Peterman Cumulative Preseason Stats

[jrober38]

27 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

And he will do this how from the bench? It’s not as if the Bills have Sam Bradford or some other seasoned vet to be a placeholder starter for awhile. NP has a couple games of NFL experience , including one where he threw a whopping 5 picks and got sacked multiple times. About the only argument one could make for starting NP is to keep the investment in one piece while the OL gets straightened out. Not many other reasons to start an inexperienced Peterman over Allen. It’s only a matter of time either way. The coaches will decide what they think is the best plan of action and we will watch the outcome unfold. All the arguments in the world won’t change that. 

 

Peterman has outplayed Allen and it hasn't been close.

 

If we're trying to win games this year, Peterman is the obvious choice to start week 1. 

[Boatdrinks]

6 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Peterman has outplayed Allen and it hasn't been close.

 

If we're trying to win games this year, Peterman is the obvious choice to start week 1. 

They will be trying to win games this year. On a national level , I’m not sure many would agree that it is obvious to start Nate Peterman. He doesn’t offer much in terms of experience, OR talent. He’s hardly a seasoned vet QB. Remember, the first QB they called when FA started was Bradford. They even brought in McCarron when he garnered little interest . They know what they’re dealing with. If he starts, it s because they just don’t feel comfortable throwing Allen out there just yet. 

Edited August 27, 2018 by Boatdrinks

[John from Riverside]

1 hour ago, jrober38 said:

He's been excellent. 

 

He's accurate, he gets the ball out quickly and he puts his receivers in a position to pick up yards after the catch. 

 

Name Peterman the week 1 starter, and give Allen the whole 4th game to get some experience under his belt. 

 

 

Very possible this happens

 

Of course we know that once teams start game planning for us....they will take everything away except what Peterman does not do well.....ugh

[Mister Defense]

30 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

And he will do this how from the bench? It’s not as if the Bills have Sam Bradford or some other seasoned vet to be a placeholder starter for awhile. NP has a couple games of NFL experience , including one where he threw a whopping 5 picks and got sacked multiple times. About the only argument one could make for starting NP is to keep the investment in one piece while the OL gets straightened out. Not many other reasons to start an inexperienced Peterman over Allen. It’s only a matter of time either way. The coaches will decide what they think is the best plan of action and we will watch the outcome unfold. All the arguments in the world won’t change that. 

 

 

A bunch of irrational words with no evidence at all to back any of it up.

 

Look at the stats,  no contest, and what did you see with your own eyes?

 

You have to back up this or it is only nonsense,  babble.

 

The dramatically better statistical and observational data indicate Peterman is much more prepared to lead the Bills to victories.  Peterman starts.

[jrober38]

Just now, Boatdrinks said:

They will be trying to win games this year. On a national level , I’m not sure many would agree that it is obvious to start Nate Peterman. He doesn’t offer much in terms of experience, OR talent. He’s hardly a seasoned vet QB. Remember, the first QB they called when FA started was Bradford. They even brought in McCarron when he garnered little interest . They know what they’re dealing with. If he starts, it because they just don’t feel comfortable throwing Allen out there just yet. 

 

Right. 

 

Peterman starting is an indictment of the other guys. McCarron was a low price free agent and Allen is a project who hasn't shown he can contribute yet. 

 

Peterman appears to be the best option (but that's not saying much). 

[Buffalo Boy]

1 hour ago, The Bills Blog said:

33/41, 432 yds, 3 TD, 1 INT, QB rating 124.80

 

He just needs to not throw outs. Ever.

I watched that last out and he needs to throw it before the receiver breaks. I can’t remember who it was to but it was more of a dig where  he ( the receiver) was waiting for it. But, yeah, thought the same thing. 

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, Mister Defense said:

 

 

A bunch of irrational words with no evidence at all to back any of it up.

 

Look at the stats,  no contest, and what did you see with your own eyes?

 

You have to back up this or it is only nonsense,  babble.

 

The dramatically better statistical and observational data indicate Peterman is much more prepared to lead the Bills to victories.  Peterman starts.

 

Stats? Here are your preseason stats: http://www.nfl.com/stats/player

[HappyDays]

The way I see it is this - if Peterman goes out and craps the bed we can make the switch and no one will bat an eye. If Allen starts week 1 and is a disaster it's hard to come back from that. After today I can't see a good argument for starting Allen over Peterman. If it turns out that Peterman's good play was just a product of preseason game speed it isn't a big deal at all.

[John from Riverside]

1 minute ago, Buffalo Boy said:

I watched that last out and he needs to throw it before the receiver breaks. I can’t remember who it was to but it was more of a dig where  he ( the receiver) was waiting for it. But, yeah, thought the same thing. 

I think the receiver waiting was O'Leary.......

 

I think Oleary gonna get cut

[Wily Dog]

1 hour ago, fridge said:

 

I think you grossly overstate the arm strength knock and cherry pick anyone that agrees with it. The guy has an NFL arm. It might be on the lower spectrum, but you write about it like he’s incapable, which is both wrong and annoying to see repeated dozens of times a day by you.

