Buddo Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 Just now, Johnny Hammersticks said: Not sure if you paid attention in the preseason, but McCarron was flat out beat by Nate Peterman. He sucked. I don’t know why so many people are now bashing Beane for shipping off AJM...as if he would have faired any better yesterday. I'm not sure you read what I wrote. I realise Peterman won the competition, but I'm also aware that there wasn't any absolute need to get rid of McCarron, who has played successfully in the NFL, albeit on a small sample size. If they decided they wanted shot of McCarron, why didn't they pick up someone like Moore, to cover the situation we now have, where Allen is forced to start, because Peterman is useless when the bullets fly. This is the NFL, plan 'A' often doesn't work, you need to try and cover worst case scenarios - especially when you can do that with little difficulty. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Johnny Hammersticks said: Yes, the plan is to develop Josh Allen. That’s what you have to do if you take a QB top 10. Tyrod Taylor would have cost way too much to keep around as a back up. I honestly think they thought they had more in McCarron. They obviously were wrong. It happens. It’s the Josh Allen show now. i think they were wrong that they didn't think they had more with McCarron. Edited September 10, 2018 by reddogblitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Finkel Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 27 minutes ago, BobChalmers said: I thought it was a fair point until I remembered they got the 65th pick in the draft for Tyrod. That was a steal. Well seriously, who doesn't start the number one overall pick? I was responding to someone who thought I was talking about Allen. Some Cleveland fans are already bashing Tyrod and want Mayfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hammersticks Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 10 minutes ago, Buddo said: I'm not sure you read what I wrote. I realise Peterman won the competition, but I'm also aware that there wasn't any absolute need to get rid of McCarron, who has played successfully in the NFL, albeit on a small sample size. If they decided they wanted shot of McCarron, why didn't they pick up someone like Moore, to cover the situation we now have, where Allen is forced to start, because Peterman is useless when the bullets fly. This is the NFL, plan 'A' often doesn't work, you need to try and cover worst case scenarios - especially when you can do that with little difficulty. Again, JMO, but I think they recognized that Allen was head and shoulders above both McCarron and Peterman talent wise and they wanted him to start sooner than later anyway. They were able to recoup a 5th for McCarron, and they went for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 2 hours ago, Another Fan said: I’m hoping any discussions on this are for not brining Taylor back here. Had no problem with the move even today. I wonder though if there was a solid plan in place going forward after replacing him. The whole acquiring and then trading AJ struck me as just being very wishy washy and didn’t make sense. Not against Allen but I often wonder if that was a last second decision contrary to what OBD says. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hammersticks Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 13 minutes ago, reddogblitz said: i think they were wrong that they didn't think they had more with McCarron. I’m sorry....but, what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Domdab99 Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 Pretty sure the plan was for AJ and Peterman not to suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, Johnny Hammersticks said: I’m sorry....but, what? You said they didn't have more with McCarron so they cut him. I think they were wrong in thinking that. We have not see the last of AJ in this league. You know what? Yesterday the 2 scrubs that weren't good enough for us that started for other teams were light years ahead of where our 2 young franchise QBs are. Maybe our problem isn't all QB, but in what we put around them? And how we coach them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Another Fan Posted September 10, 2018 Author Share Posted September 10, 2018 If the brass here was smart they would have had serious QB discussions after last year when Peterman couldn’t cut it against the Chargers. Its what I was getting at, I just don’t feel there was a solid QB plan in place after Tyrod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ngbills Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 My house burned down and I had no insurance. But I never planned on my house burning down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nedboy7 Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: You know, that's a funny thing, that "Taylor would cost too much" idea. Somehow Josh McCown and his $10M contract don't cost the Jets too much as a backup/insurance plan for Sam Darnold. Sam Bradford and his 1 eyar, $20M contract don't cost the Cardinals too much as an insurance plan for Rosen not being ready to start. Tyrod Taylor and his $16M contract don't cost the Browns too much as an insurance plan for Mayfield not being ready to start. But taking a $7.6M dead cap hit to ship Taylor out of town, then $4M dead cap to sign and trade for McCarron, a guy who has never started, leaving the Bills with choices at QB of the least ready/biggest project of the top draftees or Nate Peterman somehow seems like a good plan, and taking a flyer on Corey Coleman and his $3.6M guaranteed salary is OK. What if the Bills just kept Taylor as a guy who could start while they were developing Allen, and paid the few million more to, you know, have a capable player instead of no players and $15.2M of dead money on the books for Taylor, McCarron, and Coleman? Yes, developing the QB is what you have to do when you take a QB in the top-10, but you don't have to do it the way the Bills are doing it - with no choices in the race but a dark-horse 5th round guy, a career backup, and your precious needs-development high pick. Thank you for some sanity. 