Rockpile233 Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 1 minute ago, Commonsense said: Can’t start Josh after yesterday. The game looked to fast for him. The offensive line never game him a chance and things continued south from there. Those guys should all be embarrassed. They didn’t come to play yesterday and forced a decision on the coach. If they had played better Allen would have had a chance to adjust, he didn’t get that and it’s a shame. Completely agree. Very tough to tell if he was ready with basically no pass protection. That better wake them up because they stand little chance of winning with that type of line play. Have to give Peterman the nod, and there’s a strong argument that he earned it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ennjay Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 I vote no but not because of Allen or his skills -- it's because of the O-line. There's no point in making him a tackling dummy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 1 minute ago, Perry Turtle said: One of the issues Allen had yesterday was the speed of and familiarity of playing with the ones. He probably would have done better if he wasn't spending most of his time the last 3 months with the 3rd stringers. The only way he gets better in this regard is by playing with the first team (same goes with Peterman). McDermott has decide who he is developing Peterman or Allen, because that guy needs the majority of snaps from here on out. My choice is to give the ball to the 7th pick in the draft. Hiding him is only hurting his development. Bad protection teaches QB's bad habits because they don't have enough space or time to use proper mechanics IMO. Its a recipe for failure in the development of a QB... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 31 minutes ago, Soda Popinski said: you need to understand football in the preseason. We were not looking to commit to running the ball, we wanted to have our QB throw the ball to evaluate him. and as I said to HappyDays what i meant was their dline was not concerned with stopping the run (which is why it looked good when we tried it) they were concerned with getting after our QBs and nothing else. Ok, but “bringing the house”—the term you used—means an all-out blitz, and the Bengals didn’t do that against JA yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soda Popinski Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 Just now, mannc said: Ok, but “bringing the house”—the term you used—means an all-out blitz, and the Bengals didn’t do that against JA yesterday. no it was an incorrect statement on my part. their front 4 brought it. our oline did not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrober38 Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 3 minutes ago, Figster said: Bad protection teaches QB's bad habits because they don't have enough space or time to use proper mechanics IMO. Its a recipe for failure in the development of a QB... Agreed. I have no idea why everyone is in such a hurry to start a guy who was drafted as an enormous project. Allen needs to sit and learn on the bench, or all the time he put into his mechanics will get shot to hell. His confidence looked shook yesterday in a half of football. If you start this guy week 1 and he stinks, you can't go back on that without risking ruining his development. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cripple Creek Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 I preferred he sit prior to camp and I would still like to see him sit. He was composed yesterday. Threw some nice balls, threw 2 bad ones. We don’t know what his route options were, even play options at the line. Did he option to some passes rather than run the ball? Were protections set properly? We know far less than we think we do. He didn’t fail in any way/shape/form yesterday. But he should sit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perry Turtle Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 1 minute ago, Figster said: Bad protection teaches QB's bad habits because they don't have enough space or time to use proper mechanics IMO. Its a recipe for failure in the development of a QB... Guys like Jim Kelly, John Elway, and Peyton Manning all played as rookies behind poor offensive lines. They turned out okay. The nature of the draft places the better QB prospects on bad teams. If the prospect is a franchise caliber QB, they elevate the play of the bad team in some way. If the prospect is not truly an elite NFL QB, they fall to the level of the bad players on the team. The sooner a coaching staff knows whether they have a QB that elevates the team, the better. Hiding Allen accomplishes nothing if he is a franchise QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw66 Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 Has to be Peterman. Allen looked like a rookie taking sacks. His job.is to get the ball out quickly. Either he couldn't find anyone or he couldn't decide, but it doesn't matter. Taking sacks kills drives. Allen's better physically but Peterman did his job. 4 minutes ago, Cripple Creek said: I preferred he sit prior to camp and I would still like to see him sit. He was composed yesterday. Threw some nice balls, threw 2 bad ones. We don’t know what his route options were, even play options at the line. Did he option to some passes rather than run the ball? Were protections set properly? We know far less than we think we do. He didn’t fail in any way/shape/form yesterday. But he should sit. I agree. Except he did fail. Peterman put points up and Allen didn't. Peterman did his job. The best qb should play, and Pete's been the best. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cripple Creek Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 3 minutes ago, Shaw66 said: Has to be Peterman. Allen looked like a rookie taking sacks. His job.is to get the ball out quickly. Either he couldn't find anyone or he couldn't decide, but it doesn't matter. Taking sacks kills drives. Allen's better physically but Peterman did his job. I agree. Except he did fail. Peterman put points up and Allen didn't. Peterman did his job. The best qb should play, and Pete's been the best. Apples and oranges. Our ones against their twos. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdutton Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 17 minutes ago, Gugny said: I voted yes. None of our QBs has looked good with our first string vs. a first string defense. As someone had posted earlier, Peterman has posted top 10 stats in every category this preseason including a good start against Carolina and stepping in when Allen was forced out. Also has a much faster release than Allen and thats why there were less sacks when he was in. You absolutely need that faster release with this OL. Until they fix the OL, Allen should watch, learn and work on his anticipation and release. At this point, with that OL, Peterman gives us the best chance to win now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctk232 Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 (edited) I don't really want our OL starting week 1, is there an option for that? Honestly, no, the kid needed this to see pro ball and has stayed within himself for what he's seen so far. Last night was his first look at what the NFL can be like when your OL is a saloon door. But I'd rather see what Peterman has learned and how he's grown since last year before putting all my eggs on the rookie, while he still has a good amount of refinement to progress through Edited August 27, 2018 by ctk232 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 Part of me says No because I dont want him getting injured behind that OL. But then part of me says Yes because if he can learn to get the ball out in time behind that OL, then he'll be near HoF caliber once we put a decent line in front of him! Im not really worried about "winning right now". We got the drought monkey off our back, and could use some early picks to (re)build the team around the new QB. So the fact that Peterman might give us a better chance now, doest really concern me. It's all about how we want to treat Allen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProcessAccepted Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 1 hour ago, CircleTheWagons99 said: Allen stated Himself he held the ball too long. WRs were open. I'd take that one with a pinch of salt since he is being a team player. He was far from perfect but he really didn't get much help out there. I'm sure there's some tougher conversations going on behind closed doors. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 I was in the camp that argued Allen should sit and learn for awhile, and he only starts if he clearly wins the job; he didn't. He was viewed as a very raw talent, and I think he's shown better than what many expected--myself included, but it's best to let him watch and learn a bit. Nate deserves the chance at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 52 minutes ago, Domdab99 said: This forum is becoming AIDS-like I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan1960 Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 I leave it in the hands of the Coaches but I personally would go with Peterman to start against the Ravens as I don't think Allen is ready even though he has the better physical skills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplantbillsfan Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 It has nothing to do with his performance. I think he's as capable or more of starting and being viably successful this season. The OL is why I don't want him to start. It's terrifying how bad they look. Throw Peterman or McCarron to the wolves. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quinnearlysghost88 Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 I voted start Josh Allen. Everyone’s saying we’re going to lose the first four. Start the rookie. Somehow believing Peterman is going to turn into Brady is sad Buffalo thinking. I’d rather lose with Allen. He will get a whole season under his belt and we will be more prepared for next season. Stop settling bills fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 Just now, quinnearlysghost88 said: I voted start Josh Allen. Everyone’s saying we’re going to lose the first four. Start the rookie. Somehow believing Peterman is going to turn into Brady is sad Buffalo thinking. I’d rather lose with Allen. He will get a whole season under his belt and we will be more prepared for next season. Stop settling bills fans. I disagree because Peterman's game -- quick-release and tempo/rhythm -- is the best antidote to a truly atrocious line. He really should be starting in the first game. Allen's game -- and why the Bills drafted him so high -- relies on longer-developing plays, and is the sort that will get him killed early and often behind the current set of turnstiles. Also, do not underestimate the impact of the fans turning on him assuming he really struggles. You know fans: when he struggles (and he assuredly will with this line and this group of bad receivers), many will turn on him, and they'll be very loud. That's as predictable as the rooster crowing at dawn. Bills fans are like that too. It'll create a bad scene for the long term, with the coaches always defending him to the press, and the national media (which predicted he'd fail) circling like vultures. It won't be good for his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts