Prediction: Nathan Peterman Bills Starting QB Wk. 1 vs. Ravens

[Wily Dog]

No , it was expected.

[suorangefan4]

3 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

5-10 for 57 yards against the rather bad Colts' secondary.  Meh!

 

I love how you have made this same post several times in the past only for me or someone inform you that he had 3 passes hit receivers right in the chest only to have receivers drop them. He also had a spike to stop the clock which counts as an incompletion. 

 

He was pretty much perfect that game.

 

Edited August 17, 2018 by suorangefan4

[Boca BIlls]

Peterman might not be on the team by week 1.

[GoBills808]

2 hours ago, BurpleBull said:

 

I've read very little from those who feel Allen should be given the starting job, where they're acknowledging a marked difference between Peterman as a second-year player, versus Josh Allen as a rookie, for most of the discussion.

 

So no, it's not that obvious.

 

Guys wanted Allen to be elevated up the depth chart so that he wouldn't be bogged down with the 'inferior' talent that surrounded him, now that wish may be granted.

 

And by 'no excuses', I largely mean as to why Peterman had the better game, if the end results should end up favoring him.

 

 

 

 

 

Wanting to see Allen play with the 1s and 2s is imo a separate issue from why a second year QB would be better equipped to succeed in preseason games than would a rookie. 

 

I very much doubt the coaches are going to make their decision on who starts the regular season based on Allen and Peterman's respective play with the third team, so Allen's play against the Panthers vs Peterman's play against the Browns is not important in determining who between them should start.

[Wily Dog]

12 minutes ago, Boca BIlls said:

Peterman might not be on the team by week 1.

 

Odds are better that he is on the team or was this just a incendiary

[billsredneck1]

i love allen, i'm happy they got ajm, but i think even with the 3's nate will have the best stats again. those bubble players are gonna love and benefit from having him with them.

[26CornerBlitz]

2 hours ago, Wily Dog said:

 

That's almost hilarious if you weren't being serious 

 

 

's

 

What's hilarious is that you have nothing of substance to counter what I posted.  

[Wagon Circler]

As long as you admit Peterman is not why we lost.

[Magox]

I'd say as of right now Peterman has the edge to be the starter for week 1.   However, McCarron isn't that far behind and if Allen continues to impress he could be the starter as well.  The bad news is that whoever the #1 is isn't getting all the reps that you want your starter to get.  The good news is that all three QB's are performing decently.   We all know that Allen is the future but we should absolutely roll with three QB's to start the season and may the best QB win the job for week 1.

[Tenhigh]

12 hours ago, Wily Dog said:

 

That's almost hilarious if you weren't being serious 

 

 

's

The defense got almost no pass rush because of the snow.  I never understood what the Naterbaters saw in this game that everyone else missed.  He wasn't terrible, that's about it.  

[BurpleBull]

11 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

Wanting to see Allen play with the 1s and 2s is imo a separate issue from why a second year QB would be better equipped to succeed in preseason games than would a rookie. 

 

I very much doubt the coaches are going to make their decision on who starts the regular season based on Allen and Peterman's respective play with the third team, so Allen's play against the Panthers vs Peterman's play against the Browns is not important in determining who between them should start.

 

Except people want Allen to start the regular season over that 'better equipped', second-year player without having seen him compete against a 1st team defense.

 

Peterman having a better outing, being a second-year player isn't the obvious, foregone conclusion shared by the majority, that you make it seem, if it were, I doubt so many would be calling for Allen to open the season as the starter...that's my point.

 

Also, I'm assuming that Allen gets work with the second-team offense, considering that's who he got the most reps in with during practices, and it's who McCarron started the game with after replacing Peterman vs. the Panthers'.

 

So it wouldn't be Peterman's third-team performance vs. Allen's third-team performance, that would decide anything for the coaches---as that would be ridiculous---it's Allen's play with the second-team alone, that will likely weigh heavily on the coaches' decision to elevate him or demote him on the depth chart.

 

I think the Browns' defense will serve as a good test for the QBs.

[reddogblitz]

4 hours ago, BurpleBull said:

So it wouldn't be Peterman's third-team performance vs. Allen's third-team performance, that would decide anything for the coaches---as that would be ridiculous---it's Allen's play with the second-team alone, that will likely weigh heavily on the coaches' decision to elevate him or demote him on the depth chart. 

 

I don't think we really have any idea on what the coaches criteria is for picking a starter.  Howsoever, I doubt very seriously it's based soley on their play in these PS games. Things like smarts, leadership (an often over looked trait on TBD), and other things I probably wouldn't understand are probably in the mix as well. 