 

and it will be repeated dozens of times on the board in the future. most even bodies number 2 quarterbacks has limitations. I would rather have Peterman than most of them and probably some of the number1's. I can think of at least 4 number I's

[Mister Defense]

2 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

They will be trying to win games this year. On a national level , I’m not sure many would agree that it is obvious to start Nate Peterman. He doesn’t offer much in terms of experience, OR talent. He’s hardly a seasoned vet QB. Remember, the first QB they called when FA started was Bradford. They even brought in McCarron when he garnered little interest . They know what they’re dealing with. If he starts, it s because they just don’t feel comfortable throwing Allen out there just yet. 

 

 

I agree with the comment in bold: people not watching the games, not closely following what is going on in the preseason work, not really knowing much, "would not agree that is obvious to start Peterman". 

 

It is because they don't really know what they are talking about, don't know the details.

 

Think we should listen to these people?

[Boatdrinks]

Just now, Mister Defense said:

 

 

A bunch of irrational words with no evidence at all to back any of it up.

 

Look at the stats,  no contest, and what did you see with your own eyes?

 

You have to back up this or it is only nonsense,  babble.

 

The dramatically better statistical and observational data indicate Peterman is much more prepared to lead the Bills to victories.  Peterman starts.

 

Just now, Mister Defense said:

 

 

A bunch of irrational words with no evidence at all to back any of it up.

 

Look at the stats,  no contest, and what did you see with your own eyes?

 

You have to back up this or it is only nonsense,  babble.

 

The dramatically better statistical and observational data indicate Peterman is much more prepared to lead the Bills to victories.  Peterman starts.

I see two QBs with limitations. One with a huge capacity for growth. The other is closer to his peak level. That level isn’t all that high. We don’t know what the coaching staff will decide.  They’ve only asked NP to do quick game type stuff. Allen there was a different mindset to the play-calling. The coaches were clearly evaluating, not scheming to win preseason games. It’s ALL babble from fans, I’m afraid. None of us know what the coaches will do. You are backing up going with a guy with just a couple games of experience. One of them being one of the worst performances ever by a starting QB. It isn’t as cut and dried as you are making it out to be. If I had to predict, I’d guess they wouldn’t subject their big investment to potential injury while they get the OL straightened out. 

[jrober38]

2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

The way I see it is this - if Peterman goes out and craps the bed we can make the switch and no one will bat an eye. If Allen starts week 1 and is a disaster it's hard to come back from that. After today I can't see a good argument for starting Allen over Peterman. If it turns out that Peterman's good play was just a product of preseason game speed it isn't a big deal at all.

 

Agreed.

 

There was absolutely nothing about Allen's performance today that said he's going to be ready to start against the Ravens in week 1. The beginning of our schedule is brutal, and if Allen plays like he did today we'll likely be 0-5 and discussing benching him. That would likely be a disaster for his development. 

[Buffalo Boy]

1 hour ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

You can't run a full offense with him at the helm given his limitations. 

If you can run an “ Offense” with Tuhrod you can run one with Peterman. Maybe not to a championship but no one on here is making that claim.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, LABILLBACKER said:

I agree. Take the 10 yd outs away from him and give him a decent 3 second pocket and he will compete. This will allow Josh more time to learn.

 

How is that decent 3 second pocket going to be established?

[Buffalo Boy]

3 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

I think the receiver waiting was O'Leary.......

 

I think Oleary gonna get cut

I agree. Croom looked good.

[dubs]

1 hour ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

You can't run a full offense with him at the helm given his limitations. 

 

I agree. Same thing as Tyrod. 

 

But, it prob makes sense to go with Peterman it AJ to start the season, given how terrible the OLine is. 

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, Buffalo Boy said:

If you can run an “ Offense” with Tuhrod you can run one with Peterman. Maybe not to a championship but no one on here is making that claim.

 

Tyrod has nothing to do with Peterman.  Not sure why he's even in the conversation. 

[starrymessenger]

Peterman looks to have the smarts for playing the position. He gets the ball out quick and is generally accurate with it. He obviously has trouble with the quick out but I think he can make that throw well enough to his left. All the picks and near picks have been to his right, and that's a more difficult throw for a right handed QB. It would be nice if he could improve on that. Maybe he can, maybe he can't. 

Hes had a strong preseason and looks to have settled down after his rough rookie year. He is showing great composure for a second year QB with almost no in season experience. Thing is we still need to see how he performs when the games count. There will be a significant step up in game speed and complexity in the defences over anything he's seen so far in preseason. So the jury is still very much out IMO. If he continues to play at this level as the Bills navigate a very difficult schedule, and especially after DCs have had a chance to game plan for him, he will be laying a claim to be considered a potentially starting calibre QB. 

Josh Allen should not be starting against the teams at the front end of the Bills schedule behind that line. 

[Boatdrinks]

6 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Right. 

 

Peterman starting is an indictment of the other guys. McCarron was a low price free agent and Allen is a project who hasn't shown he can contribute yet. 

 

Peterman appears to be the best option (but that's not saying much). 

Yes, him starting would be more about the other QBs. Particularly Allen, who might be too big an investment to risk in front of a worse than expected line. It’s not saying much to say that NP would be the best option. Because he isn’t that good. So is it better to play NP and deal with his limitations, or to play Allen and let him take his lumps and learn the pro game ? If you think they drafted Allen to let him sit and develop for three years you’re dreaming.