Do you want Josh Allen to start week 1? (After pre-season wk 3 performance)

[Jobot]

Guarantee the players want Allen.  I think the guy earned a ton of respect from his team when he shouldered all the blame for the offenses struggles.

[Green Lightning]

Just now, whatdrought said:

I don't think you improve a bad offense by putting a less talented QB out there. I understand that injuries are a concern, but they're always a concern. If we were deep in the playoff hunt and lost 3 pro-bowl linemen to season ending injury we wouldn't be asking them to pull our franchise QB to prevent injury. I think it's time to let him play, do our best with scheme and personnel to protect him and help him out, and then trust that his talent level will make things happen. Defenses aren't going to pass blitz every down when Lesean McCoy is in the backfield, and as soon as they cheat to the line Allen can make them pay unlike Peterman and McCarron can. 

 

I also think that once Dawkins is back in the lineup the entire line will look significantly better. 

You improve a shaky offence by putting a more productive QB in there. Peterman has moved the ball and scored points with the 1s., 2s. and 3s. He makes faster decisions and gets the ball out quicker than Allen and AJ. With this pathetic OL, that's the guy we need right now,, someone to get the ball out and put it the hands of playmakers - however few we have.

[billybob71]

I was at the game and to my untrained eye there wasn't a lot of separation with our receivers for sure. Definitely didn't see anyone running free over the middle except Bengals receivers. This combined with a lot of pressure up the middle and I see why he started to hold the ball too long. Not saying he is ready to start season but are receivers looked slow yesterday. 

[Jerome007]

41 minutes ago, teef said:

i think the bolded captures it perfectly.  once they start allen, they completely need to commit to him.  i'm not sure if the first 4-6 weeks are that time.  if they decide to play him and let him learn on the fly, so be it.  i just has a dangerous feel to it.

That is 100% true. So long term, think of Allen first if you feel he can be a "franchise QB". But what about winning now? What about the other players? Coaches should base their decision around that. If voted start him, but I'd fine with Nate starting, for the reasons of flexibility. And... what about AJ? Odd man out paid 5M a year?

[DC Grid]

I say no but ONLY because the OL is AWFUL and I don't want to David Carr this kid.  He is going to fall into bad footwork patterns, leading to INTs and destroyed confidence if he has to play behind a line that has him running for his life constantly.  This is a recipe for failure.  Let Peterman or McCarron go 2-6 wile the line gels (or doesn't) then get this kid some expirence that won't scar him for his career.

 

 

[whatdrought]

1 minute ago, Green Lightning said:

You improve a shaky offence by putting a more productive QB in there. Peterman has moved the ball and scored points with the 1s., 2s. and 3s. He makes faster decisions and gets the ball out quicker than Allen and AJ. With this pathetic OL, that's the guy we need right now,, someone to get the ball out and put it the hands of playmakers - however few we have.

 

If the argument is that the offensive line is terrible, the only evidence needed to not start Peterman is the Chargers game. I understand that that was a bad game and he can definitely improve, but the natural talent is a big difference. He couldn't throw the ball under pressure even to open receivers, and he had no mobility in the pocket. 

 

If a bad O-line is holding the offense back, imagine how it will be when all 11 defenders are playing within 10 yards of the LOS because they don't respect the pass. Allan's mobility, playmaking skills, and arm talent improve the entire offense. 

[NewEra]

No.  He might die.  I’d like our future qb to be breathing going into next season.  Sit him for the first 3 weeks minimum.  I don’t think he’d learn much from playing in those 3 games because he’d probably be concussed

[jrober38]

4 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

If the argument is that the offensive line is terrible, the only evidence needed to not start Peterman is the Chargers game. I understand that that was a bad game and he can definitely improve, but the natural talent is a big difference. He couldn't throw the ball under pressure even to open receivers, and he had no mobility in the pocket. 

 

If a bad O-line is holding the offense back, imagine how it will be when all 11 defenders are playing within 10 yards of the LOS because they don't respect the pass. Allan's mobility, playmaking skills, and arm talent improve the entire offense. 

 

Last night disagrees. 

 

Last night was a glimpse into what our offense will look like this year with Allen as the QB.

 

He was a huge project coming out of college who needs to learn on the sidelines. He's clearly not ready. 

Edited August 27, 2018 by jrober38

[Domdab99]

This forum is becoming AIDS-like 

[billybob71]

I was sitting up high and when he dropped back I tried to really focus on the routes and he didn't have much to throw too. This combined with the pressure made it tough. I prob wouldn't put him out there until this line can gel and some receiving threats emerge.

[Green Lightning]

4 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

If the argument is that the offensive line is terrible, the only evidence needed to not start Peterman is the Chargers game. I understand that that was a bad game and he can definitely improve, but the natural talent is a big difference. He couldn't throw the ball under pressure even to open receivers, and he had no mobility in the pocket. 

 

If a bad O-line is holding the offense back, imagine how it will be when all 11 defenders are playing within 10 yards of the LOS because they don't respect the pass. Allan's mobility, playmaking skills, and arm talent improve the entire offense. 

Your premise fails to take into account NP's vast improvement during the off season and in camp. He processes the game faster, makes good decisions and gets the ball out faster than either AJ or Allen. And with this OL that's a valuable trait. If DCs want to defense him like a WCO prevent, fine. He's smart enough to opt to runs and has shown some accuracy over the middle.  (That said, I just don't want him to throw an out patters to the right.)  At this point, he's the best option to put points on the board with this offense.

[starrymessenger]

What Peterman needs to do (amongst other things) is make opposing Ds respect his ability to beat them over the top (as ridiculous as that may sound to some). If he can do that his short passing game (and the Bills run game) will be that much more effective. Of course he will never be able to challenge them in parts of the field that a guy with an arm like Allen can but the TD throw to Streater that was called back travelled 40 yards in the air and was perfectly placed. Streater did not even have to push off to beat the corner, the timing and ball placement was so good. I think his useful range is probably around 50 yards. If he can be very accurate with it that should be good enuf, and he is said to have "long ball" accuracy. It cannot be a staple of his game for a obvious reasons but he doesn't need to do it except occasionally, for example when Ds are playing 100% underneath. He wouldn't be throwing ropes either but if he gets rid of it quickly his receivers can run under it. If he can't do it there's a chance, perhaps even a likelihood, that his game eventually gets snuffed out. Conversely if he can do it his game, and the Bills O, should be elevated to a significant extent.

Allen should not be starting now IMO. Maybe later towards the end of the year against weaker opposition if the other guys aren't getting the job done. Andy Reid is said to know QBs. He sat McNabb for most of his rookie year and kept Mahomes off the field in 2017. It's not a universal rule by any means but I think it sometimes makes sense to acclimate these talented prospects gradually, depending on just how raw they are and how good the team around them is. Allen is a raw talent. The Bills don't have many proven, reliable playmakers around him and the line is lousy in pass pro. And Daboll doesn't seem to me to be a ground chuck kinda guy.

[ddaryl]

7 minutes ago, Domdab99 said:

This forum is becoming AIDS-like 

 

Oh do explain that in full detail.. 

 

everything discussed here is pretty civil and very honest

[whatdrought]

Just now, Green Lightning said:

Your premise fails to take into account NP's vast improvement during the off season and in camp. He processes the game faster, makes good decisions and gets the ball out faster than either AJ or Allen. And with this OL that's a valuable trait. If DCs want to defense him like a WCO prevent, fine. He's smart enough to opt to runs and has shown some accuracy over the middle.  (That said, I just don't want him to throw an out patters to the right.)  At this point, he's the best option to put points on the board with this offense.

 

Actually, I did say that it was definitely possible that he could have improved. Read my post. 

As for the argument that he has improved, I think that he has shown some good things. He has also been inconsistent. Every chance he has had to put the nail in the qb competition he has faltered. 

I think Peterman can be a decent QB in the right situation, but his lack of talent in general is a handicap to this already suffering offense. He is also very mistake prone (Even just looking at this year, and ignoring last) and that is not going to help a bad offense be better. 

[CommonCents]

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.

[Gugny]

I voted yes.

 

None of our QBs has looked good with our first string vs. a first string defense.

 

It seems that most here are in agreement that the starting OL hasn't done any of the QBs any favors.

 

Add a couple key drops in yesterday's game, a scramble for (what appeared to be) a first down that should have been challenged, but was not, and some very questionable play-calling by Dabol - and I can't fault Allen much for yesterday's lack of production.  I'd say two of the sacks were on him - maybe.  Kid had no time.

 

He looked just as good against Cleveland's second string as Peterman looked last night.

 

I feel that if Allen and Peterman are equal, that Allen should get the start because there's no benefit to starting Peterman (he doesn't have much real experience, either).

 

I also feel that Allen and Peterman have both looked better than McCarron.

 

That's why I voted yes.

 

If I had to bet, my money would be on McCarron starting.  I do not think Peterman will start unless the other two are injured.

[BuffaloFan68]

Before yesterday's game I was on board with starting Allen, but now I say start Peterman & have McCarron as back up for the first 4 games.  With our O-line, chances are, the QBs will be getting killed anyways. 

[RiotAct]

No.  

 

He’ll probably be starting by Week 6 anyway, if you know what I mean.

[Perry Turtle]

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.

 

[billybob71]

And maybe our receivers looked so blanketed to me in the first half because when the Bengals had the ball there was a stark contrast. Lots of room for them in our secondary yesterday.

 

[Rockpile233]

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.

[Ennjay]

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.

[Figster]

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...

[mannc]

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.

[Soda Popinski]

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. 

[jrober38]

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. 

[Cripple Creek]

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.

[Perry Turtle]

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.  

[Shaw66]

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. 

[Cripple Creek]

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. 

[bdutton]

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.

[ctk232]

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

[DrDawkinstein]

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.

[ProcessAccepted]

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. 

[TPS]

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.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

52 minutes ago, Domdab99 said:

This forum is becoming AIDS-like 

 

I agree.

[billsfan1960]

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.

[transplantbillsfan]

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.

[quinnearlysghost88]

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. 

[dave mcbride]

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.