 

I have my preference, but I'll just have to wait and see what happens.  Whoever can help us win the most THIS YEAR is who I want.  I'll have to trust Coach McDermott to make that decision.  He was right last year.

[GoBills808]

4 hours ago, BurpleBull said:

 

Except people want Allen to start the regular season over that 'better equipped', second-year player without having seen him compete against a 1st team defense.

 

Peterman having a better outing, being a second-year player isn't the obvious, foregone conclusion shared by the majority, that you make it seem, if it were, I doubt so many would be calling for Allen to open the season as the starter...that's my point.

 

Also, I'm assuming that Allen gets work with the second-team offense, considering that's who he got the most reps in with during practices, and it's who McCarron started the game with after replacing Peterman vs. the Panthers'.

 

So it wouldn't be Peterman's third-team performance vs. Allen's third-team performance, that would decide anything for the coaches---as that would be ridiculous---it's Allen's play with the second-team alone, that will likely weigh heavily on the coaches' decision to elevate him or demote him on the depth chart.

 

I think the Browns' defense will serve as a good test for the QBs.

You realize, when I say 'better equipped', I am speaking strictly in terms of playing preseason football games and make no claims as to which is the better prospect, in either the short, intermediate, or long term. Nor does my use of the phrase 'better equipped' have any bearing on the overall comparable quality, potential career, nor general NFL-readiness of either quarterback. This has been a message from GoBills808. 

[BurpleBull]

1 hour ago, reddogblitz said:

 

I don't think we really have any idea on what the coaches criteria is for picking a starter.  Howsoever, I doubt very seriously it's based soley on their play in these PS games. Things like smarts, leadership (an often over looked trait on TBD), and other things I probably wouldn't understand are probably in the mix as well. 

 

I have my preference, but I'll just have to wait and see what happens.  Whoever can help us win the most THIS YEAR is who I want.  I'll have to trust Coach McDermott to make that decision.  He was right last year.

 

I believe everything that's gone on during minicamp and training camp will be kept in mind, but the decision will rest heavily on how each performs in preseason.

 

Why do you place emphasis on 'this year'? 

[BurpleBull]

2 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

You realize, when I say 'better equipped', I am speaking strictly in terms of playing preseason football games and make no claims as to which is the better prospect, in either the short, intermediate, or long term. Nor does my use of the phrase 'better equipped' have any bearing on the overall comparable quality, potential career, nor general NFL-readiness of either quarterback. This has been a message from GoBills808. 

 

On 8/16/2018 at 1:56 PM, BurpleBull said:

I just wanna say, there's been a lot of kicking and screaming for Josh Allen to get work in, elevated on the depth chart, if he struggles as second man in behind McCarron, don't be mad.

 

No excuses if Peterman excels as third man in.

 

On 8/16/2018 at 2:00 PM, GoBills808 said:

It's not an excuse to say that a rookie will have a harder time playing w/ the 3s than a second year guy. If that wasn't obvious enough already. 

 

19 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

Wanting to see Allen play with the 1s and 2s is imo a separate issue from why a second year QB would be better equipped to succeed in preseason games than would a rookie. 

 

I very much doubt the coaches are going to make their decision on who starts the regular season based on Allen and Peterman's respective play with the third team, so Allen's play against the Panthers vs Peterman's play against the Browns is not important in determining who between them should start.

 

 

Applying the phrase 'better equipped' to Peterman, when speaking on preseason football games vs. regular season games football doesn't change what you are suggesting.

 

You're suggesting that Peterman has an 'obvious' advantage over Allen, being that he's a second-year player; few, if any of Allen's backers calling for him to be week one starter, have expressed any such sentiment of Peterman being 'better equipped' than Allen in any capacity, regardless of playing experience.

 

So the 'obviously a rookie will have a harder time...than a second year guy' argument won't hold weight with me should Allen fail perform up to expectations, but Peterman excel.

 

 

I just don't want the multitude of excuses...that's all.

 

 

 

[reddogblitz]

1 hour ago, BurpleBull said:

Why do you place emphasis on 'this year'? 

 

Because it is THIS YEAR this year.  It's all we got.  Next year isn't promised. Heck, tomorrow isn't even promised.

 

i don't know about you, but I'm getting older by the minute.

 

Why do you place emphasis on next year and the year after instead?  There is no guarantee that whatever young QB (or old QB) for that matter will deliver.  I have no desire to baby sit another young QB.  I don't want to sacrifice another season in the hopes that our young QB gets better.  JP didn't. Trent didn't. EJ didn't.  If he's good enough to play and win, put him in.  If not, go with whoever gives us the chance THIS YEAR.

 

The last 3 winning/playoff season we had were with vet QBs.  I suppose you could go all they way back to Jimbo, but even he played 2 years  on another league.

 

Just win. We'll worry about next year next year (if we get one).

 

Go BILLS !!

Edited August 17, 2018 by reddogblitz

[GoBills808]

1 minute ago, BurpleBull said:

 

 

 

 

 

Applying the phrase 'better equipped' to Peterman, when speaking on preseason football games vs. regular season games football doesn't change what you are suggesting.

 

You're suggesting that Peterman has an 'obvious' advantage over Allen, being that he's a second-year player; few, if any of Allen's backers calling for him to be week one starter, have expressed any such sentiment of Peterman being 'better equipped' than Allen in any capacity, regardless of playing experience.

 

So the 'obviously a rookie will have a harder time...than a second year guy' argument won't hold weight with me should Allen fail perform up to expectations, but Peterman excel.

 

 

I just don't want the multitude of excuses...that's all.

 

 

 

I thought it was obvious that there exist circumstances relating to their relative pro experience, not to mention differences in expectation according to draft position, that render a comparison of their play with third stringers almost completely worthless. If I didn't make that clear I apologize.

 

Similarly, should Allen find himself as week one starter, it will have little or nothing to do with how he performed vis a vis Peterman surrounded by borderline practice squad-level talent. It's less an excuse than just the reality of the situation, at least in my mind.

[Wily Dog]

20 hours ago, suorangefan4 said:

 

I love how you have made this same post several times in the past only for me or someone inform you that he had 3 passes hit receivers right in the chest only to have receivers drop them. He also had a spike to stop the clock which counts as an incompletion. 

 

He was pretty much perfect that game.

 

 

18 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

What's hilarious is that you have nothing of substance to counter what I posted.  

 

Did you read this or is it fake news.........

 

[transplantbillsfan]

On 8/15/2018 at 6:21 AM, BurpleBull said:

 

Perhaps concerning how soon he could be named starter, but not on my overall stance.

 

Welp... it's McCarron starting, Allen 2nd and Peterman 3rd, so I guess you were incorrect there.

[BurpleBull]

48 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Welp... it's McCarron starting, Allen 2nd and Peterman 3rd, so I guess you were incorrect there.

 

Yeah...welp.

 

'Overall stance", as in overall stance on Peterman being named starter for week one...that isn't changing.

 

 

[billsredneck1]

23 hours ago, Boca BIlls said:

Peterman might not be on the team by week 1.

tonight will fully cement peterman on the 53. ajm is not gonna be no.1.....i way overestimated him. nate will save the night and ya know what?...when he plays the 4th qtr., it's gonna really open some eyes as to the reality of where we are qb wise. i bet right now, he is the best qb of the night with no matter who is on the field with him.

[SoCal Deek]

Mc Carron just ended ANY chance of being the starter! He is awful.

[transplantbillsfan]

1 hour ago, billsredneck1 said:

tonight will fully cement peterman on the 53. ajm is not gonna be no.1.....i way overestimated him. nate will save the night and ya know what?...when he plays the 4th qtr., it's gonna really open some eyes as to the reality of where we are qb wise. i bet right now, he is the best qb of the night with no matter who is on the field with him.

 

[billsredneck1]

1 hour ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

laugh all you want foos...8/10 113 and a td.......suckit.

nate ain't going nowhere and in another month, you'll be wanting to have his baby.

 

oh wait....i just saw my previous post after i did this one. take a knee beyatches....or 2....

Edited August 18, 2018 by billsredneck1

[transplantbillsfan]

1 minute ago, billsredneck1 said:

laugh all you want foos...8/10 113 and a td.......suckit.

nate ain't going nowhere and in another month, you'll be wanting to have his baby.

 

This is you being sarcastic, right?

[BuffaloBaumer]

He deserves to start, AJ is brutal and offers nothing.

[billsredneck1]

1 minute ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

This is you being sarcastic, right?

yes...but it's an honest sarcastic....

[Lfod]

I remember saying AJMcarron might not look as hot behind the starting line. I'll give Josh Allen credit he is looking good, I will have to stay open minded. Peterman still put in his work. 

Edited August 18, 2018 by Lfod

[billsredneck1]

16 hours ago, Magox said:

I'd say as of right now Peterman has the edge to be the starter for week 1.   However, McCarron isn't that far behind and if Allen continues to impress he could be the starter as well.  The bad news is that whoever the #1 is isn't getting all the reps that you want your starter to get.  The good news is that all three QB's are performing decently.   We all know that Allen is the future but we should absolutely roll with three QB's to start the season and may the best QB win the job for week 1.

while we know allen is the future( i think he'll be great), i am in the camp of not starting him for the first part of the season. i just think he will be better off getting used to the games. even the fact of hearing the home town crowd, being in away stadiums, reviewing game film etc. i think it will benefit a lot. i want him to succeed but i think it would do more for him to take it all in for a while. remember...winning isn't everything....it's the only thing.   signed.....the other 52 guys

[BurpleBull]

Beautiful game.

 

Good job, both quarterbacks.

[billsredneck1]

1 minute ago, BurpleBull said:

Beautiful game.

 

Good job, both quarterbacks.

i'm thinking there's only 2 to get ready for week one as of tonight.

[BurpleBull]

Just now, billsredneck1 said:

i'm thinking there's only 2 to get ready for week one as of tonight.

 

Seems like it.

 

But what is laughable are the outsiders who don't follow the Bills closely, talking up the McCarron injury, as if he was way out in the lead to start for the Bills.

 

Such a grave situation the Bills' find themselves in. Lol

 

Get well McCarron.

[billsredneck1]

34 minutes ago, BurpleBull said:

 

Seems like it.

 

But what is laughable are the outsiders who don't follow the Bills closely, talking up the McCarron injury, as if he was way out in the lead to start for the Bills.

 

Such a grave situation the Bills' find themselves in. Lol

 

Get well McCarron.

i thought ajm was a good pickup. while i have liked nate all along, i figured ajm's experience, college achievements and even his background would give us a gritty, determined, pull it out kind of qb.  it looks like i was wrong on this one. maybe it was the 5 mil.? or maybe he catches fire idk. but i will take nate and his completion percentage every day.

Edited August 18, 2018 by billsredneck1

[Boca BIlls]

Just now, billsredneck1 said:

i thought ajm was a good pickup. while i have liked nate all along, i figured ajm's experience, college achievements and even his background would give us a gritty, determined, pull it out kind of qb.  it looks like i was wrong one this one. maybe it was the 5 mil.? or maybe he catches fire idk. but i will take nate and his completion percentage every day.

Peterman is false hope like a Fitzpatrick. Don't trust guys like that, go to with the rookie he is the best bet.

[dgrochester55]

Might happen now with McCarron hurt.   Allen has looked good so far and exceeded my expectations, but still shows just enough inexperience to make me worry if he is thrown in right away.

[HappyDays]

Peterman could have a long career as a backup/journeyman type. And that's a lot better than most people would have predicted after LA last year.

[billsredneck1]

1 minute ago, dgrochester55 said:

Might happen now with McCarron hurt.   Allen has looked good so far and exceeded my expectations, but still shows just enough inexperience to make me worry if he is thrown in right away.

not to mention it's only been the 1st 2 pre season games.  stuff will look a lot different against balt. /la/gb and minny in the first 4 weeks. if mcd starts him week one,.....idk,

but i would lose a lot of...i wouldn't say respect, but i think the clock will start ticking and only have so much time.

4 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

Peterman could have a long career as a backup/journeyman type. And that's a lot better than most people would have predicted after LA last year.

he's the kind of guy i think could get us some wins early, especially with daboll. as long as we are winning ya gotta dance with who brung ya.  after that or if it don't work out, i don't care. let the kid ball.

 

 

 

 

[BurpleBull]

7 minutes ago, billsredneck1 said:

i thought ajm was a good pickup. while i have liked nate all along, i figured ajm's experience, college achievements and even his background would give us a gritty, determined, pull it out kind of qb.  it looks like i was wrong one this one. maybe it was the 5 mil.? or maybe he catches fire idk. but i will take nate and his completion percentage every day.

 

I had no idea what McCarron brought to the table, but I was hopeful.

 

Peterman looks like the fourth-year player out there.

 

He has total control of the offense at the line and he takes what the defense gives him, without being too conservative.

 

Really seems ahead of his time.

 

[Strethor]

2 minutes ago, BurpleBull said:

 

I had no idea what McCarron brought to the table, but I was hopeful.

 

Peterman looks like the fourth-year player out there.

 

He has total control of the offense at the line and he takes what the defense gives him, without being too conservative.

 

Really seems ahead of his time.

 

 

this

[Kelly the Dog]

There is nothing in two games that has showed us that Peterman has gotten over the two things he cannot do, which are his death knell. He cannot get the ball downfield. He cannot handle a strong pass rush. He sucks at both of them and no one can succeeed in real NFL games without an ability to do both. He does neither. Allen does both already. 

 

It's a no brainer.