77% were wrong believing our HC wouldn't be fooled by the mirage of preseason, but the Allen Era begins week 2!

[transplantbillsfan]

http://www.espn.com/blog/buffalo-bills/post/_/id/31756

Josh Allen's development key to Bills' postseason hopes

For the Buffalo Bills to contend for the playoffs this season, here are the five players who can help make that happen:

AJ McCarron, QB:

Josh Allen, QB:

LeSean McCoy, RB:

Kelvin Benjamin, WR: 

Jerry Hughes, DE: 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

http://www.espn.com/blog/buffalo-bills/post/_/id/31756

Josh Allen's development key to Bills' postseason hopes

For the Buffalo Bills to contend for the playoffs this season, here are the five players who can help make that happen:

AJ McCarron, QB:

Josh Allen, QB:

LeSean McCoy, RB:

Kelvin Benjamin, WR: 

Jerry Hughes, DE: 

 

So, Rodak isn't buying the Nate Peterman hype train and thinks McCarron  "seems to have the inside track on the starting job", is that what I'm getting from this?

[transplantbillsfan]

3 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

So, Rodak isn't buying the Nate Peterman hype train and thinks McCarron  "seems to have the inside track on the starting job", is that what I'm getting from this?

 

Guess so.

 

I think and have thought since we acquired McCarron and drafted Allen it'd be McCarron or Allen starting.

 

The Peterman hype has been odd, but let's see how long it goes into TC.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

3 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

So, Rodak isn't buying the Nate Peterman hype train and thinks McCarron  "seems to have the inside track on the starting job", is that what I'm getting from this?

 

...so who's buying Rodak?.....

[reddogblitz]

On 6/29/2018 at 7:31 PM, transplantbillsfan said:

More projecting. Similarly to #1, Beane's job as GM is to evaluate players and bring in the best known good to great players for value but, more importantly, to rely on scouting--both pro and college--to go out and find those diamonds in the rough. We have and unknown offensive roster, not necessarily a "not very good one." Maybe it's downright awful, but the good thing is that McDermott has had OTAs and Minicamp and will have Training Camp and Preseason to evaluate it. If he thinks they're much worse than they were last year, I'm sure that'll factor into his decision. I, personally, thing the offensive roster is better than you think. But I've really bought into what Beane has been doing with the roster on both the pro and college side.

 

I'd say it's bordering on a loser mentality. We can't win. We're not good enough. Play the worst guy. We're gonna lose anyway.  Conceding playoffs before TC even starts?

 

thankfully Coach McDermott does not think this way.

[transplantbillsfan]

1 hour ago, reddogblitz said:

 

I'd say it's bordering on a loser mentality. We can't win. We're not good enough. Play the worst guy. We're gonna lose anyway.  Conceding playoffs before TC even starts?

 

thankfully Coach McDermott does not think this way.

 

Fans are the ones with this "protectionist mentality." 

 

Luckily, that's really not generally how coaches think.

 

The best QB over the Summer will be the guy who starts. 

 

With very few exceptions, that's how it's always been.

[Thurman#1]

 

 

Tough tough question.

 

Let's look at things objectively. Hmmm. What has changed?

 

Answer: Absolutely nothing except the emotional status of the fans. Wow, well, clearly that's a good reason to imagine that the odds on Allen playing have gone up.

[Thurman#1]

On 6/27/2018 at 10:25 AM, transplantbillsfan said:

 

And yet, in the modern era of quarterbacking over the last 10 years, 76.5% of the QBs drafted in the top 10 started week #1 and 56% of all QBs drafted in the 1st round drafted have started week #1, game #1 of their rookie year for the team that drafted him.

 

96.3% of all QBs drafted in the 1st round in the last 10 years started at some point during their rookie year.

 

General odds actually seem to favor Allen starting week 1, especially given a new offensive system and no incumbent.

 

 

How many of those QBs selected in the first round who played the first week were the third QBs selected that year? How many  went outside the top two or three?

 

And how many of them were widely considered before the draft as developmental guys who would need a year or even two to be ready?

 

General odds aren't particularly general.

 

 

 

And then a smart team has to think about this ... should we do what the majority of teams have done in the past?  Is that a good reason to do something, that most teams seem to do it that way? Second, should we flat-out pretend that all first round QBs are alike? Or should we take into account the obviously huge factor that many on the boards want to forget about when in the first round guys went, among many other kinds of individual differences? Third, should we totally ignore what has separated successful and unsuccessful QB development as so many want to do, the way that Transplant is doing in this post?

 

"... over the last ten years 76.5% of the QBs drafted in the top 10 started week one," says Transplant. Desperately spinning the fact that that's only 16 guys total, and that of that 16, 12 of the 16 guys (75%) went in the top three, not just the top ten. In fact, 10 of those 16 guys went in the top two, not just the top three. And that all of those guys, every one of the 16, was either the first QB chosen that year or was the #2 pick after another QB had been chosen #1.

 

Whereas Allen was chosen #7, the third QB chosen. 

 

Allen doesn't compare to the situations of guys like that. In fact, here are all of the other QBs chosen in the top ten but not the top three during Transplant's chosen time-frame ....

 

Tannehill

Jake Locker

Blaine Gabbert

Mark Sanchez.

 

Should we try to model ourselves after how teams developed those four? Tannehill and Sanchez started Game #1. Gabbert played in Game #2 and started #3. Locker played in five games, significant time in the 10th, 13th and 14th game. I say YES!!! These are the guys you want to use as models. Develop our guy the way that Tannehill, Locker, Gabbert and Sanchez were developed. What could go wrong?

 

 

 

 

Just so folks know, I'm reasonably hopeful about Allen. Love his story and his work ethic beyond his obvious tools. But he's very unlikely to be well-served by playing early.

[Thurman#1]

On 6/30/2018 at 10:35 AM, Zerovotlz said:

 

I am willing to entertain the idea that Allens completion PCT can actually be improved by almost 10 pct even though that would be unprecedented. Allen could be coached up to a QB who could exceed the 60% completion pct threshold in the NFL someday but I'm only willing to think it possible if he gets a TON of reps, in practice, with NFL caliber players on the field with him, and good coaching.  The only argument I will buy that he had the low completion pct in college is due to poor coaching, poor talent around him and that he spent a ton of his on field time playing sandlot football, totally off script.  

 

Josh Allen is the very RARE case where if ever a guy could truly see tangible benefits by sitting and learning then he is it.  For the sake of your future, for the sake of seeing this whole thing through the right way and to end up with a QB that can be a franchise 15 year guy....he needs to be solidly planted on the bench for the whole year....and at bare minimum, the first 8 games.

 

 

While I agree with some of this, I just wanted to point out that it is NOT unprecedented to see completion percentage improve by almost 10%.

 

Brett Favre 1987 Southern Mississippi 40.7%

Brett Favre 1988 Southern Mississippi 55.8%

Brett Favre 1989 Southern Mississippi 54.1%

Brett Favre 1990 Southern Mississippi 54.5% (college totals 52.4%)

Brett Favre 1991 Atlanta Falcons 4 attempts the whole year

Brett Favre 1992 Green Bay Packers 64.1% on 471 attempts and a career total of 62%

 

Interesting to note that Favre sat for a year before his major improvement occurred.

 

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

If Allen can’t beat a second year 5th round pick with marginal arm talent and a sliver of live game experience,  historically horrific for the most part, he is a total bust. 

 

Mccarron has so many seasons under his belt I can see him winning the start.

 

but honestly I hope Allen wins it legitimately because of what it means for the franchise. So I am predicting what I hope. 

[Zerovoltz]

5 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

While I agree with some of this, I just wanted to point out that it is NOT unprecedented to see completion percentage improve by almost 10%.

 

Brett Favre 1987 Southern Mississippi 40.7%

Brett Favre 1988 Southern Mississippi 55.8%

Brett Favre 1989 Southern Mississippi 54.1%

Brett Favre 1990 Southern Mississippi 54.5% (college totals 52.4%)

Brett Favre 1991 Atlanta Falcons 4 attempts the whole year

Brett Favre 1992 Green Bay Packers 64.1% on 471 attempts and a career total of 62%

 

Interesting to note that Favre sat for a year before his major improvement occurred.

 

I admit I overlooked the case of Brett Favre....probalby due to the guys I researched to compare being within the past 10 years or so...but since you bring it up, it does fit in with my thought that Allen COULD do this...but in my opinion, he'll need the good reps, good coaching, etc..and lots of it to get him "right".  I can't say i know much about Favre's college career etc but playing at small school, that wasn't in a conference back then, with the big arm and good size....there may be some similarities there.  

 

....it is worth noting that late 80's early 90's era NFL football, it was considered GOOD to have a mid 50's% completion pct....different era, different rules....that's worth noting....Favres college numbers would seem BAD if he played now.

[transplantbillsfan]

9 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Tough tough question.

 

Let's look at things objectively. Hmmm. What has changed?

 

Answer: Absolutely nothing except the emotional status of the fans. Wow, well, clearly that's a good reason to imagine that the odds on Allen playing have gone up.

 

You're right. Nothing has changed. Allen's odds are still about the same as they were, though the fact that he probably exceeded performance expectations in OTAs and Minicamp have probably increased his chances a bit.

 

The other thing not changing is you're still stubbornly refusing to concede that his odds are significantly higher than the 5% chance you initially claimed he had.

[transplantbillsfan]

14 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

How many of those QBs selected in the first round who played the first week were the third QBs selected that year? How many  went outside the top two or three?

 

And how many of them were widely considered before the draft as developmental guys who would need a year or even two to be ready?

 

General odds aren't particularly general.

 

 

 

And then a smart team has to think about this ... should we do what the majority of teams have done in the past?  Is that a good reason to do something, that most teams seem to do it that way? Second, should we flat-out pretend that all first round QBs are alike? Or should we take into account the obviously huge factor that many on the boards want to forget about when in the first round guys went, among many other kinds of individual differences? Third, should we totally ignore what has separated successful and unsuccessful QB development as so many want to do, the way that Transplant is doing in this post?

 

"... over the last ten years 76.5% of the QBs drafted in the top 10 started week one," says Transplant. Desperately spinning the fact that that's only 16 guys total, and that of that 16, 12 of the 16 guys (75%) went in the top three, not just the top ten. In fact, 10 of those 16 guys went in the top two, not just the top three. And that all of those guys, every one of the 16, was either the first QB chosen that year or was the #2 pick after another QB had been chosen #1.

 

Whereas Allen was chosen #7, the third QB chosen. 

 

Allen doesn't compare to the situations of guys like that. In fact, here are all of the other QBs chosen in the top ten but not the top three during Transplant's chosen time-frame ....

 

Tannehill

Jake Locker

Blaine Gabbert

Mark Sanchez.

 

Should we try to model ourselves after how teams developed those four? Tannehill and Sanchez started Game #1. Gabbert played in Game #2 and started #3. Locker played in five games, significant time in the 10th, 13th and 14th game. I say YES!!! These are the guys you want to use as models. Develop our guy the way that Tannehill, Locker, Gabbert and Sanchez were developed. What could go wrong?

 

 

 

 

Just so folks know, I'm reasonably hopeful about Allen. Love his story and his work ethic beyond his obvious tools. But he's very unlikely to be well-served by playing early.

 

This isn't necessarily an argument of what should happen (although that's kind of built into the discussion), but an argument of what will most likely happen.