1 hour ago, Johnny Hammersticks said: Hindsight is 20/20. Again, I suspect when they acquired McCarron they thought they were getting much more of a bridge QB. Sometimes you gamble and lose. Sometimes you just flat out make a bad decision. And it’s good to look back analyze and learn from it. Edited September 10, 2018 by nedboy7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 McCaron might not have been a bad option to hang on to after he had a chance to get back into playing after the preseason injury, but Beane will trade anything if you dangle a draft pick in front of him..... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 1 hour ago, BobChalmers said: - They also got the first pick in the 3rd round for Taylor - which (I believe?) they used to get Edmunds (the best player on the team yesterday). That was amazing value for a guy who won't be a starting QB in the league ever again once the Browns start Mayfield. - They got McCarron as a FA and turned him in to another 5th round pick. Not apples to apples at all - can't just compare salaries. I wasn't "just comparing salaries". In another post, someone brought up that it "cost too much" to keep TT as a potential backup. The goal of Monopoly is to accumulate stuff - properties, buildings, draft picks, cap space. The goal of NFL football is to win games. When it comes to being able to field a competitive team - not necessarily a winning team, but a team where everyone is playing hard and feels as though they have a shot - QB is by far the most important position. So I really don't understand the logic of the argument about getting a 3rd round pick or a 5th round pick. What does a 3rd round pick or a 5th round pick matter, if you put your team in the position of not having a functional QB for a season - of having a poor choice between a raw, not-ready rookie or a 5th round guy who apparently just can't play? 17 minutes ago, apuszczalowski said: McCaron might not have been a bad option to hang on to after he had a chance to get back into playing after the preseason injury, but Beane will trade anything if you dangle a draft pick in front of him..... I'm starting to believe this may be true. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuckyBoys Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 I think McDermott greatly overestimated Peterman's ability . I agree it was time to move on from Taylor though. Sometimes life has a funny way of working out and maybe this is best for the Bills long term. Long as Allen doesn't get hurt he'll gain experience and so what if we only win 3-5 games. Its not a playoff roster anyways. Plus most teams are one snap from being in qb hell Last night the packers were staring at 16 games of Kizer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SinceThe70s Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 1 hour ago, Batman1876 said: I just went over to the browns board, their Tyrod conversation there sounds very familiar. Half think he stinks and Mayfield should start and half blame the system and other players around him. Even with Tyrod we lose yesterday if Browns fans are fed up after 1 game and a tie how bad would things be here after 3 years and a loss. I don't understand why Browns fans would be upset today. At 0-0-1 they are off to their best start since 2004. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 Even with Taylor they may have lost yesterday, but at least today we arent talking about how Allen now has to start because theres no way they could bring out Peterman again after another historically bad start. If the intent was to keep Allen off the field until he can learn the game better at the pro level, Taylor at least gives them a chance to stay in games. Yes everyone knows he isnt going to win it for them and he has faults/limitations, but he doesn't force them to put Allen in earlier then expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuckyBoys Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 11 minutes ago, apuszczalowski said: Even with Taylor they may have lost yesterday, but at least today we arent talking about how Allen now has to start because theres no way they could bring out Peterman again after another historically bad start. If the intent was to keep Allen off the field until he can learn the game better at the pro level, Taylor at least gives them a chance to stay in games. Yes everyone knows he isnt going to win it for them and he has faults/limitations, but he doesn't force them to put Allen in earlier then expected. but would the outcome been much different yesterday? Honestly losing 30-10 yesterday with Taylor in, whats the difference? Anyone with their eyes open knows what Taylor is. If you your defense plays lights out/wins the turnover battle and you have a running game he gives you a chance to win. Steelers coughed up the football 6 times yesterday and taylor still coudn't get a W Process that for a minute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthNYfan Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 2 hours ago, billsfan11 said: McCarron already has proved way more than Peterman even in such a small sample size . 2 and 1 in 3 starts with over a 90 rating with 6 TDS and 2 picks. I will not even dig out the Peterman stats as they are literally as bad as you get in the history in the NFL. While Mccaron is mediocre at best, the two aren’t comparable. McDermott completely butchered the situation by keeping Peterman over Mccaron. He’s now been burnt twice by his boy, Nate. I meant for QB. Teams don’t game plan against QBs in pre season Mccarron was throwing to the best receiving corps in the league, a high powered offense including a stud rb at the time and a great line. Most QBs would look that good in that group. If teams don't game plan for QBs, please explain to me why mccarron looked like dogsh*t in the preseason? That's right, because he sucks too. Peterman just sucked less in the preseason and practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 (edited) A solid plan? Yes. And it involves waiting to see what happens with the guys they kept, observing the consequences after far more than one game, and acting accordingly. A solid plan that would make us look like a good offense this year? Nope. That was always a fairly low possibility. And that's OK. Football personnel plans should be long-term. If we'd wanted to look as good as possible this year we should've kept Tyrod. Or brought in Alex Smith or Kirk Cousins. Edited September 10, 2018 by Thurman#1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmart128 Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 McCarron was supposed to be much better than he was. Unfortunately he was a major disappointment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts