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

[Rocky Landing]

1 hour ago, BurpleBull said:

 

The discussion was never about...

 

51 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Again, we can always...

You guys should take a breather for a couple days...

[BurpleBull]

4 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

 

You guys should take a breather for a couple days...

 

Lol.

 

Or an hour...an hour would do some good.

[Kirby Jackson]

5 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

 

You guys should take a breather for a couple days...

If you notice, I respond but haven’t initiated anything in this thread in forever. I guess that we can take it to PM if it needs to continue. As far as I’m concerned the thread can die.

[reddogblitz]

14 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The reality is that the Bills have 2 bad QBs and a young guy with a high ceiling and low floor.

 

just curious. What have you seen in AJ's play on the field that makes you think he is a "bad QB"?

[BurpleBull]

22 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Again, we can always cherry pick the top guys. That’s the point!! For every Tom Brady there are 102 Keith Wennings. We sure say “well look at Tom Brady” more than we do “well look at Keith Wenning.” Statistically, these guys are WAY more likely to be Wenning than they are to even be Gradkowski.

 

Yes, we are talking about opening day starters. I think it is reasonable that any of the 3 could get that job. That doesn’t make the other 2 good. You asked “how do you know they aren’t good?” I guess that I should have responded with “how do you know that they are good?” The reality is that we don’t either way but they are way more likely to fail than succeed. There are mounds of evidence to support this.

 

Brady is merely used as a QB example of how a prospect can pan out in spite of where drafted, he just so happens to be the ultimate example of that.

 

I also use Matt Milano as a case.

 

Unlike Brady, he is not considered a top player currently, though highly praised.

 

How do you explain his falling to the 163rd selection?

 

What was his reason for being passed on 162 times despite his ability?

Edited August 8, 2018 by BurpleBull

[Kirby Jackson]

41 minutes ago, BurpleBull said:

 

Brady is merely used as a QB example of how a prospect can pan out in spite of where drafted, he just so happens to be the ultimate example of that.

 

I also use Matt Milano as a case.

 

Unlike Brady, he is not considered a top player currently, though highly praised.

 

How do you explain his falling to the 163rd selection?

 

What was his reason for being passed on 162 times in spite of his ability?

There are way more position players, drafted late, that succeed than QBs. That’s apples and oranges. 

6 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

just curious. What have you seen in AJ's play on the field that makes you think he is a "bad QB"?

He wasn’t good when he played and he has limited ability. He has a chance to be an okay game manager and a decent backup but he isn’t an NFL starting caliber QB. 

[JohnC]

18 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Of the 102 guys drafted between rounds 5-7 from 2001-now Tyrod Taylor is the top QB and Fitz is next. I don’t know why it is reasonable to expect BOTH of these guys to surpass that level of play? There is a less than 1% chance that they will be better QBs than Tyrod who we are all in agreement wasn’t the long term answer. We came to that conclusion on Fitz a few years earlier. 

 

Everytime we do this hamster wheel I ask myself if I am the crazy one? Why do people always believe that their guy will be in the top .98%? That’s not realistic. Bruce Gradkowski is in the top 7% of guys drafted in those rounds. The stats say that there is a 93% chance that they won’t achieve that level of success!!  It’s baffling that I am the one that has to support the argument when there is a 93% chance that they won’t be Gradkowski. Why are they different from the overwhelming majority of their peers? The odds and stats so far wouldn’t support that.

Few people believe that McCarron or Peterman are franchise qbs. That discussion needs to be placed in the garbage can in the front of the house that will soon be picked up by the noisy and stinking garbage truck. That's not what the McCarron vs Peterman discussion is really about. It is about which one of these two earnest game managers will be the starting qb when the season begins until Josh Allen is ready to play as a starter. As a fan the more intriguing issue is how many games will be played before the HC crosses the rubicon and puts in the strapping rookie qb. As far as I am concerned both McCarron and Peterman would be acceptable backups. Which one would be preferred? I don't give a dam! 

 

This qb scenario is the standard highly drafted qb scenario that takes place almost every year. What makes this issue more compelling than usual is that four teams (Cleveland,  NY Jets and Arizona) are undergoing the same situation this year. 

 

Kirby, you hear the word Peterman and it triggers a visceral reaction from you. Let it go!  Whenever I mention Logan Thomas to Gunner it also triggers a spleen busting reaction from him. Don't worry about what is happening in the distant perimeter. The real issue is all about Josh Allen and where he is at. Everything else about the qb issue is a side issue. 

[BurpleBull]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

There are way more position players, drafted late, that succeed than QBs. That’s apples and oranges. 

He wasn’t good when he played and he has limited ability. He has a chance to be an okay game manager and a decent backup but he isn’t an NFL starting caliber QB. 

 

So this is your answer in explaining away Milano's production and Peterman's potential production as a prospect drafted in the same round.

 

While, 'there's a reason he was passed on 190 times' is your way of defining Peterman.

 

There are also less thought of position players that are drafted late, who end up excelling and producing at a higher level than more highly touted position players drafted in much earlier rounds.

 

Such as Chargers' DB, Desmond King (151st overall), who I also hoped would be drafted along with Peterman (171st overall) in 2017. 

 

I understand you have your percentages and list of late round QB success rates as support in your stance, but let's not act as though names won't be added to that list of QB's who found success, despite being drafted in later rounds.

[26CornerBlitz]

How faith and competitive fire drive Nathan Peterman to achieve his ultimate goal

Backed by family

Built by family

He heard you

Inner peace and competitive fire

[Kirby Jackson]

20 minutes ago, BurpleBull said:

 

So this is your answer in explaining away Milano's production and Peterman's potential production as a prospect drafted in the same round.

 

While, 'there's a reason he was passed on 190 times' is your way of defining Peterman.

 

There are also less thought of position players that are drafted late, who end up excelling and producing at a higher level than more highly touted position players drafted in much earlier rounds.

 

Such as Chargers' DB, Desmond King (151st overall), who I also hoped would be drafted along with Peterman (171st overall) in 2017. 

 

I understand you have your percentages and list of late round QB success rates as support in your stance, but let's not act as though names won't be added to that list of QB's who found success, despite being drafted in later rounds.

Again, we go round and round. You are even agreeing with my point in this post. A far greater percentage of late round players at positions other than QB succeed. I haven’t looked through all of them by I’d say, with confidence, that they are 3 or 4 times more likely to succeed than a late round QB. We agree there.

 

Your support for late round QBs succeeding is basically “we know it will happen.” I listed the last 102 QBs (no other position) taken between rounds 5-7 as my support. Those guys are what they are, lottery tickets. There is no reason to expect to win the lottery. If it happens, great but it isn’t the greatest retirement strategy. 

[Royale with Cheese]

3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Again, we go round and round. You are even agreeing with my point in this post. A far greater percentage of late round players at positions other than QB succeed. I haven’t looked through all of them by I’d say, with confidence, that they are 3 or 4 times more likely to succeed than a late round QB. We agree there.

 

Your support for late round QBs succeeding is basically “we know it will happen.” I listed the last 102 QBs (no other position) taken between rounds 5-7 as my support. Those guys are what they are, lottery tickets. There is no reason to expect to win the lottery. If it happens, great but it isn’t the greatest retirement strategy. 

 

I'm getting you a Christmas present.  Let me know your size and if you want a home/away/...or even throwback/red alternate.

 

[BuffaloHokie13]

3 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

I'm getting you a Christmas present.  Let me know your size and if you want a home/away/...or even throwback/red alternate.

 

Save some money and wait a couple weeks until he's not on the roster. 

[Kirby Jackson]

2 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

I'm getting you a Christmas present.  Let me know your size and if you want a home/away/...or even throwback/red alternate.

 

Perfect, it will go great in my jersey collection of lovable underdogs. I will wear it proudly just like I wear my Tuel, Jasper, Reilly, Hogan and 11 Fred Jackson jerseys. 

[lookylookyherecomescookie]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

There are way more position players, drafted late, that succeed than QBs. 

 

I believe you're right. Why do you think that is? Is it due to the overwhelming importance of the position and that more time and effort is put into scouting the qbs, so pre-draft evaluation may be more accurate for that position than others?

[Royale with Cheese]

11 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Save some money and wait a couple weeks until he's not on the roster. 

 

I think they keep all 3 QB's.  I didn't think that before camp started, I thought Peterman might be the odd man out but he's battling.  He's not going down without a fight!

10 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Perfect, it will go great in my jersey collection of lovable underdogs. I will wear it proudly just like I wear my Tuel, Jasper, Reilly, Hogan and 11 Fred Jackson jerseys. 

 

If you can find me a John DiGiorgio jersey...I'll proudly wear it!

[Augie]

1 minute ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

I think they keep all 3 QB's.  I didn't think that before camp started, I thought Peterman might be the odd man out but he's battling.  He's not going down without a fight!

 

I think they keep all three, mostly to avoid being in a situation where they HAVE TO put Allen in before they would like. It seems like their plan is firm and is a cautious one. I’m good with that. 

[Royale with Cheese]

Just now, Augie said:

 

I think they keep all three, mostly to avoid being in a situation where they HAVE TO put Allen in before they would like. It seems like their plan is firm and is a cautious one. I’m good with that. 

 

I'm good with this plan too.  You traded up for the guy, be patient with him.  The only reason I would put him in this year is if McCaron/Peterman are just bad in the regular season and your playoff hopes are out the door by early November.  

 

Hopefully one of the vets, I lean towards McCaron, can just be solid and keep us competitive.  

[Kirby Jackson]

22 minutes ago, lookylookyherecomescookie said:

I believe you're right. Why do you think that is? Is it due to the overwhelming importance of the position and that more time and effort is put into scouting the qbs, so pre-draft evaluation may be more accurate for that position than others?

I think that is a big part of it. I’d venture to say that the transition from playing CB (for example) in the SEC to the NFL is a smaller transition. You are playing man-to-man with NFL caliber receivers. The scouts have a pretty good idea how those skills will translate. The QB is dependent on so many other factors that are tough to judge. What were his progressions? How good is his line? How good are his pass catchers? How good is his playcaller? That is without even mentioning the physical tools. He needs all of those things (and then some) to be working to even get a fair evaluation. 

[reddogblitz]

4 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

There are way more position players, drafted late, that succeed than QBs. That’s apples and oranges. 

He wasn’t good when he played and he has limited ability. He has a chance to be an okay game manager and a decent backup but he isn’t an NFL starting caliber QB. 

 

i got that. Question is the same. What exactly did he do to show he's not a "good QB" besides "he wasn't good".  Was it a 3-1 TD to Int ratio? Was it the 2 National Championships?  Enlighten me.

[Kirby Jackson]

8 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

i got that. Question is the same. What exactly did he do to show he's not a "good QB" besides "he wasn't good".  Was it a 3-1 TD to Int ratio? Was it the 2 National Championships?  Enlighten me.

Look no further than the Bengals offense with Dalton vs. McCarron. It was night and day. He has won a lot but he has played with TONS of talent. No team has won BECAUSE of AJ McCarron they have won WITH AJ McCarron. That’s not a knock. He’s a decent game manager and has a place in the league. He’s a good number 2 but not a starting caliber QB. That’s why he got $5M when Josh McCown got $10M. He’s a limited athlete with limited arm talent. He will be in the league for a long time but he’s not a number 1. The league spoke pretty loudly on that.

[BuffaloHokie13]

11 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

i got that. Question is the same. What exactly did he do to show he's not a "good QB" besides "he wasn't good".  Was it a 3-1 TD to Int ratio? Was it the 2 National Championships?  Enlighten me.

It's probably to do with the fact that the Cincy offense dropped by 7.6 PPG, 78 YPG, and 55 Passing YPG when average Andy went down and AJ stepped in.

[reddogblitz]

6 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

It's probably to do with the fact that the Cincy offense dropped by 7.6 PPG, 78 YPG, and 55 Passing YPG when average Andy went down and AJ stepped in.

 

He was the BACKUP.  What HC in a stretch run and playoff game with a rookie backup is going to put him in and let it fly like his starter does?  Bombs Away!

 

I get the knock that he has won with talent.  Legit knock.  But at the same time doesn't prove that he is "not a good QB".  When hasTom Brady or Big Ben ever played on an un talented squad?  Does that mean he's not good?

 

I'm gonna wait and see what he does.

 

Personally, I think he has a chance to be really good.

 

I'm not saying he is gong to be the next Kurt Warner, but can't we at least give the guy a chance?

[26CornerBlitz]

2 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

He was the BACKUP.  What HC in a stretch run and playoff game with a rookie backup is going to put him in and let it fly like his starter does?  Bombs Away!

 

I get the knock that he has won with talent.  Legit knock.  But at the same time doesn't prove that he is "not a good QB".  When hasTom Brady or Big Ben ever played on an un talented squad?  Does that mean he's not good?

 

I'm gonna wait and see what he does.

 

Personally, I think he has a chance to be really good.

 

I'm not saying he is gong to be the next Kurt Warner, but can't we at least give the guy a chance?

 

He wasn't a rookie in 2015.

[Putin]

2 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

He was the BACKUP.  What HC in a stretch run and playoff game with a rookie backup is going to put him in and let it fly like his starter does?  Bombs Away!

 

I get the knock that he has won with talent.  Legit knock.  But at the same time doesn't prove that he is "not a good QB".  When hasTom Brady or Big Ben ever played on an un talented squad?  Does that mean he's not good?

 

I'm gonna wait and see what he does.

 

Personally, I think he has a chance to be really good.

 

I'm not saying he is gong to be the next Kurt Warner, but can't we at least give the guy a chance?

But , but , but the odds say otherwise!!!!

[reddogblitz]

1 minute ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

He wasn't a rookie in 2015.

 

True.  Good catch.

 

OK, he was a second year backup QB that has never played.  Bombs away! or play more conservative than with your starter?

 

Here's his stat line from 2015 as a 2nd year guy that had never started a game.  These are the stats of "bad QB"?

 

2015

Cincinnati Bengals

79 for

119

66.4 comp %

854 yards

7.2 ypa

6 TDs

2 Ints

[26CornerBlitz]

3 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

True.  Good catch.

 

OK, he was a second year backup QB that has never played.  Bombs away! or play more conservative than with your starter?

 

Here's his stat line from 2015 as a 2nd year guy that had never started a game.  These are the stats of "bad QB"?

 

2015

Cincinnati Bengals

79 for

119

66.4 comp %

854 yards

7.2 ypa

6 TDs

2 Ints

 

He played a safe Trent Edwards type of game for the most part with a loaded receiving corps.   I think he'll be okay as a seat warmer for the Bills until Allen is ready to take the reins. 

[Kirby Jackson]

9 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

He played a safe Trent Edwards type of game for the most part with a loaded receiving corps.   I think he'll be okay as a seat warmer for the Bills until Allen is ready to take the reins. 

This is where I’m at with McCarron. I think that he is a good addition for what we were looking for. He can play a few weeks if necessary, keep the seat warm and potentially be a long-term backup. I’m glad that we have McCarron. 

[BurpleBull]

5 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Again, we go round and round. You are even agreeing with my point in this post. A far greater percentage of late round players at positions other than QB succeed. I haven’t looked through all of them by I’d say, with confidence, that they are 3 or 4 times more likely to succeed than a late round QB. We agree there.

 

Your support for late round QBs succeeding is basically “we know it will happen.” I listed the last 102 QBs (no other position) taken between rounds 5-7 as my support. Those guys are what they are, lottery tickets. There is no reason to expect to win the lottery. If it happens, great but it isn’t the greatest retirement strategy. 

 

All I did was point out another off-the-radar player from the same draft class, who I also wanted the Bills' to draft that panned out, despite being selected in the same round that you suggest will definitely place a cap on Peterman's potential as a QB.

 

If I do agree there, it's not without the understanding that there are variables that affect the success rates between QBs and non-QB positions.

 

It's not as cut and dried as you attempt to make it seem.

 

7 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

There are way more position players, drafted late, that succeed than QBs. That’s apples and oranges

 

This answers nothing. 

 

Doesn't explain how Milano managed to not be defined by his draft status, despite being selected just eight spots ahead of Peterman.

Edited August 8, 2018 by BurpleBull

[Thurman#1]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Look no further than the Bengals offense with Dalton vs. McCarron. It was night and day. He has won a lot but he has played with TONS of talent. No team has won BECAUSE of AJ McCarron they have won WITH AJ McCarron. That’s not a knock. He’s a decent game manager and has a place in the league. He’s a good number 2 but not a starting caliber QB. That’s why he got $5M when Josh McCown got $10M. He’s a limited athlete with limited arm talent. He will be in the league for a long time but he’s not a number 1. The league spoke pretty loudly on that.

 

 

The league spoke pretty loudly, but with the little game time he's seen, what they were doing is guessing loudly. It's an educated guess, but a guess nonetheless. Sometimes the league gets it wrong.

[Thurman#1]

2 hours ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

It's probably to do with the fact that the Cincy offense dropped by 7.6 PPG, 78 YPG, and 55 Passing YPG when average Andy went down and AJ stepped in.

 

 

Those games you're referring to were from 2015, right? McCarron's 2nd year. Mightn't he have improved?

 

More, the four games you're talking about (I assume, anyway) there were against the 19th (Pittsburgh), 29th (San Fran), 1st (Denver) and 8th (Baltimore) ranked defenses, and Pittsburgh was actually 11th in defensive scoring allowed, they were better than they appeared. That was a tough slate, though SF was a nice little letup, but they scored 24 against SF.

 

I'm not a huge McCarron fan or anything. I'm pursuing this half-heartedly. But those four games against tough defenses as a 2nd year guy just do not even begin to show he's not a good QB.

 

 

 

Oh, and as for Average Andy, in 2015 he was on fire. 66.1% completions. 25 TDs in 13 games and 7 INTs, an 8.4 YPA and a 106.2 passer rating. The guy was ripping it up. Very few QBs were playing as well as Dalton was that year.

Edited August 8, 2018 by Thurman#1

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Its been days  I need to add my 2 cents 

 

 

[Kirby Jackson]

55 minutes ago, BurpleBull said:

 

All I did was point out another off-the-radar player from the same draft class, who I also wanted the Bills' to draft that panned out, despite being selected in the same round that you suggest will definitely place a cap on Peterman's potential as a QB.

 

If I do agree there, it's not without the understanding that there are variables that affect the success rates between QBs and non-QB positions.

 

It's not as cut and dried as you attempt to make it seem.

 

 

This answers nothing. 

 

Doesn't explain how Milano managed to not be defined by his draft status, despite being selected just eight spots ahead of Peterman.

A lot of position players that are drafted later have success. A lot of QBs drafted later don’t. Not sure that it is that confusing? It’s much less surprising to see a successful 5th rd. LB than it is a 5th rd. QB. 

52 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

The league spoke pretty loudly, but with the little game time he's seen, what they were doing is guessing loudly. It's an educated guess, but a guess nonetheless. Sometimes the league gets it wrong.

That’s fair but it does nothing to dispute my point. These guys are longshots. They are guys that the league doesn’t love. Maybe they overcome the odds, maybe the league gets it wrong but through 2 weeks of camp it looks a lot like we expected it to. McCarron is limited but doesn’t make a lot of mistakes, Peterman is a roller coaster and Allen can wow you but looks like a rookie. If we were all being honest with ourselves this is probably what we should have expected.

Edited August 8, 2018 by Kirby Jackson

[Wily Dog]

7 hours ago, JohnC said:

Few people believe that McCarron or Peterman are franchise qbs. That discussion needs to be placed in the garbage can in the front of the house that will soon be picked up by the noisy and stinking garbage truck. That's not what the McCarron vs Peterman discussion is really about. It is about which one of these two earnest game managers will be the starting qb when the season begins until Josh Allen is ready to play as a starter. As a fan the more intriguing issue is how many games will be played before the HC crosses the rubicon and puts in the strapping rookie qb. As far as I am concerned both McCarron and Peterman would be acceptable backups. Which one would be preferred? I don't give a dam! 

 

This qb scenario is the standard highly drafted qb scenario that takes place almost every year. What makes this issue more compelling than usual is that four teams (Cleveland,  NY Jets and Arizona) are undergoing the same situation this year. 

 

Kirby, you hear the word Peterman and it triggers a visceral reaction from you. Let it go!  Whenever I mention Logan Thomas to Gunner it also triggers a spleen busting reaction from him. Don't worry about what is happening in the distant perimeter. The real issue is all about Josh Allen and where he is at. Everything else about the qb issue is a side issue. 

