Peterman pros and cons...

[Kelly the Dog]

1 minute ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

 

...Jesus, sounds to me like those "Peterman flea bites" got the best of "Kelly Dawg".....hell, I'd bet if the kid sported a Hartz Mountain 90 day collar, he STILL ain't makin' YOUR Christmas list.....

I hope he proves me wrong. 

 

I have been on record here saying that certain players, such as Matt Leinart, Matt Barkley, Kellen Moore, Colt McCoy and others will never be good starters in this league, CAN never be good, because they lack the arm strength to play against starters in real games. And it’s my opinion Nate is one of those guys. It’s possible he has just enough and I have not seen it. It’s very infrequent but some guys can improve. Most can’t. 

 

IF that is the case, and I fear it is not I’m positive it is, he cannot succeed over time. Sure he can excel in preseason. Sure he can have a good game or two. But he cannot succeed as a starter without sufficient arm. 

 

Many here think he does have it. I don’t. Have seen zero evidence of it

 

I also don’t think he handles a real rush well at all. And I don’t think he throws a good accurate slant pattern. 

 

Sucks too. Because there is a lot to like about him. And he’s a great guy and teammate. I just don’t think he can throw and there hasn’t been a guy for 30 years that has been able to win without an arm and the only one who came close, Pennington, was somewhat of an aberration. 

[Dr. Who]

3 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Our thinking is more aligned than it appears.

 

It's not too challenging to come up with a list of deficiencies in the first stage of a rebuild. Next year the Bills will have over $50M of cap space and a young franchise qb on the team. They will also have a full complement of draft picks. Sweeping out much of the old for the new takes time. 

 

I'm not bothered by the Peterman decision. Why expend so much energy on a short term player (as a starter)? He has a role on this team as a backup. His role now will not be as significant as it will be in the not too distant future. Whether the HC decided to start Peterman or go with the rookie there was some merit and logic to whatever he decided. As it stands I more than comfortable with the decision. 

I suspect Allen will end up starting fairly early unless Peterman plays better than I expect. I am okay waiting on Allen because I would prefer to see if the o-line is merely subpar or execrable. I also think Allen may benefit watching a few regular season games. He was slow getting players to the line and calling plays against the Bengals. I don't think he needs a year to rectify that, but waiting through the early part of the schedule does not seem outlandish to me.

[JohnC]

10 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

How is this different from Donahoe's plan or Gailey's plan or Coach Moron's plan?

 

If I had any confidence at all that the Bills could get worse and then actually get better in a short period of time once all the pieces are in place I might be for it.  But we've gotten worse several times over the last 20 years with promises of getting better only not to happen.  It finally happened when a smart coach decided to do what is best to win now.  We should have just stuck to that plan IMHO.

The plan that McDermott had when he took over is the same plan that he is executing now. As Kelly state last year the Bills overachieved. This is probably a four year rebuild. If you don't have patience you will be frustrated and have moments where you want to jump off the bus. There simply is no quick fix. 

 

With respect to the Donahoe and Gailey eras that was under the prior owner. This is a completely different situation that has little to do with the past. 

[reddogblitz]

4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The plan that McDermott had when he took over is the same plan that he is executing now. As Kelly state last year the Bills overachieved. This is probably a four year rebuild. If you don't have patience you will be frustrated and have moments where you want to jump off the bus. There simply is no quick fix. 

 

With respect to the Donahoe and Gailey eras that was under the prior owner. This is a completely different situation that has little to do with the past. 

 

If you're right about this, he'll be out on his bum before it's built.  A better plan is to win now.

 

"A coach that is rebuilding is rebuilding for the next coach that comes in." -- Bill Parcells

[JohnC]

2 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

I hope he proves me wrong. 

 

I have been on record here saying that certain players, such as Matt Leinart, Matt Barkley, Kellen Moore, Colt McCoy and others will never be good starters in this league, CAN never be good, because they lack the arm strength to play against starters in real games. And it’s my opinion Nate is one of those guys. It’s possible he has just enough and I have not seen it. It’s very infrequent but some guys can improve. Most can’t. 

 

IF that is the case, and I fear it is not I’m positive it is, he cannot succeed over time. Sure he can excel in preseason. Sure he can have a good game or two. But he cannot succeed as a starter without sufficient arm. 

