Peterman pros and cons...

[Bing Bong]

Just now, zow2 said:

I don't think Peterman is nearly as bad as he is perceived to be.  He would probably have a W under his belt if he completed the Indy snow game.  He was throwing well in that game, much better than the Indy QB...and had the Bills up 7-0.  

This Ravens game will be tough.  I hope the coaching staff keeps it simple and Nate can get through the game without having it turn into a nightmare.  If he can manage the game, keep the chains moving, stay out of trouble, that will go a long way towards confidence.   Because of his past, The Ravens will be looking to jump every out route.  Those DB's are going to try and feed off the LA Chargers film.  Maybe our OC can dial up some plays where Peterman can burn the DB's, knowing they will be looking to jump up.  Maybe some hitch and go routes or something...

He's really not as bad as his regular season passer rating says. But I seriously doubt this wr group can change their route for Peterman. He drew a bad draw. Does have chemistry with KB I'll say that. 

 

Better than Cam you know. "Any Quarterback is better" KB

2 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

 

Give the kid a shot at redemption.  

 

Thats what the Bills FO is doing 

 

If you don’t like it ......  that's on you

 

 

We didn't for Tuel. But I agree, he's maintained confidence and looks good. We talk about breaking QBs. He's certainly not broken and that's damn impressive and what I'm trying to say is the best intangible a QB can have

3 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

I'm not sure what you do for a living, but imagine if your entire career was judged by your first 30 minutes on the job.

 

Doesn't seem fair, does it?  Or smart.

Lol I said some where I was blackout. Took the day off today. I'm making my rounds of apologies

4 hours ago, sodbuster said:

Small sample size. 

Eh.. nobody has a small sample size on the roster throwing the pigskin. That's why I'm nervous. I hope he's great.

 

I don't think he will be JMO

1 hour ago, fridge said:

 

Good luck with your podcast.

Honestly surprised the mods didn't hammer me. All that happened was my "Peterman cons" thread got merged here.. like come on.. that's just funny I don't care where we disagree.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

That misses the point that he was not challenged in the was JA was.  So he wasn't undergoing the same evaluation process.  He played 2 varsity series all preseason and hten he coasted the rest of the way against scrubs exclusively.  In the only meaningful preseason  game (week 3) they wouldn't let him into the huddle until the Bengals sat their starters.  Then he came in and Scrimmaged with the 2-3-4s and padded his stats.  He's faced no pressure since last season, when that pressure resulted in 5 picks.

 

My guess is that, if he had to play that first half against the Bengals starters, hw would not be the Bills starter coming this Sunday. 

 

Or cleveland. Both brought a ton of pressure with their starters. Panthers didn’t. 

 

Hopefully we don’t see a repeat of last season, but I think it’s still a very open question 

[T master]

Fitz was said to have a weak arm but has the longest TD in team history with the best WR in team history (TO) just ask him he'll tell you !! ??

 

Not to mention TO said Fitz had the best ball he ever caught from a QB !! 

Edited September 4, 2018 by T master

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Bangarang said:

 

What do you mean he wasn’t challenged the same way Allen was or didn’t go under the same evaluation process? That literally makes no sense.

 

Are you just sad Allen didn’t come out and clearly win the competition? He will get his shot eventually.

 

Allen also went up against backups just like Peterman did and still wasn’t able to consistently look as good or pad his stats like you’re bashing Peterman for. 

 

Sad?  No.  Just making an obvious point, literally. 

 

Your claim is that, when both went against backups, Peterman was the better QB.  That's not a strong argument for him to start, especially since his NFL experience as a starter is arguably no better than Allen's (which is zero of course).

[billsredneck1]

22 hours ago, The_Dude said:

I really like Peterman. 

 

Unlike many of you I like the WGR crew. But Schoop made a comment last year on Peterman that I found soooo stupid. I tweeted him that I like Peterman because I think he's a Chad Pennington type and while he'll probably always be a backup, I think he'll have a long career as a backup, like a Colt McCoy type. Schoop said if that's all you predict for a players future then what's the point in drafting him? I was blown away by that logic. I mean, to me backup QB is a position on the team, and you want the best one you can get. And yes, I believe in drafting and developing QB's even if you think the most you can get out of them is backup material. 

schoop is the worst guy on that station and that comment makes him look stupid....some more. our 5th round pick is our starting qb for now and should be fine as a backup for years to come. not a bad return on a 5th.

 

as far as the op...thanks for your professional you tube analysis. you've seen all the tape    and it's out.

did you watch and /or monitor practices and listen to the 24/7 coverage from all the beat reporters?  listen to player interviews? see every snap in pre season?

 

a lot of people  think they can do a bio on peterman based 2017, but this year he is much better. i'm hoping he carves it up.

7 hours ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

A username that had a stat? Lmao.

 

I'm blackout rn so I'll apologize tomorrow. But Peterman threw 5 picks in one half. It Happened.. saying otherwise is being a flat earther you branwashed idiot

I'm a pissed off bills fan because we have pick6 Pete. Until he stops throwing interceptions every average 5 drop backs.. he's probably the best quarterback we have. And that's why I miss Tyrod lol. He averaged a lot less picks per snap. But nope. Not a bills fan you got me. I haven't bought the process because we are horrible.

 

Btw you should be a guest on our podcast seriously. We need Peterman defenders to laugh at

 

You suck fridge. Everybody says you're overrated

 

Fridge please give me an argument that is solid and doesn't say the friggin process. And we can. Proceed to civilized conversation. Because if pick 6 Pete is the process.. we're going to have a bad time

the bolded is impossible....it can't even get past your username. what a moron....

[pimp on da' net]

4 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

I'm not sure what you do for a living, but imagine if your entire career was judged by your first 30 minutes on the job.

 

Doesn't seem fair, does it?  Or smart.

You make it seem as if  NP is only being judged by the Chargers game, he has thrown INT's or looked shaky in every game that he has played. 

 

Correction, he was injured early in the snow game against Indy. I don't think he threw an INT in that game...?

22 hours ago, Big C said:

Greg Gabriel says Peterman will be fine.

I guess Greg is echoing the thoughts of every DB we will face this year...?

Edited September 4, 2018 by pimp on da' net

[Bangarang]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Sad?  No.  Just making an obvious point, literally. 

 

The point is hardly obvious, nor does it make any sense. Are you saying the competition was unfair because Peterman played against backups and Allen played against a starting defense that one time?

 

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Your claim is that, when both went against backups, Peterman was the better QB.  That's not a strong argument for him to start, especially since his NFL experience as a starter is arguably no better than Allen's (which is zero of course).

 

Are you twisting my words around now? My claim is that Peterman clearly had the better showing this preseason regardless of whether he was going up against a starting defense or backups. In a fair QB competition, the guy who plays the best should start. Had Allen played well against the Bengals then that changes things and he would make a much stronger case to start. 

[Gugny]

15 minutes ago, pimp on da' net said:

You make it seem as if  NP is only being judged by the Chargers game, he has thrown INT's or looked shaky in every game that he has played. 

 

Correction, he was injured early in the snow game against Indy. I don't think he threw an INT in that game...?

I guess Greg is echoing the thoughts of every DB we will face this year...?

 

Here is his entire body of work.

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PeteNa00/gamelog/2017/

 

A rookie backup thrown into a game vs. a formidable defense on the road with minimal preparation had a horrible half of football.

 

Color me shocked.

 

A rookie late round pick looks shaky in playing time that included a grand total of 49 attempted passes ... again ... say it ain't so!

 

Overall, through 4 games of action, his stats are typical rookie stats.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

1 hour ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

We didn't for Tuel. But I agree, he's maintained confidence and looks good. We talk about breaking QBs. He's certainly not broken and that's damn impressive and what I'm trying to say is the best intangible a QB can have

Tuel?  I was never one to buy into Tuel Time.   

 

The Tuel Time craze was just that imo.   like a bad meme.  similar to The Chroise! 

Who knows what Nate will do.   But unfortunately we have a choice of 2.  

 

We watch Nate try to redeem himself or we see Josh get the snot beat out of him if he doesn't adjust to a much quicker read and throw.  

[reddogblitz]

4 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Would repeating the same mistakes of the last 3 seasons have an upside?

 

 

Just win baby.  Enough screwin' around.  If we could do it with Hotrod, shouldn't be so hard.

 

Ending the drought is a mistake?

[TheBrownBear]

42 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Here is his entire body of work.

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PeteNa00/gamelog/2017/

 

A rookie backup thrown into a game vs. a formidable defense on the road with minimal preparation had a horrible half of football.

 

Color me shocked.

 

A rookie late round pick looks shaky in playing time that included a grand total of 49 attempted passes ... again ... say it ain't so!

 

Overall, through 4 games of action, his stats are typical rookie stats.

 

I actually feel a little better after looking at those stats.  Outside of that terrible half against the Chargers, he wasn't too bad.  IMO, he's looked great this preseason.  I like Allen too, but it would be great if Nate continued his strong play in the regular season to buy Josh a season of preparation.  And then you've got a really strong trade chip in Peterman (or Allen if Peterman somehow ends up elite) to acquire future draft picks.

[Mr. WEO]

44 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

 

The point is hardly obvious, nor does it make any sense. Are you saying the competition was unfair because Peterman played against backups and Allen played against a starting defense that one time?

 

 

Are you twisting my words around now? My claim is that Peterman clearly had the better showing this preseason regardless of whether he was going up against a starting defense or backups. In a fair QB competition, the guy who plays the best should start. Had Allen played well against the Bengals then that changes things and he would make a much stronger case to start. 

 

You ask a lot of questions.

 

!).  yes, obviously. 

 

Allen was put in front of a solid pressure starting NFL defense for half a game.  Peterman was not put in that same situation.  He was subbed after his second series against starters after he threw a pick.  After those first few minutes of the preseason, he would not see opposing starters until Week 1 of the regular season.  Is it really hard to understand how, given NP's struggles against a significant pass rush in his only NFL start last year, seeing how he would have done against the Bengals would have been useful in comparing the 2 QBs in the same situation?  The answer is, no, it's not hard to understand and yes, it makes sense.

 

2). no.

 

See "1)."  Yes, NP looked better against backups.  I've made that same observation several times now.  In a fair competition, one competitor doesn't get easier terms under which he assessed than the other.  That really shouldn't need an explanation.  It's not as though JA looked awful this preseason, either.

[Mat68]

I hope he plays well and Buffalo wins.  I can not help but think Buffalo is about to do what Houston did last year with Savage.  First half cant move the ball multiple sacks and picks and then Watson moves in at halftime.  

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

27 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Just win baby.  Enough screwin' around.  If we could do it with Hotrod, shouldn't be so hard.

 

Ending the drought is a mistake?

To some it was.

 

1) My reference was to player(s) that were deemed  - Can not improve in talent level. 

2) As I've said many times (the majority of the time) new HC's want their own QB.   McD had to settle for TT last year because there was no other choice. 

 

 

If there was TT would have been a Cleveland Brown last season 

 

 

Quote

See "1)."  Yes, NP looked better against backups. 

backups backups backups   Such a tiring excuse WEO  

 

The first drive or two against the Panthers was against the starters minus 1 or 2 guys sitting on the bench, which I may add happens throughout the season because of injuries. 

 

In 5 days time you can justifiably complain about Nate or find more excuses if a miracle happens

Edited September 4, 2018 by ShadyBillsFan

[reddogblitz]

Just now, ShadyBillsFan said:

2) As I've said many times new HC's want their own QB.   McD had to settle for TT last year because there was no other choice.  

 

No arguments here. However, Mahomes and Watson were options ...

[Bangarang]

23 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

You ask a lot of questions.

 

!).  yes, obviously. 

 

Allen was put in front of a solid pressure starting NFL defense for half a game.  Peterman was not put in that same situation.  He was subbed after his second series against starters after he threw a pick.  After those first few minutes of the preseason, he would not see opposing starters until Week 1 of the regular season.  Is it really hard to understand how, given NP's struggles against a significant pass rush in his only NFL start last year, seeing how he would have done against the Bengals would have been useful in comparing the 2 QBs in the same situation?  The answer is, no, it's not hard to understand and yes, it makes sense.

 

2). no.

 

See "1)."  Yes, NP looked better against backups.  I've made that same observation several times now.  In a fair competition, one competitor doesn't get easier terms under which he assessed than the other.  That really shouldn't need an explanation.  It's not as though JA looked awful this preseason, either.

 

Peterman didn’t get easier terms. Your point is just really stupid. 

Edited September 4, 2018 by Bangarang

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

3 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

No arguments here. However, Mahomes and Watson were options ...

True.  I should have said the majority   

 

now edited 

Edited September 4, 2018 by ShadyBillsFan

[Mr. WEO]

3 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

 

Peterman didn’t get easier terms. Your point is just really stupid. 

 

Did you watch the Bengals game? 