 

Kirby and Gunner Bill have the the over- riding opinion that they are right. nothing is going to change that. It is primarily EGO.  IF Peterman wins the QB  " battle " they will be apoplectic. WHY , , as John C. says  who cares , it is all about  Allen. Ego will not let people who are wrong  , admit it . I don't care if I am wrong about  Peterman  but would like to see him become a successful backup for the Bills , a Reich  to Allen. They are intellectually  both on the high end and  the  difference is the God given  body  that  Allen has. 

 

[Kirby Jackson]

23 minutes ago, Wily Dog said:

 

Kirby and Gunner Bill have the the over- riding opinion that they are right. nothing is going to change that. It is primarily EGO.  IF Peterman wins the QB  " battle " they will be apoplectic. WHY , , as John C. says  who cares , it is all about  Allen. Ego will not let people who are wrong  , admit it . I don't care if I am wrong about  Peterman  but would like to see him become a successful backup for the Bills , a Reich  to Allen. They are intellectually  both on the high end and  the  difference is the God given  body  that  Allen has. 

 

It’s not an opinion. It’s a universal truth. When it comes to the Bills it’s very rare that @GunnerBill or I are wrong. Sometimes we are positive, sometimes negative but almost always right. If Peterman ends up starting we will be proven right (again). 

 

Edited August 8, 2018 by Kirby Jackson

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

20 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

It’s not an opinion. It’s a universal truth. When it comes to the Bills it’s very rare that @GunnerBill or I are wrong. Sometimes we are positive, sometimes negative but almost always right. If Peterman ends up starting we will be proven right (again). 

 

Don’t hurt yourself patting your own back Kirby. 

 

 

 

How will Peterman starting prove yourself right?   

 

Both of you are chomping at the bit to cut Nate.   

[BurpleBull]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

A lot of position players that are drafted later have success. A lot of QBs drafted later don’t. Not sure that it is that confusing? It’s much less surprising to see a successful 5th rd. LB than it is a 5th rd. QB. 

 

That’s fair but it does nothing to dispute my point. These guys are longshots. They are guys that the league doesn’t love. Maybe they overcome the odds, maybe the league gets it wrong but through 2 weeks of camp it looks a lot like we expected it to. McCarron is limited but doesn’t make a lot of mistakes, Peterman is a roller coaster and Allen can wow you but looks like a rookie. If we were all being honest with ourselves this is probably what we should have expected.

 

Confusing?

 

More like it's not very enlightening.

 

No variables that affect the success rates of QB's drafted in later rounds vs. non-QB's?

 

Okay.

 

Heck, I think it's best that we don't even begin to define 'success' so that your narrative on 5th rd. QB's holds up.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

2 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Its been days  I need to add my 2 cents 

 

 

 

..LMAO......you're late and shirking your duties......what if McCarron turns into Buffalos' "Rich Gannon"?......Peace Bridge railing could get crowded...stay tuned....

[Kirby Jackson]

28 minutes ago, BurpleBull said:

 

Confusing?

 

More like it's not very enlightening.

 

No variables that affect the success rates of QB's drafted in later rounds vs. non-QB's?

 

Okay.

 

Heck, I think it's best that we don't even begin to define 'success' so that your narrative on 5th rd. QB's holds up.

Tons of variables effect QBs, way more than anyone else. We definitely agree with that. It’s hard to find a QB. There are teams that have been trying for years. 

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Don’t hurt yourself patting your own back Kirby. 

 

 

 

How will Peterman starting prove yourself right?   

 

Both of you are chomping at the bit to cut Nate.   

 

I think your sarcasm meter requires new batteries. 

 

If cut downs were today yes I would cut Nate Peterman because at the moment we have zero evidence he can play Quarterback in the NFL. I think he will make the 53 for week 1 this year. I do not think he will make a 53 in the NFL for week 1 next year. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

34 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I think your sarcasm meter requires new batteries. 

 

If cut downs were today yes I would cut Nate Peterman because at the moment we have zero evidence he can play Quarterback in the NFL. I think he will make the 53 for week 1 this year. I do not think he will make a 53 in the NFL for week 1 next year. 

Whatever happens happens.  

 

If he’s here he’s here if he’s not he’s not.  

 

No skin off my nose.