 

Many here think he does have it. I don’t. Have seen zero evidence of it

 

I also don’t think he handles a real rush well at all. And I don’t think he throws a good accurate slant pattern. 

 

Sucks too. Because there is a lot to like about him. And he’s a great guy and teammate. I just don’t think he can throw and there hasn’t been a guy for 30 years that has been able to win without an arm and the only one who came close, Pennington, was somewhat of an aberration. 

The assessment you are making on Peterman is the same assessment that the coaching staff has of him. They know exactly what they got. Why do you think that the organization put so much effort into putting themselves in a position to draft one of the highly rated qbs in this draft class?  I just don't understand why you have such a jaundiced view of Nathan when his role as a starter will probably be for a short term. 

 

The coaching decision to start Peterman is as much about where Allen is as a player as it is about Nathan as a player. If this were a stage play you would know what the ending would be before it even started.  

[Kelly the Dog]

2 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The assessment you are making on Peterman is the same assessment that the coaching staff has of him. They know exactly what they got. Why do you think that the organization put so much effort into putting themselves in a position to draft one of the highly rated qbs in this draft class?  I just don't understand why you have such a jaundiced view of Nathan when his role as a starter will probably be for a short term. 

 

The coaching decision to start Peterman is as much about where Allen is as a player as it is about Nathan as a player. If this were a stage play you would know what the ending would be before it even started.  

I just explained why. You get last year against the Chargers and Jax. Those passes that are completions in practice and preseason are INTs in real games. 

[JohnC]

6 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

If you're right about this, he'll be out on his bum before it's built.  A better plan is to win now.

 

"A coach that is rebuilding is rebuilding for the next coach that comes in." -- Bill Parcells

I respectfully but strenuously disagree with you. The reason that McDermott was hired by Pegula is that he presented to the owner his plan to rebuild this mediocre organization. It was a comprehensive and coherent plan. Pegula knew exactly what he was getting when he hired McDermott. It was a complete remake and not a cosmetic change. That takes time. I'm confident that the owner is on board with the plan. 

4 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

I just explained why. You get last year against the Chargers and Jax. Those passes that are completions in practice and preseason are INTs in real games. 

I'm confident that the coaches know exactly who and what Nate is as a qb. They still decided to start him. 

[Kelly the Dog]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

I respectfully but strenuously disagree with you. The reason that McDermott was hired by Pegula is that he presented to the owner his plan to rebuild this mediocre organization. It was a comprehensive and coherent plan. Pegula knew exactly what he was getting when he hired McDermott. It was a complete remake and not a cosmetic change. That takes time. I'm confident that the owner is on board with the plan. 

Yep. I think he liked McD and his no nonsense act and plan so much that he hired Botterill, thinking he got the hockey version of McDermott. 

[reddogblitz]

Just now, JohnC said:

I respectfully but strenuously disagree with you. The reason that McDermott was hired by Pegula is that he presented to the owner his plan to rebuild this mediocre organization. It was a comprehensive and coherent plan. Pegula knew exactly what he was getting when he hired McDermott. It was a complete remake and not a cosmetic change. That takes time. I'm confident that the owner is on board with the plan. 

 

Were you in the interview?  Did Terry tell you what he knew when he made the hire?  this i pure conjecture on your part. 

 

Terry will be on board with this plan through one losing season and then he and Kim will get their Super Bowl invitations mailed out.

 

A person  only gets so many NFL seasons.  I'm tired of wasting them on the eternal "next year".   I thought we had finally figured it out last year.

 

I don't know about your, but I'm getting older by the minute.

 

This whole "rebuilding" is nonsense IMHO. We had a playoff team last year. We should have doubled down on it and made a serious run this year instead of being back to "next year:" mode.

 

But maybe you're right.  I hope so.  the handling of the QB position in the off season (and still today) makes me seriously doubt Beane knows what he's doing in regards to building a wining organization.

[Dr. Who]

2 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Were you in the interview?  Did Terry tell you what he knew when he made the hire?  this i pure conjecture on your part. 

 

Terry will be on board with this plan through one losing season and then he and Kim will get their Super Bowl invitations mailed out.

 

A person  only gets so many NFL seasons.  I'm tired of wasting them on the eternal "next year".   I thought we had finally figured it out last year.

 

I don't know about your, but I'm getting older by the minute.

 

This whole "rebuilding" is nonsense IMHO. We had a playoff team last year. We should have doubled down on it and made a serious run this year instead of being back to "next year:" mode.

 

But maybe you're right.  I hope so.  the handling of the QB position in the off season (and still today) makes me seriously doubt Beane knows what he's doing in regards to building a wining organization.

Lot of dead cap money to make "doubling down" feasible. We were fortunate last year. Defense created opportune turnovers, especially early on. We lacked playmakers or a franchise qb. How does one turn that into a viable strategy for competing now? Bad rebuilds mean one has to get it right before one can plan on consistently being a team that can challenge for championships.

[JohnC]

3 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Were you in the interview?  Did Terry tell you what he knew when he made the hire?  this i pure conjecture on your part.

 

Terry will be on board with this plan through one losing season and then he and Kim will get their Super Bowl invitations mailed out.

 

A person  only gets so many NFL seasons.  I'm tired of wasting them on the eternal "next year".   I thought we had finally figured it out last year.

 

I don't know about your, but I'm getting older by the minute.

 

This whole "rebuilding" is nonsense IMHO. We had a playoff team last year. We should have doubled down on it and made a serious run this year instead of being back to "next year:" mode.

 

But maybe you're right.  I hope so.  the handling of the QB position in the off season (and still today) makes me seriously doubt Beane knows what he's doing in regards to building a wining organization.

You don't have to be in an interview to exercise common sense. As soon as McDermott was hired Whaley lost his authority. That's a fact. After the draft Whaely was fired and !00% of the scouting department was terminated. The GM that was brought on board was a staffer he worked with in Carolina. Beane was a McDermott hire. Over the past couple of years this team has been stipped of many of the most expensive player drafted by the previous regime, such as Watkins and Dareus etc. McDermott was hired based on his plans to rebuild not only the roster and cap structure and organization. What do you think that has been going on over the past year? You don't have to be in a meeting to see what is happening because it is happening right in front of our eyes. This is not a quick fix and was never expected to be. I'm confident the owner is on board. 

15 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Yep. I think he liked McD and his no nonsense act and plan so much that he hired Botterill, thinking he got the hockey version of McDermott. 

Pegula has made some very damaging hires as a new owner with his respective teams. I do like the McDermott/Beane and Botterill hires. If you are going to shake it don't be squeamish. Really shake it up! And that's what the owner did! Kudos to him. 

[reddogblitz]

3 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

Lot of dead cap money to make "doubling down" feasible. We were fortunate last year. Defense created opportune turnovers, especially early on. We lacked playmakers or a franchise qb. How does one turn that into a viable strategy for competing now? Bad rebuilds mean one has to get it right before one can plan on consistently being a team that can challenge for championships.

 

We could have drafted Ridley.  We could have done a lot of things.Hiring Daboll like we did would have helped down the doubled down offense as well.

 

Other teams seem to be able to build on good team without having these big salary cap problems.  Denver is adding high dollar people every year, yet they seem to be competitive most years or example.  They signed Keenum this year and they are carrying that huge Von Miller salary.  The Raiders added a HUGE contract right at the end of camp.  Can't imagine they just happened to have a big pile of cap money laying around.

 

Not buying this salary cap thing either.

[Dr. Who]

1 minute ago, reddogblitz said:

 

We could have drafted Ridley.  We could have done a lot of things.Hiring Daboll like we did would have helped down the doubled down offense as well.

 

Other teams seem to be able to build on good team without having these big salary cap problems.  Denver is adding high dollar people every year, yet they seem to be competitive most years or example.  They signed Keenum this year and they are carrying that huge Von Miller salary.  The Raiders added a HUGE contract right at the end of camp.  Can't imagine they just happened to have a big pile of cap money laying around.

 

Not buying this salary cap thing either.

So you would have preferred Ridley to Edmunds? I suspect McDermott thinks Edmunds can develop into the qb of the defense. It's an important piece and more likely to have long-term benefits than a good wr. I'm not convinced Denver or the Raiders are set up for success. Probably our criteria and temperaments differ too much for agreement. I see a team that was fortunate and overacheiving. They needed to rebuild and I think they are doing it right.

[reddogblitz]

5 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You don't have to be in an interview to exercise common sense. As soon as McDermott was hired Whaley lost his authority. That's a fact. After the draft Whaely was fired and !00% of the scouting department was terminated. The GM that was brought on board was a staffer he worked with in Carolina. Beane was a McDermott hire. Over the past couple of years this team has been stipped of many of the most expensive player drafted by the previous regime, such as Watkins and Dareus etc. McDermott was hired based on his plans to rebuild not only the roster and cap structure and organization. What do you think that has been going on over the past year? You don't have to be in a meeting to see what is happening because it is happening right in front of our eyes. This is not a quick fix and was never expected to be. I'm confident the owner is on board.  

 

Conjecture in other words.

 

I don't doubt they have a plan.  Of course they do.  The plan is win and rebuild.  I'm just a little nervous this year they went too heavy on the rebuild.  Just hoping we don't drop of the win side.

 

I'm just not a fan of get rid of good guys in hopes of someday getting good guys.  It's a treadmill approach.  I'm more of a bird in hand guy.  We got some good guys, let's add to it.  May have to make a trade here or there and re structure contracts etc. but I think it can be done.  Other teams sure seam to be able to.  Am having a hard time believing Doug Whaley messed it up so bad over 3 years that all we can do it dump  a lot of guys ( some on first contracts ) and re load.

 

Hopefully it all works out somehow.

 

 

[Billsguy]

On 9/3/2018 at 8:50 AM, NewEra said:

He’s not afraid to throw the ball.  I’ll give him that.  There will be some terrible moments, I’m sure.

I hope he survives week 1.

 

The offensive line might get him killed against the Ravens. He looks like a sacrificial lamb being led to slaughter. I hope, for his sake, I'm wrong.

[Kelly the Dog]

Did Nathan Peterman ever even make “The World’s Greatest Jewish Sports Heroes” pamphlet?

[NewEra]

3 minutes ago, Billsguy said:

I hope he survives week 1.

 

The offensive line might get him killed against the Ravens. He looks like a sacrificial lamb being led to slaughter. I hope, for his sake, I'm wrong.

Yeah I hope he makes it through week 3 and we have a 1-2 record (3-0 would be better but, yeah).  Then start Allen for the trip to Lambeau.  That would get me super pumped up for that road trip 

[reddogblitz]

28 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

So you would have preferred Ridley to Edmunds? I suspect McDermott thinks Edmunds can develop into the qb of the defense. It's an important piece and more likely to have long-term benefits than a good wr. I'm not convinced Denver or the Raiders are set up for success. Probably our criteria and temperaments differ too much for agreement. I see a team that was fortunate and overacheiving. They needed to rebuild and I think they are doing it right.

 

If you're gonna go all in on trading up to take THE GUY, you should also go heavy on getting him some help on offense.  A top notch WR in round 1 for example.  So yeah.  If not then, get some help otherwise.  Beefing up RB should help.  I think the plan is iffy there.  Get Your QB and then go heavy on D?  If you're going all in on QB, you gotta go all in on offense too if you can.

 

We'll see.  Hopefully it works.

Edited September 4, 2018 by reddogblitz

[Fadingpain]

21 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

If you're gonna go all in on trading up to take THE GUY, you should also go heavy on getting him some help on offense.  A top notch WR in round 1 for example.  So yeah.  If not then, get some help otherwise.  Beefing up RB should help.  I think the plan is iffy there.  Get Your QB and then go heavy on D?  If you're going all in on QB, you gotta go all in on offense too if you can.

 

We'll see.  Hopefully it works.

I would expect next offseason and draft to be heavily offense-oriented.

 

If it isn't, something strange will be afoot.

 

 

 

 

[JohnC]

58 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Conjecture in other words.

 

I don't doubt they have a plan.  Of course they do.  The plan is win and rebuild.  I'm just a little nervous this year they went too heavy on the rebuild.  Just hoping we don't drop of the win side.

 

I'm just not a fan of get rid of good guys in hopes of someday getting good guys.  It's a treadmill approach.  I'm more of a bird in hand guy.  We got some good guys, let's add to it.  May have to make a trade here or there and re structure contracts etc. but I think it can be done.  Other teams sure seam to be able to.  Am having a hard time believing Doug Whaley messed it up so bad over 3 years that all we can do it dump  a lot of guys ( some on first contracts ) and re load.

 

Hopefully it all works out somehow.

 

 

It's unlikely that the Bills will be matching their win total from last year. If you don't expect it you won't be disappointed. 

[Kelly the Dog]

Food for thought. 

 

 

[reddogblitz]

29 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Food for thought. 

 

 

 

he had small hands though.

31 minutes ago, JohnC said:

It's unlikely that the Bills will be matching their win total from last year. If you don't expect it you won't be disappointed. 

 

accept Defeat before it happens, if it happens ???

 

REALLY ???

 

NEVER

[JohnC]

4 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

he had small hands though.

 

accept Defeat before it happens, if it happens ???

 

REALLY ???

 

NEVER

When realism is competing with delusion realism usually wins out. 

[reddogblitz]

3 minutes ago, JohnC said:

When realism is competing with delusion realism usually wins out. 

 

Be patient Grasshpopper. ?

Edited September 5, 2018 by reddogblitz

[Dr.Sack]

5 hours ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

..injury prone?...if he's smart and slides while chasing the extra yard, he'll be fine......feet first lad like Lou Brock.......he didn't do too bad slidin'.....

 

Concussions are a bad omen. He got absolutely clocked and knocked out of the Colts game in the snow. Remember Brady in 2001 got hammered by Nate Clements his helmet bounced off the turf on a cold snowless December day? So Brady survived a hit on a much harder surface that Peterman could not.   

 

Edited September 5, 2018 by Dr.Sack

[RFL]

On 9/3/2018 at 12:05 PM, THE SLAMMER said:

During the draft Petermen arm was compared to Kirk Cousins who just signed a Huge deal.

 

 

He just needs to eliminate those sideline floaters.

[Boca BIlls]

On 9/3/2018 at 11:28 AM, WhoTom said:

 

I can live with another Fitz while Josh learns the ropes.

 

 

 

So bad draft pick and no playoffs?

[BillsFan130]

On 9/3/2018 at 12:14 PM, Gugny said:

 

He acknowledges wide receivers and he is decisive.

 

I don't anticipate yelling, "throw the !@#$ing ball!!!!!!!!!!!!!" 20 times/game anymore, like I have the past three years.

Lol once again I ask. How is he an upgrade over tyrod? Even as mediocre as tyrod is

Edited September 9, 2018 by billsfan11

[billsfanmiami(oh)]

None, All

[Gugny]

37 minutes ago, billsfan11 said:

Lol once again I ask. How is he an upgrade over tyrod? Even as mediocre as tyrod is

 

They both suck.  I want a better QB.

[BillsFan130]

6 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

They both suck.  I want a better QB.

Lol agreed

[jayg]

Helluva con man convincing this staff he's an NFL starting QB. I'm laughing it hurts so much....

[Bing Bong]

On 9/4/2018 at 11:02 AM, ShadyBillsFan said:

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.  

I sincerely think Tuel is far better than Peterman. Tuel ain't good but he's probably sitting around somewhere wondering how Peterman is getting every chance and is really confused about how less crappy he would be if he just jumped on the roster. 

 

I bet LOT of undrafted college quarterbacks are wondering how on Earth Peterman got so favored by somebody.

[Formerly Allan in MD]

On 9/3/2018 at 11:22 AM, WMDman said:

Hes basically Fitz 

Fitz doesn't melt.  It may simply be experience but the way Peterman plays now, he won't get much (hopefully).

[billsfan89]

Dude he sucks get over it, Tyrod looks like TyGod compared to Peterman. 

[Fadingpain]

Read through the comments in this thread starting with the very first post.

 

Pretty funny and revealing, now that we know Nate Peterman is an unabashed failure on a historic level and basically done in the league forever.

 

 

[transplantbillsfan]

2 hours ago, Fadingpain said:

Read through the comments in this thread starting with the very first post.

 

Pretty funny and revealing, now that we know Nate Peterman is an unabashed failure on a historic level and basically done in the league forever.

 

 

 

Funny.

 

Revealing.

 

Frightening.

 

I haven't understood the infatuation with Peterman for over a year now. I find it pretty funny that most of those folks are in hiding right now.

 

It's less painful if you just own being wrong, folks. Take it from a guy who's been there