 

Why is pointing out the different  opposing competition faced by the 2 QBs during the preseason evaluation process. "stupid"?

 

Is it more stupid than saying "it doesn't matter who they faced, the guy who played against nobodies played better"? Why even point that out, in fact?

[JohnC]

25 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Did you watch the Bengals game? 

 

Why is pointing out the different  opposing competition faced by the 2 QBs during the preseason evaluation process. "stupid"?

 

Is it more stupid than saying "it doesn't matter who they faced, the guy who played against nobodies played better"? Why even point that out, in fact?

In the preseason games in Peterman clearly in generaloutperformed the rookie. Was the opposition talent equalized for each qb? Not really because it is difficult to get that balance in preseason games when the opposing teams aren't willing to play their starters very much. 

 

What is indisputable is that overall Peterman outperformed Allen in the preseason games.(If you don't accept the stats then trust your eyes.) And he demonstrated a better grasp of the offense and the defenses that he faced.(That is understandable because he is more experienced.) I'm not saying any of your points about Peterman are stupid other than bringing up last year's fiasco game in San Diego as being relevant to this year. That is stupid because it has no bearing on this year.   

 

Without question, Josh Allen is in the not too distant future our franchise qb. The HC decided to start the season with the qb who in the short term gives this team the best chance to succeed. It not only was the right decision but it was a very understandable decision.

[Kelly the Dog]

6 minutes ago, JohnC said:

In the preseason games in Peterman clearly in generaloutperformed the rookie. Was the opposition talent equalized for each qb? Not really because it is difficult to get that balance in preseason games when the opposing teams aren't willing to play their starters very much. 

 

What is indisputable is that overall Peterman outperformed Allen in the preseason games.(If you don't accept the stats then trust your eyes.) And he demonstrated a better grasp of the offense and the defenses that he faced.(That is understandable because he is more experienced.) I'm not saying any of your points about Peterman are stupid other than bringing up last year's fiasco game in San Diego as being relevant to this year. That is stupid because it has no bearing on this year.   

 

Without question, Josh Allen is in the not too distant future our franchise qb. The HC decided to start the season with the qb who in the short term gives this team the best chance to succeed. It not only was the right decision but it was a very understandable decision.

Not if you looked at it a different way, which is an equally important way. 

 

Peterman did not show any real ability to get the ball downfield. Or to back defenses away. Allen showed a clear ability to involve the entire field, to throw left, middle and right, short, medium and deep, rolling left or right. He showed a better ability to run. He didn't throw an INT or fumble. He didn't have two pick sixes dropped. 

[Bangarang]

33 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Did you watch the Bengals game? 

 

Why is pointing out the different  opposing competition faced by the 2 QBs during the preseason evaluation process. "stupid"?

 

Is it more stupid than saying "it doesn't matter who they faced, the guy who played against nobodies played better"? Why even point that out, in fact?

 

Going by your logic, no QB competition would ever be fair then. It would be impossible to have each QB face the exact set of circumstances.

[pimp on da' net]

2 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

Here is his entire body of work.

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PeteNa00/gamelog/2017/

 

A rookie backup thrown into a game vs. a formidable defense on the road with minimal preparation had a horrible half of football.

 

Color me shocked.

 

A rookie late round pick looks shaky in playing time that included a grand total of 49 attempted passes ... again ... say it ain't so!

 

Overall, through 4 games of action, his stats are typical rookie stats.

This sounds like NP was named the starter of the Chargers game, on game day. He had a weeks preparations but I digress...

 

You can't have it both ways with this guy. 

 

 You previously stated that he was an upgrade over TT (another late round draft pick), with an overall regular season winning record, and by your own admission NP is a typical (sic) limited rookie QB. How is he an upgrade? 

 

I have stated on the record that TT is very limited as a QB but each week he didn't hurt the team with turnovers and NP scares the life out of me because he is limited as well but adds the sacks & turnover effect to the equation which will equate to a very long season for this Bills fan.

 

My hope is that I'm wrong and NP plays lights out but J. Allen is developing so well that he takes over after the bye week!  ? Go Bills!

[JohnC]

9 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Not if you looked at it a different way, which is an equally important way. 

 

Peterman did not show any real ability to get the ball downfield. Or to back defenses away. Allen showed a clear ability to involve the entire field, to throw left, middle and right, short, medium and deep, rolling left or right. He showed a better ability to run. He didn't throw an INT or fumble. He didn't have two pick sixes dropped. 

I'm taking a different short term perspective. Peterman clearly (undertandably)  has a better grasp of the offense and reading defenses. Without question he has physical limitations that will never qualify him as a franchise qb. But as a short term starter it makes a lot of sense to start the season with him taking the snaps. 

 

His physical limitations are evident to everyone. But what he does better right now than Josh does is more quickly make a read and get rid of the ball. That attribute is a necessity for survival because of the caliber of our OL, especially its pass blocking. 

 

Most of us agree that before the season is over with Josh Allen will get his chance as a starter. My point is that in the short term having Peterman as a starter makes a lot of sense not only for the team but also for the rookie qb. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

24 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

 

Going by your logic, no QB competition would ever be fair then. It would be impossible to have each QB face the exact set of circumstances.

BINGO!!!! 

 

Its almost like asking   -- how bad would the Bills have lost if TT started the Chargers game? 

 

IIRC hardly anyone realistically expected the Bills to win 

 

if they weren't up 30+ points would they have let off the gas?     Highly unlikely 

lmo

Edited September 4, 2018 by ShadyBillsFan

[Kelly the Dog]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

I'm taking a different short term perspective. Peterman clearly (undertandably)  has a better grasp of the offense and reading defenses. Without question he has physical limitations that will never qualify him as a franchise qb. But as a short term starter it makes a lot of sense to start the season with him taking the snaps. 

 

His physical limitations are evident to everyone. But what he does better right now than Josh does is more quickly make a read and get rid of the ball. That attribute is a necessity for survival because of the caliber of our OL, especially its pass blocking. 

 

Most of us agree that before the season is over with Josh Allen will get his chance as a starter. My point is that in the short term having Peterman as a starter makes a lot of sense not only for the team but also for the rookie qb. 

He didn't show a clear ability to know the offense better or to read defenses. Josh looked off more guys, and went to his second and third receivers more than Nate did. Peterman is a one read thrower. He read defenses presnap. Josh read defenses post snap. Josh also ran more of the offense. 

[Gugny]

4 minutes ago, pimp on da' net said:

This sounds like NP was named the starter of the Chargers game, on game day. He had a weeks preparations but I digress...

 

You can't have it both ways with this guy. 

 

 You previously stated that he was an upgrade over TT (another late round draft pick), with an overall regular season winning record, and by your own admission NP is a typical (sic) limited rookie QB. How is he an upgrade? 

 

I have stated on the record that TT is very limited as a QB but each week he didn't hurt the team with turnovers and NP scares the life out of me because he is limited as well but adds the sacks & turnover effect to the equation which will equate to a very long season for this Bills fan.

 

My hope is that I'm wrong and NP plays lights out but J. Allen is developing so well that he takes over after the bye week!  ? Go Bills!

 

Protecting the ball certainly kept the turnovers to a minimum.  Unfortunately, they also kept points - when they were needed most - to a minimum, too.

 

I don't expect the offense to be any better, to be honest.  The o-line is trash and we've got the oldest running game in the league.

 

Three years of the same crap from the QB position.  Week in and week out.  At least we'll have a QB who wants to throw the ball - and will, if he has time.  To me, that's an upgrade.  Yes - I expect more turnovers.  That happens when a QB actually takes chances and I'm fine with it.

[Alphadawg7]

https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2018/9/4/17808072/buffalo-bills-quarterback-nathan-peterman-and-throwing-velocity-on-sideline-passes-mike-jordan

 

Good analysis about NP's issue with the sidelines

[JohnC]

11 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

He didn't show a clear ability to know the offense better or to read defenses. Josh looked off more guys, and went to his second and third receivers more than Nate did. Peterman is a one read thrower. He read defenses presnap. Josh read defenses post snap. Josh also ran more of the offense. 

In a short term perspective I disagree with your comparisons between Peterman and Allen. I think that Peterman is right now better equipped mentally to be the starter. Your point that Nate is a one read thrower doesn't discredit my underlying point on this topic, it buttresses it. Quickly getting rid of the ball is a necessity even more than going through progressions because of the caliber of our OL. 

 

The attached link is from WGR in which Peter King addresses the issue of starting Peterman over Allen. It is a 14 minute segment. You can go directly to the the 11 minute mark where he address the qb decision. He and I have the same line of reasoning 

https://wgr550.radio.com/media/audio-channel/09-04-nbc-sports-columnist-peter-king-one-bills-live

 

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

In the preseason games in Peterman clearly in generaloutperformed the rookie. Was the opposition talent equalized for each qb? Not really because it is difficult to get that balance in preseason games when the opposing teams aren't willing to play their starters very much. 

 

What is indisputable is that overall Peterman outperformed Allen in the preseason games.(If you don't accept the stats then trust your eyes.) And he demonstrated a better grasp of the offense and the defenses that he faced.(That is understandable because he is more experienced.) I'm not saying any of your points about Peterman are stupid other than bringing up last year's fiasco game in San Diego as being relevant to this year. That is stupid because it has no bearing on this year.   

 

Without question, Josh Allen is in the not too distant future our franchise qb. The HC decided to start the season with the qb who in the short term gives this team the best chance to succeed. It not only was the right decision but it was a very understandable decision.

 

I bring up last year's SD fiasco because it is the ONLY or starting experience he has ever had in the NFL!  What else can I compare his response to a good pass rush to?  The recent cuts of the teams he played ok in preseason against?

 

We shall see if it is the right decision.

 

50 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

 

Going by your logic, no QB competition would ever be fair then. It would be impossible to have each QB face the exact set of circumstances.

 

I know you're still struggling with the logic of this, so I'll try one more time:  it would not have been impossible--it would have been pretty easy.  They could have put Peterman in the beginning of the 2nd Q against the Bengals, when most of their D was still playing.  Then they could have traded the 3rd and 4th Q against the scrubs.  One game, both QBs against the same units.  As similar circumstances as possible, therefore...

 

It would have been that easy, really.

Edited September 4, 2018 by Mr. WEO

[Kelly the Dog]

4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

In a short term perspective I disagree with your comparisons between Peterman and Allen. I think that Peterman is right now better equipped mentally to be the starter. Your point that Nate is a one read thrower doesn't discredit my underlying point on this topic, it buttresses it. Quickly getting rid of the ball is a necessity even more than going through progressions because of the caliber of our OL. 

 

Thee attached link is from WGR in which Peter King addresses the issue of starting Peterman over Allen. It is a 14 minute segment. You can go directly to the the 11 minute mark where he address the qb decision. He and I have the same line of reasoning 

https://wgr550.radio.com/media/audio-channel/09-04-nbc-sports-columnist-peter-king-one-bills-live

 

You're addressing a different thing though. You said he read defenses better and he didn't. Yes, it is more efficient to do what he did. You may be right that he is better equipped because he reads presnap and makes quick decisions with the ball that he can run this offense better (I disagree but for different reasons), I was only saying that a) you cannot say he has better grasp of the offense if he only uses a small portion of it, and b) just because he makes quick decisions and gets the ball out does not mean he reads defenses better. All it does is show he knows his limitations.

 

It is arguable as to whether that is the wisest. In preseason I would argue yes it is, as evidenced. In regular season, I would argue that cannot work, as evidenced by Chargers game, and post season game. Mop up time and snow game is impossible to make any judgment on that. 

[Real McClappy]

What happens to Allen if we go 13-3 under Peterman and win the division?

[JohnC]

Just now, Mr. WEO said:

 

I bring up last year's SD fiasco because it is the ONLY or starting experience he has ever had in the NFL!  What else can I compare his response to a good pass rush to?  The recent cuts of the teams he played ok in preseason against?

 

We shall see if it is the right decision.

 

 

 

Last year's performance has no relevancy to this year! Of course it was part of his experience but it has absolutely no bearing on this year. 

 

For the short term Peterman's induction as a starter makes sense to me. Before the season is completed odds are that a more physically talented qb  will be behind the center. 

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

2 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

What happens to Allen if we go 13-3 under Peterman and win the division?

 

Start Allen for the playoffs and bring Home the Lombardi ?

[Real McClappy]

1 minute ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

 

Start Allen for the playoffs and bring Home the Lombardi ?

Just WIN Baby!

[Bangarang]

8 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

I bring up last year's SD fiasco because it is the ONLY or starting experience he has ever had in the NFL!  What else can I compare his response to a good pass rush to?  The recent cuts of the teams he played ok in preseason against?

 

We shall see if it is the right decision.

 

 

I know you're still struggling with the logic of this, so I'll try one more time:  it would not have been impossible--it would have been pretty easy.  They could have put Peterman in the beginning of the 2nd Q against the Bengals, when most of their D was still playing.  Then they could have traded the 3rd and 4th Q against the scrubs.  One game, both QBs against the same units.  As similar circumstances as possible, therefore...

 

It would have been that easy, really.

 

You’re still hung up on the Bengals game huh? That seems to be your main beef. It’s still stupid though.

[Mr. WEO]

2 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Last year's performance has no relevancy to this year! Of course it was part of his experience but it has absolutely no bearing on this year. 

 

For the short term Peterman's induction as a starter makes sense to me. Before the season is completed odds are that a more physically talented qb  will be behind the center. 

 

How does anyone know?  How has he proven otherwise--that he can handle an aggressive pass rush? 

 

Despite what he says now, he and everyone else will be thinking of his last start as soon a he takes the field for his next start---because that's all we have to go on. 

1 minute ago, Bangarang said:

 

You’re still hung up on the Bengals game huh? That seems to be your main beef. It’s still stupid though.

 

Holy cow.

 

Ok, you win.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

9 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

What happens to Allen if we go 13-3 under Peterman and win the division?

 

(there are no words in reply for what you said)

Edited September 4, 2018 by ShadyBillsFan

[JohnC]

4 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

You're addressing a different thing though. You said he read defenses better and he didn't. Yes, it is more efficient to do what he did. You may be right that he is better equipped because he reads presnap and makes quick decisions with the ball that he can run this offense better (I disagree but for different reasons), I was only saying that a) you cannot say he has better grasp of the offense if he only uses a small portion of it, and b) just because he makes quick decisions and gets the ball out does not mean he reads defenses better. All it does is show he knows his limitations.

 

It is arguable as to whether that is the wisest. In preseason I would argue yes it is, as evidenced. In regular season, I would argue that cannot work, as evidenced by Chargers game, and post season game. Mop up time and snow game is impossible to make any judgment on that. 

My response is the same to you as it is to WEO. The Charger game is in the past and has no relevancy to this season for Pererman. 

 

As far as which qb better reads defenses I don't see how you can say Allen is better (at this early stage for him) than Peterman. I simply can't make a judgment on that issue as of now. 

 

The bottom line is that the HC who watches the tape and presides over practice came to the conclusion that in the short term Peterman gives his team a better chance to succeed. I not only understand why he made that decision but I agree that it was the right thing to do. (At least for the short term.) 

[Kelly the Dog]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

My response is the same to you as it is to WEO. The Charger game is in the past and has no relevancy to this season for Pererman. 

 

As far as which qb better reads defenses I don't see how you can say Allen is better (at this early stage for him) than Peterman. I simply can't make a judgment on that issue as of now. 

 

The bottom line is that the HC who watches the tape and presides over practice came to the conclusion that in the short term Peterman gives his team a better chance to succeed. I not only understand why he made that decision but I agree that it was the right thing to do. (At least for the short term.) 

Name me one play in preseason where he showed that he could throw a hard enough out pattern that was his issue last season? Name one play where he showed in preseason that he has overcome his lack of arm which is the one reason his doubters have doubt. How can you say it has no bearing when A) he hasn't played with real bullets since, and b) he never showed it with rubber bullets this year? 

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

How does anyone know?  How has he proven otherwise--that he can handle an aggressive pass rush? 

 

Despite what he says now, he and everyone else will be thinking of his last start as soon a he takes the field for his next start---because that's all we have to go on.

 

 

You may be fixated on the fiasco in San Diego but I won't be. I'll be watching the games in present time this year. WEO, let it go and free yourself from the burdens of the past. You will feel liberated. 

1 minute ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Name me one play in preseason where he showed that he could throw a hard enough out pattern that was his issue last season? Name one play where he showed in preseason that he has overcome his lack of arm which is the one reason his doubters have doubt. How can you say it has no bearing when A) he hasn't played with real bullets since, and b) he never showed it with rubber bullets this year? 

If you want me to argue that Peterman doesn't have limitations regarding his arm strength then you have been missing my central point in this discussion. With the exception of his sideline throws he did make some quality passes. It's understood by everyone who has eyes that he can't make those wide out throws. Every time he attempts that type of pass it is a disaster in waiting.  I understand that and acknowledge it. What you see is the same thing that the HC and staff sees. Yet for the short term they decided to start Peterman over Allen. I agree with that judgment.