 

And relating to that and disregarding whatever tangential argument of what model we should follow, you chose 2 QBs who started week #1.

 

The other guys who didn't start week include 1 QB who had a vet QB with tons of experience in the regular season/postseason/Super Bowl/pro bowl in front of him, and one QB who sat behind a vet with like 5 career starts over a 7 year career, which looks familiar, and it's worth noting that while that rookie may not have started week 1, he was inserted in week 2 and started week 3.

 

Talk about a quick autocorrect. Same thing happened last year with Trubisky and Watson.

 

I think you're focused too much on what you believe we should do rather than what is simply most likely to happen. And right or wrong (I guess we can debate that, too, though that's based completely on opinion), Allen's chances of starting are way way way higher than the crazy 5% number you threw out there.

 

 

Very simple question to end this post: if Allen is the hands-down winner of the QB competition this Summer--meaning he's the best QB and everyone can see it--do you actually think he (and the team) is best served on the bench as we start the season?

Edited July 5, 2018 by transplantbillsfan

[reddogblitz]

On 7/5/2018 at 9:41 AM, transplantbillsfan said:

You're right. Nothing has changed. Allen's odds are still about the same as they were, though the fact that he probably exceeded performance expectations in OTAs and Minicamp have probably increased his chances a bit.

 

Same exact thing happened with EJ.  Then he had the magical 2:00 drive vs the Colts resulting in a TD  pass and we were sold.

[transplantbillsfan]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000939509/article/ranking-divisions-by-quarterback-nfc-north-nfc-west-top-list

For the sake of this exercise, I'm going to lift up the division by projecting that Allen and Darnold will play sooner than later. In fact, I give both a chance to start in Week 1. Especially Allen. I don't want to hear about AJ McCarron. And spare me the Nathan Peterman nonsense. The Bills smartly traded up for Allen because he's the next Carson Wentz and oozes talent. I believe in Darnold, too. I hope he wins the Jets' job. Meanwhile, Tom Brady is the greatest of all time. And Tannehill is a guy.

[buffalobloodfloridahome]

They were really talking up Peterman in OTAs wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if he gets the nod.

[reddogblitz]

13 hours ago, buffalobloodfloridahome said:

They were really talking up Peterman in OTAs wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if he gets the nod.

 

Who's "They"? Sportswriters?

[greeneblitz]

Anyone other than Josh Allen is just wasting time, why would we piss away games "training" McCarron or Peterman with a whole 5 games between them when obviously the coaching staff will just be looking to start Allen at the first opportunity, that just makes zero sense.

[Gigs]

Anyone who wants Allen to start at any point this year must cum within a minute or something. You people have absolutely no patience and don’t realize how far he has to go. But hey, keep cumming in a minute, that’ll make her happy. 

[transplantbillsfan]

6 hours ago, Gigs said:

Anyone who wants Allen to start at any point this year must cum within a minute or something. You people have absolutely no patience and don’t realize how far he has to go. But hey, keep cumming in a minute, that’ll make her happy. 

 

Well this sounds like an appropriate post 

 

It's rather odd you chose this analogy. Do you have issues of your own?

 

As to the point and disregarding your absurd analogy, how far exactly does Allen have to go? How much further ahead are Peterman and McCarron from where he is right now? Regardless of whatever progression Allen needs, what makes you think his progression will be better served on the bench than on the field?

 

I won't post the quotes or links again, but Allen's OC Brent Vigen (who also coached Carson Wentz) raved about Allen's progression in college and his ability to immediately step into the NFL and execute an NFL offense. Our GM Beane essentially shot down the national narrative that Allen is (too) raw in a post draft interview with Buffalo News.

 

He's also getting plenty of praise from teammates so far, including Shady, who's likely about the most bluntly honest player on our team.

 

Allen might be ready to start. That'll be determined this Summer. If he is and is better than Peterman and McCarron, I want him starting. 

Edited July 8, 2018 by transplantbillsfan