros?

 

Of course, not everyone who practices hard becomes an All-Pro as there are so many other factors (raw talent, size, strength, coaching, franchise, family, injuries, mental makeup, etc.) that go into it.  That was, obviously, not what I was saying. But everyone does get better with practice, so why not see where a kid's ceiling is before dumping him. Do you really think San Diego was Peterman's best and even if he stays in the league for 10 years he will always look that bad on the field?

 

Cause, I am looking around the league and seeing guys like McCown, Keenum, and Foles...who are obviously better at this stage in their careers than they were earlier.

Now I'm not saying you wait on a guy for 5-10 years to develop, but let's give these kids at least 2-3 years to acclimate, learn, mature, get some experience and some, of course not all, will surprise you. What Patriots fan in Brady's rookie year thought some 6th rounder should take over for Bledsoe? How many fans were ready to kick Eric Moulds to the curb after his first two seasons. There are just so many examples of players who just needed a little time or the right situation. But, no, since a kid isn't an obvious franchise QB the first time he hits the field, then he's just a bum with no value, let's get rid of him.

 

How are you going to react if the Bills do draft one of the top 4 QBs and his first 8 games are atrocious. Do you dump him and try to draft another one next year? or do give him at least another season to show he can improve and get it?

[MrEpsYtown]

Peterman is another example of why guys need to sit. Could he become a competent backup, average starter? Maybe. But he should not been playing in that Chargers game. The staff was stuck in a weird spot because their "quarterback" just threw for 52 yards in an actual NFL game. 

 

Regardless, whoever we draft, they need to sit for at least 6-8 games. Preferably the whole season like Carson Palmer. 

[Southern Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

They called him “Nervous Nate” in college for the way that he played under pressure.

So "They" know more than our coaching staff?

[Ga boy]

7 hours ago, dpberr said:

He wasn't ready for prime time.  You could tell the game was too fast for him.  

 

He was put in some crap spots too by the coaching staff.  Starting a game in a playoff run, in place of the benched starter, a snow game, and the last desperate gasp of the wild card game.  

 

Training camp will be interesting to watch because I think he'll be improved over last year, perhaps with a better plan for the offense too.  

I pullin for him.  Maybe Peterman can!!

[Kirby Jackson]

1 hour ago, Southern Bills Fan said:

So "They" know more than our coaching staff?

Said a different way, I feel that I probably know more about the Ohio State players than the Bills coaches do. I’ve made it a priority to watch and follow them. I would think that the same can be applied to the Pitt fans. Obviously the Bills coaches have a much more trained eye but I’ve watched all 1211 of JT Barrett’s pass attempts. I have a pretty good idea where he excels and where he struggles. 

 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Said a different way, I feel that I probably know more about the Ohio State players than the Bills coaches do. I’ve made it a priority to watch and follow them. I would think that the same can be applied to the Pitt fans. Obviously the Bills coaches have a much more trained eye but I’ve watched all 1211 of JT Barrett’s pass attempts. I have a pretty good idea where he excels and where he struggles. 

 

No offense Kirby but if you are real good at it  oh wait I should ask.        

 

Are you an NFL scout?  

 

A trained eye should have known to give up in TT early last season.  

 

 

[ngbills]

8 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

No offense Kirby but if you are real good at it  oh wait I should ask.        

 

Are you an NFL scout?  

 

A trained eye should have known to give up in TT early last season.  

 

 

What are you saying then. Clearly the Bills and other NFL teams did not give up on TT early last season. How many millions are spent on scouting and guys still get it wrong. You can watch every second and have every piece of analysis and still get it wrong.