John Wawrow on the QB situation

[YoloinOhio]

Interesting thread 

 

 

[John from Riverside]

Interesting news about Bridgewater

[YoloinOhio]

3 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Interesting news about Bridgewater

I had heard that teams were very apprehensive about him but didn’t know that part. Must be why jets paid him so little. 

[Kevin1778]

The McCarron hairline fractured collarbone didn't help. An injury like that puts a team in a tough spot. Behind this line he likely would have broken it again.

[Kevin1778]

1 minute ago, ScottLaw said:

There were PLENTY of people very skeptical of going with Peterman and Allen as your two QBs going into the season. 

 

Maybe not so much from the national media, but that's not a surprise they couldn't care less about the Bills. 

 

Agreed, but apparently it wasn't easy to get anyone to play here. Look at that line and the receivers. Two quarterbacks have gone down in 3 weeks. Who would come play here if there was any other option.

[Mr. WEO]

This is easy:

 

How about "yeah, outbid Elway for Keenum".

 

or:

 

"was it wise to get rid of TT when your plan was to sit Allen behind a starting QB?"

 

Or:

 

"Kaepernick too much for Mr. Pegula to handle?"

 

 

What's the issue here?  That the press can't ask a question unless they have a followup?  I mean who hasn't asked about Bridgewater, TT, AJM already in this context?

Edited November 1, 2018 by Mr. WEO

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

Never was a reason to trade Mccarron. That pick will become a nobody and we will have suffered through an entire year of wasted offense and a Peterman yo-yo because of it. Mccarron would have been the starter after week 1 and everything would have fallen into place. Peterman would have probably been cut after Baltimore. Never would have lost us the Houston game. Maybe Allen never gets hurt. 

 

If the Bills HAD to trade one of the guys, they should have waited until after the regular season started and took advantage of a teams injury. Probably could have gotten more from SF if we waited. Also might have been able to get Cleveland interested. We rushed for no reason. Just constantly making ridiculous personnel decisions.

[BringBackOrton]

5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

This is easy:

 

How about "yeah, outbid Elway for Keenum".

 

or:

 

"was it wise to get rid of TT when your plan was to sit Allen behind a starting QB?"

 

Or:

 

"Kaepernick too much for Mr. Pegula to handle?"

 

 

What's the issue here?  That the press can't ask a question unless they have a followup?  I mean who hasn't asked about Bridgewater, TT, AJM already in this context?

I think Wawrow is saying the press isn't giving the Bills the chance to defend their decision making process by refusing to actually ask them the question.

 

It's not so much a commentary on the story, but the press' reaction.

[Kevin1778]

6 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

This is easy:

 

"was it wise to get rid of TT when your plan was to sit Allen behind a starting QB?"

 

 

Good question.

Edited November 1, 2018 by Kevin1778

[Scott7975]

People keep bringing up Kaepernick, but never stop to think that the dude doesn't really want to play unless he is played franchise starting QB money.  He turned down an offer from Denver and then sued the league for collusion.  The guy is a nut case.

[Big Turk]

10 minutes ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

Never was a reason to trade Mccarron. That pick will become a nobody and we will have suffered through an entire year of wasted offense and a Peterman yo-yo because of it. Mccarron would have been the starter after week 1 and everything would have fallen into place. Peterman would have probably been cut after Baltimore. Never would have lost us the Houston game. Maybe Allen never gets hurt. 

 

If the Bills HAD to trade one of the guys, they should have waited until after the regular season started and took advantage of a teams injury. Probably could have gotten more from SF if we waited. Also might have been able to get Cleveland interested. We rushed for no reason. Just constantly making ridiculous personnel decisions.

 

You sure about that? Matt Milano was a 5th round pick and he is trending towards a pro bowl caliber player.

[Mr. WEO]

12 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

I think Wawrow is saying the press isn't giving the Bills the chance to defend their decision making process by refusing to actually ask them the question.

 

It's not so much a commentary on the story, but the press' reaction.

 

 

Then that's the nuttiest criticism if the press ever.  The team can't defend their obvious bungling of this situation....unless they asked specific questions about "this guy or that guy"?

 

 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

41 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Interesting news about Bridgewater

A twitter off of a bunch of people who have no idea what the real truth is.  

Wawrow should know more than anonof those others.  

[HappyDays]

18 minutes ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

Never was a reason to trade Mccarron. That pick will become a nobody

 

Are we sure? Matt Milano and Taron Johnson were taken in the range of the pick we'll end up with. McCarron offered us at best a bridge starter in a season where we have no chance at making the Super Bowl. I'll take a shot at a player that contributes for a few years, even if it's unlikely, over that.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

46 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

Interesting thread 

The problem for me is I don’t have the attention span to follow twitter arguments 

 

[Mikie2times]

8 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Are we sure? Matt Milano and Taron Johnson were taken in the range of the pick we'll end up with. McCarron offered us at best a bridge starter in a season where we have no chance at making the Super Bowl. I'll take a shot at a player that contributes for a few years, even if it's unlikely, over that.

Could be another nobody like Kyle Williams

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

8 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Are we sure? Matt Milano and Taron Johnson were taken in the range of the pick we'll end up with. McCarron offered us at best a bridge starter in a season where we have no chance at making the Super Bowl. I'll take a shot at a player that contributes for a few years, even if it's unlikely, over that.

I see what you're saying but does sheltering Allen help his development? I'm not sure, but if you think it does then you keep McCarron in case Peterman petermans. Allen's development is the most important thing.

 

 

[EmotionallyUnstable]

***** excuses. Mishandling the most important position in football id inexcusable. So yes, you roll the dice on Bridgewater. If you trade AJ, you bring in someone else. Going into the season without a veteran QB was obvious to some. I give this regime no pass for this. They drafted both the guys in the QB room and if neither of them are serviceable, that's on them. 

[mjt328]

AJ McCarron was dealing with a fractured collarbone. 

 

And he was outplayed by Nathan Peterman during both training camp and the preseason. 

 

And at the time, many Bills fans were calling for him to get cut. 

 

And most in the media felt Beane got a steal landing a 5th Round Pick. 

[CommonCents]

I know this might be mind blowing stuff but if they were able to read the Peterman situation correctly they could have signed a guy like Anderson in the offseason and had him ready to go. Not that he is a savior but I’m sure he would have looked better the first 4-6 weeks if sitting Allen was the plan. 

[Kirby Jackson]

58 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

There were PLENTY of people very skeptical of going with Peterman and Allen as your two QBs going into the season. 

 

Maybe not so much from the national media, but that's not a surprise they couldn't care less about the Bills. 

 

51 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

This is easy:

 

How about "yeah, outbid Elway for Keenum".

 

or:

 

"was it wise to get rid of TT when your plan was to sit Allen behind a starting QB?"

 

Or:

 

"Kaepernick too much for Mr. Pegula to handle?"

 

 

What's the issue here?  That the press can't ask a question unless they have a followup?  I mean who hasn't asked about Bridgewater, TT, AJM already in this context?

I agree with this. The whole situation got to this point because they believed Peterman was a reasonable option to start 6 weeks or so. He made it one half. Their miss on Nate is what put them where they are. If they would have brought in a viable option or kept McCarron we wouldn’t be here. Allen was forced in earlier than they wanted and Nate was so bad they had to pull Anderson off the golf course. He is now concussed so it is back to the worst QB ever with Matt Barkley behind him. It’s a comedy of errors.

[Mr. WEO]

22 minutes ago, Chemical said:

I see what you're saying but does sheltering Allen help his development? I'm not sure, but if you think it does then you keep McCarron in case Peterman petermans. Allen's development is the most important thing.

 

 

 

 

Like McD, it hasn't occurred to you that the Bills were allowed by the NFL to NOT have as their QB choices only Nate Peterman or AJM to "backup" Allen.

 

Perhaps JW should simply ask:  

 

"can you describe for us in detail the entire process of analysis that led to your decision-making regarding the QB roster that has resulted in the possibility that Matt Barkley may be behind Center in Week 9 of the 2018 Bills season."

 

Would McD need non-stop prompts from the press to be able to give his answer?  

 

Edited November 2, 2018 by Mr. WEO

[The Frankish Reich]

1 hour ago, Kevin1778 said:

The McCarron hairline fractured collarbone didn't help. An injury like that puts a team in a tough spot. Behind this line he likely would have broken it again.

I'll grant you that. But as far as the line being awful: in preseason, it was awful. This was to be expected!  They'd lost Incognito and Wood, and depending on how you look at it, Glenn too. It takes some time for the new line to gel. Every coach should understand this as it's something that happens with a bunch of teams every season. As the real season got going, the line (in my amateur assessment) is just ordinary "not good." It's not the colossal mess it seemed to be in August. So the "he'll get killed playing behind this line" isn't really an excuse, particularly when it comes to the options they faced when dumping McCarron: (1) put your prize possession first-rounder behind that line; (2) put Nathan Peterman behind that line. 

[Kirby Jackson]

15 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Like McD, it hasn't occurred to you that the Bills were allowed by the NFL to NOT have as their QB choices only Nate Peterman or AJM to "backup" Allen.

 

Perhaps JW should simply ask:  

 

"can you describe for us in detail the entire process of analysis that led to your decision-making regarding the QB roster that has resulted in the possibility that Matt Barkley may be behind Center in Week 9 of the 2018 Bills season."

 

Would McD need non-stop prompts from the press to be able to give his answer?  

 

He will have to look at the tape

[Mr. WEO]

2 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

He will have to look at the tape

 

Or the press apparently will have to look at it for him, then they can ask him what he thinks they think he saw on the tape.

[SinceThe70s]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Then that's the nuttiest criticism if the press ever.  The team can't defend their obvious bungling of this situation....unless they asked specific questions about "this guy or that guy"?

 

 

 

I have no idea how you came to the conclusion highlighted above. Wawrow's original criticism was of the press bashing the Bills mishandling the QB situation and barely (one question) challenging them on it. Why would the team defend the situation ("obvious bungling" or not) unless they were questioned? 

[Formerly Allan in MD]

1 hour ago, Scott7975 said:

People keep bringing up Kaepernick, but never stop to think that the dude doesn't really want to play unless he is played franchise starting QB money.  He turned down an offer from Denver and then sued the league for collusion.  The guy is a nut case.

He's also a celebrity and likely loves it.  He's certainly making money off of it despite the fact he's not playing.

[Mr. WEO]

3 minutes ago, SinceThe70s said:

 

I have no idea how you came to the conclusion highlighted above. Wawrow's original criticism was of the press bashing the Bills mishandling the QB situation and barely (one question) challenging them on it. Why would the team defend the situation ("obvious bungling" or not) unless they were questioned? 

 

No idea??  Read the tweet.

 

"All that said, of all this mishandled the QB situation talk, still awaiting a realistic outline of how it should’ve been handled.

Keep McCarron (over a fifth-round pick)?
Sign Keenum (and outbid Broncos)?
Sign Bridgewater (and bet on him being healthy)?"

 

 

 

He's clearly saying the onus is on the press to suggest how it SHOULD have been handled--even to broach the subject.  As opposed to, you know, just asking what happened to get the team to this point.

[Reed83HOF]

34 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

He will have to look at the tape

 

[BADOLBILZ]

1 hour ago, matter2003 said:

 

You sure about that? Matt Milano was a 5th round pick and he is trending towards a pro bowl caliber player.

 

 

You want an extra fifth round pick?    Trade back a couple spots in round 2.    The "draft capital" value of that pick is LOW.  

 

And yes........the odds are that the player will not be very impactful compared to even a mediocre QB.

 

Guys like Taron Johnson and Milano are playing well in this system but it's pretty common for us to have slot CB's and LB's that fans think are playing great(NRC and Preston Brown under Schwartz, for example) but aren't considered scheme versatile enough if there is a regime change.    So in effect.........specialists until proven otherwise.  

[SinceThe70s]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

No idea??  Read the tweet.

 

"All that said, of all this mishandled the QB situation talk, still awaiting a realistic outline of how it should’ve been handled.

Keep McCarron (over a fifth-round pick)?
Sign Keenum (and outbid Broncos)?
Sign Bridgewater (and bet on him being healthy)?"

 

 

 

He's clearly saying the onus is on the press to suggest how it SHOULD have been handled--even to broach the subject.  As opposed to, you know, just asking what happened to get the team to this point.

 

It's a fair point that his second tweet illustrates that he went past the intent of his original tweet that the press should ask questions about the handling of the QB situation if they were gonna bash it. But IMO the original intent was expecting the press to:

 

"you know, just asking what happened to get the team to this point." 

 

instead of just bashing.

[Mr. WEO]

4 minutes ago, SinceThe70s said:

 

It's a fair point that his second tweet illustrates that he went past the intent of his original tweet that the press should ask questions about the handling of the QB situation if they were gonna bash it. But IMO the original intent was expecting the press to:

 

"you know, just asking what happened to get the team to this point." 

 

instead of just bashing.

 

He was asked about Barkley.

 

He was also asked about Kaepernick........

[BADOLBILZ]

45 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

He will have to look at the tape

 

 

Precisely............McD doesn't give answers to tough questions.

 

He gives two answers........."TRUSSSSST Me" or "I have to look at the tape".

 

The press knows this.

 

And they know that Bills ownership has leverage over the local media like they never have before...........so it takes some degree of courage to put the coach on the spot when you KNOW he's not going to answer.

 

Perhaps this is just a call to action by JW for someone to ask the questions Sully did.

[SinceThe70s]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

He was asked about Barkley.

 

He was also asked about Kaepernick........

 

Well now you're attacking the veracity of Wawrow's original claim. Different argument, curious why you didn't start there.

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, SinceThe70s said:

 

Well now you're attacking the veracity of Wawrow's original claim. Different argument, curious why you didn't start there.

 

Because I thought that his initial premise was strange.  You don't need to consider ever possible answer (and prompt the responder with all the possibilities?) in order to ask the obvious question on everyone's mind.  You don't have to have "a follow up" in order for the HC to answer this question.  He should be able to simply answer it.  He knows the answer. These were all his decisions.  He knows the list of alternatives that everyone is thinking of,  so he doesn't have to be specifically asked about each one.  That's absurd.

[Nihilarian]

This whole thing is such a mess it reminds me of the year Peyton Manning was injured and what crapfest QBs they signed to fill in, Curtis Painter, Dan Orlovsky, Kerry Collins. Naturally they went 2-14 and drafted Luck with the first overall pick.

 

To those that don't know the entire story it might look like the team is attempting to tank but that's not what happened. 

 

This team had some QBs I their sights from the start and the thinking was that Peterman was going to hold down the fort until Josh Allen was ready. So somebody clearly screwed up with that thinking. This FO wasn't going to get into a bidding war over a QB that they might not want starting the entire season. I can see why they didn't want Bradford, Bridgewater, Keenum.

 

From what Steve Tasker had stated on his talk show was that this FO was looking at Derek Anderson even before they talked with AJ McCarron. They wanted Anderson to come in and be a mentor for Allen like he was for Cam Newton. This was also the reason they didn't bring in another veteran QB because they were waiting to hear what Anderson wanted to do. He was a priority for this FO because he had no problem not starting and was agreeable to mentor Allen.

 

AJ McCarron let be known after he was in Buffalo that he wanted to start and wasn't amenable to mentoring Allen and thus the reason he was traded.

 

Although, we fans gotta remember that Peterman looked darn good in preseason as his lone interception was a tipped pass off the finger tips of Ivory. He had a completion percentage of 80.5% which is insane. He was very decisive with very quick throws and the offensive line didn't look so bad with him behind center. Peterman had also thrown for the fourth best yards with 431. 

 

I can see solid reasons as to why this FO/coaching staff did what they did with the QB situation and they must think that there is still hope for Peterman or he would be long gone.

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, Nihilarian said:

This whole thing is such a mess it reminds me of the year Peyton Manning was injured and what crapfest QBs they signed to fill in, Curtis Painter, Dan Orlovsky, Kerry Collins. Naturally they went 2-14 and drafted Luck with the first overall pick.

 

 

Crapfest?? That a masterstroke by Polian that he never got credit for (he got fired instead)

 

He knew Manning was in questionable shape to play again and he knew Luck was right there.  So he guaranteed the outcome by rooting out those QBs.

[Coach Tuesday]

“No way to prevent this” - says only franchise where this regularly happens.

[CommonCents]

3 minutes ago, Nihilarian said:

This whole thing is such a mess it reminds me of the year Peyton Manning was injured and what crapfest QBs they signed to fill in, Curtis Painter, Dan Orlovsky, Kerry Collins. Naturally they went 2-14 and drafted Luck with the first overall pick.

 

To those that don't know the entire story it might look like the team is attempting to tank but that's not what happened. 

 

This team had some QBs I their sights from the start and the thinking was that Peterman was going to hold down the fort until Josh Allen was ready. So somebody clearly screwed up with that thinking. This FO wasn't going to get into a bidding war over a QB that they might not want starting the entire season. I can see why they didn't want Bradford, Bridgewater, Keenum.

 

From what Steve Tasker had stated on his talk show was that this FO was looking at Derek Anderson even before they talked with AJ McCarron. They wanted Anderson to come in and be a mentor for Allen like he was for Cam Newton. This was also the reason they didn't bring in another veteran QB because they were waiting to hear what Anderson wanted to do. He was a priority for this FO because he had no problem not starting and was agreeable to mentor Allen.

 

AJ McCarron let be known after he was in Buffalo that he wanted to start and wasn't amenable to mentoring Allen and thus the reason he was traded.

 

Although, we fans gotta remember that Peterman looked darn good in preseason as his lone interception was a tipped pass off the finger tips of Ivory. He had a completion percentage of 80.5% which is insane. He was very decisive with very quick throws and the offensive line didn't look so bad with him behind center. Peterman had also thrown for the fourth best yards with 431. 

 

I can see solid reasons as to why this FO/coaching staff did what they did with the QB situation and they must think that there is still hope for Peterman or he would be long gone.

You just drew the dividing line amongst the fans, some will twist and turn so they can justify the handling of Peterman, while others like myself won’t. I took one look at Peterman and the first thing that came to my mind was that this kid needs a pitching mound if he wants to throw outside the hashes. 

 

I expect that professionals like Beane and McD should be making better evaluations and in doing so that would have prevented some of this mess. It’s not a lot to ask. 

[Haze_21]

Peterman should have been released last year and anyone who bought him in preseason doesnt pay attention to how little preseason means. McCarron would have been the simple solution, he may not have been great in preseason but he has proven to be adequate in actual game action against nfl defenses.

 

Your qb situation is bungled the moment you start peterman, he should not be on an nfl roster.