John Wawrow on the QB situation

[BillsFan4]

1 hour ago, Commonsense said:

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. 

They did try to sign him in the offseason. Steve Tasker said they had been trying to sign Anderson since the spring. It took him that long to agree. 

 

They also tried to sign Josh McCown, Sam Bradford and showed interest in signing Case Keenum, too. Each chose to sign elsewhere. 

[SinceThe70s]

9 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

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.

 

The original seemed as simple as why are reporters bashing the QB handling without asking about the QB handling. 

 

Whatevs, doesn't change the mess we're in at QB.

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, SinceThe70s said:

 

The original seemed as simple as why are reporters bashing the QB handling without asking about the QB handling. 

 

Whatevs, doesn't change the mess we're in at QB.

 

 

They were asking

[Nihilarian]

11 minutes ago, Commonsense said:

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. 

Most head coaches like McD that are from a defensive background have no clue about the offense and usually leave those decisions to the offensive coaching staff.

 

I gotta believe that the current offensive coaches are at fault for the wrong evaluation with Peterman and the HC is going by the consensus of his offensive staff.

 

That said, I expect a OC coaching change pretty soon considering no TDs in the last 50 drives. This lack of offense is killing the entire team as the defense wears down from bring on the field so much. At the bye perhaps. 

Edited November 2, 2018 by Nihilarian

[SinceThe70s]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

They were asking

 

Um yeah, got that...assuming that's true (I have no reason to doubt otherwise), that's a better argument. If they hadn't been asking would you still have an issue with the original tweet?

[US Egg]

2 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

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

 

The problem for me is.....wait,....are you just talking about attention spans or following Twitter arguments or both ?

Edited November 2, 2018 by I am the egg man

[Mr. WEO]

7 minutes ago, BillsFan4 said:

They did try to sign him in the offseason. Steve Tasker said they had been trying to sign Anderson since the spring. It took him that long to agree. 

 

They also tried to sign Josh McCown, Sam Bradford and showed interest in signing Case Keenum, too. Each chose to sign elsewhere. 

 

 

One tweet by Tom Polissero in March said the Bills had "some interest" in Bradford and "could be interested" in Keenum.. That's a long way from "tried to sign".

10 minutes ago, SinceThe70s said:

 

Um yeah, got that...assuming that's true (I have no reason to doubt otherwise), that's a better argument. If they hadn't been asking would you still have an issue with the original tweet?

 

 

Of course.  It's a strange criticism of the press.  That was my first response.  It makes no sense as a criticism.  

[ganesh]

2 hours 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 get a 5th round pick as a pro bowl player once every 10 years....last we had a successful 5th round pick was Kyle Williams

[Phil The Thrill]

I’ve wondered about this too.  While McDermott doesn’t really answer questions, the media has to expect that and be prepared to ask a follow up question.  I never understand why they don’t do that.

 

To Warrow’s original point, I do think the Bills should have been more aggressive in finding a veteran either through FA or a trade.  I do agree that the options were limited

 

[BigDingus]

"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)?"

 

I don't really think that's a fair point..."Awaiting a realistic outline?" I've seen countless discussions from experts & fans alike laying out much better plans than what we actually did. Here, I'll give some options that would've been infinitely better than what we did.

1. Since it begins with the offseason & your obvious plans to draft a QB high in this draft, you could've done a number of things differently. A) If you wanted someone other than Allen, you already let the Jets outbid you for the #3 spot, so you got beat there. B) If you wanted Allen from the start, you knew he was a project pick, and would benefit from having a veteran mentor & sitting the year.
 

2. Which leads to A) keeping the veteran you have on the roster in Tyrod Taylor, or B) signing another one that knows & accepts his role, someone like Derek Anderson. Did that happen? No.

3. Ok, so you sign McCarron instead. You know your only other QB other than your rookie is a 2nd year 5th round pick who became an interception meme. Combined games started between the trio was what, 4? At least McCarron showed he was capable enough of starting, is young enough to have some upside, and you got him at bargain bin pricing. Nope! Trade him for a 5th round pick, throw in the other 5th round pick INT machine as the starter, & have your project rookie as the #2.

4. So now you've already started the season backed into a corner. You're one injury or bad game away from having just your rookie QB & nobody else. Peterman plays like Peterman, doesn't even make it 1 game. A clear sign of decision making failure right there. It also adds another layer to the failure, as it casts doubt on your ability to even judge QB's, and here you are having just invested a ton picks into a rookie QB this past draft! You somehow thought this guy, Nathan Peterman, was so capable that you not only didn't need a veteran on the roster, you traded your backup plan before the first game! Yet we're supposed to believe you're the one who knows QB talent, and how to put that talent in a position to succeed? Good luck Josh Allen.

5. Alright, so at least we now know that you can't trust Peterman, Allen is the starter, and injuries can happen at any moment. So what would a smart coach do in that situation? Sign another QB immediately! But no, we gamble, trotting Allen out there week after week to get destroyed while looking completely out of his league in the process. We sign one 4 games later, but then shocker, Allen eventually gets hurt. In comes Pick-6 Peterman. Peterman does his schtick, McDermott finally realizes he has royally f'd up. Guy that's been there for a couple days now has to be starter.

6. In this whole time, QB's have been signed by various teams. Veterans on other rosters could be targeted for trades. Yes, that includes players like Teddy Bridgewater. "But is he healthy enough?" He's been cleared many times, was active last year, played well in the preseason, and wasn't expensive. It's a better option than what we've got, and funny enough, the same things were said about another Saints QB in Drew Brees before they signed him. 

7. To top it off, McDermott gets another fail for assembling this garbage WR corps & O-line KNOWING he's going to invest heavily in a rookie QB! Talk about putting them in a position to fail, this is more like putting them in a position to get destroyed & lose all confidence. But hey, at least we had a veteran there to help lead, help the other young QB's keep their head on their shoulders & help them understand what they're seeing out there...oh wait. McDermott mishandled the QB situation by also mishandling the other critical positions on offense.

 

And yes, it was VERY obvious we'd look like this! At some point I'm just going to go through the offseason posts & threads and show how easy this was to see coming. Just as easy is knowing it will inevitably lead to the OC getting blamed/fired, and this whole playbook Allen is learning thrown out the window...making half of what he learned this season worthless. It's like they went step by step through the "how to ruin a rookie QB" manual.

There's plenty more to break down. But I've already come back & forth to this post a dozen times already while working on other things. Rather just finish it now, be told by eternal optimists that everything is better than it ever has been (like they did all offseason) and come back later.

Edited November 2, 2018 by BigDingus

[QCity]

The fans that are whining about McCarron not being here are the same people that would be whining if McCarron was still here.

 

They call that a whine-whine situation. 

 

[Ayjent]

11 minutes ago, BigDingus said:

"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)?"

 

I don't really think that's a fair point..."Awaiting a realistic outline?" I've seen countless discussions from experts & fans alike laying out much better plans than what we actually did. Here, I'll give some options that would've been infinitely better than what we did.

1. Since it begins with the offseason & your obvious plans to draft a QB high in this draft, you could've done a number of things differently. A) If you wanted someone other than Allen, you already let the Jets outbid you for the #3 spot, so you got beat there. B) If you wanted Allen from the start, you knew he was a project pick, and would benefit from having a veteran mentor & sitting the year.
 

2. Which leads to A) keeping the veteran you have on the roster in Tyrod Taylor, or B) signing another one that knows & accepts his role, someone like Derek Anderson. Did that happen? No.

3. Ok, so you sign McCarron instead. You know your only other QB other than your rookie is a 2nd year 5th round pick who became an interception meme. Combined games started between the trio was what, 4? At least McCarron showed he was capable enough of starting, is young enough to have some upside, and you got him at bargain bin pricing. Nope! Trade him for a 5th round pick, throw in the other 5th round pick INT machine as the starter, & have your project rookie as the #2.

4. So now you've already started the season backed into a corner. You're one injury or bad game away from having just your rookie QB & nobody else. Peterman plays like Peterman, doesn't even make it 1 game. A clear sign of decision making failure right there. It also adds another layer to the failure, as it casts doubt on your ability to even judge QB's, and here you are having just invested a ton picks into a rookie QB this past draft! You somehow thought this guy, Nathan Peterman, was so capable that you not only didn't need a veteran on the roster, you traded your backup plan before the first game! Yet we're supposed to believe you're the one who knows QB talent, and how to put that talent in a position to succeed? Good luck Josh Allen.

5. Alright, so at least we now know that you can't trust Peterman, Allen is the starter, and injuries can happen at any moment. So what would a smart coach do in that situation? Sign another QB immediately! But no, we gamble, trotting Allen out there week after week to get destroyed while looking completely out of his league in the process. We sign one 4 games later, but then shocker, Allen eventually gets hurt. In comes Pick-6 Peterman. Peterman does his schtick, McDermott finally realizes he has royally f'd up. Guy that's been there for a couple days now has to be starter.

6. In this whole time, QB's have been signed by various teams. Veterans on other rosters could be targeted for trades. Yes, that includes players like Teddy Bridgewater. "But is he healthy enough?" He's been cleared many times, was active last year, played well in the preseason, and wasn't expensive. It's a better option than what we've got, and funny enough, the same things were said about another Saints QB in Drew Brees before they signed him. 

7. To top it off, McDermott gets another fail for assembling this garbage WR corps & O-line KNOWING he's going to invest heavily in a rookie QB! Talk about putting them in a position to fail, this is more like putting them in a position to get destroyed & loose all confidence in the meantime. But hey, at least we had a veteran there to help lead, and help the other young QB's keep their head on their shoulders & help them understand what they're seeing out there...oh wait. McDermott mishandled the QB situation by also mishandling the other critical positions on offense.

 

And yes, it was VERY obvious we'd look like this! At some point I'm just going to go through the offseason posts & threads and show how easy this was to see coming. Just as easy was knowing it will inevitably lead to the OC getting blamed, fired, and this whole playbook Allen is learning thrown out the window...making half of what he learned this season worthless. It's like they went step by step through the "how to ruin a rookie QB" manual.

There's plenty more break down. But I've already come back & forth to this post a dozen times already while working on other things. Rather just finish it now, be told by eternal optimists that everything is better than it ever has been like they did all offseason, and come back later.

All very good points.  I think point 7 is really the biggest problem with the handling, regardless of McCarron trade.  None of the 3 they had in camp were ideal day 1 starters with their experience and the talent surrounding them.  There was a ton of overconfidence in their own abilities on display by the staff and FO to think what they put together would have even the slightest chance to be good.  They are playing the rebuilding card now, but who makes the playoffs the year prior with the plan to start rebuilding afterwards focusing on the D when you have a hell of a time paying a good D to stay together and have no O to provide any compliment?  

 

Demolition of a roster is the easy part, let’s see how good they are.  Every misstep will be magnified given how much they tore it down.  

[reddogblitz]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

He was asked about Barkley.

 

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

 

When? What was Coach 's answer?

[Kwai San]

3 hours 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.

 

Hmmmm totally forgot about that......still then.  The Bills "braintrust" must have KNOWN the O-Line was gonna blow huge chunks then.....well they were spot on for that prediction...

2 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

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. 

 

Two QB's have gone down to this O-Line.....not one but 2.  A rook - kinda understandable and a vet who frankly should know better.  Bottom line - How many does it take to realize this O-Line BLOWS HUGE CHUNKS!!!

[Gugny]

Here's where I get rubbed:  Going into the season with a rookie (take Allen's name out of it) and Nathan Peterman is irresponsible.

 

There's not a football fan on the face of the earth who didn't know that Nate Peterman is not an NFL QB ... let alone a backup ... let alone a starter.

 

I don't begrudge the Bills getting rid of McCarron for a 5th.  He made it pretty clear in preseason that there was a reason he's a career backup.  I also don't begrudge them for not going after Bridgewater for the reasons outlined upstream in this thread.

 

But, Christ.  Peterman and a rookie???  Why not get Anderson in here earlier?  Or kick Barkley's tires earlier?  Or any other FA QBs out there.

 

The entire attitude taken with regard to this position (the most important in all sports) was casual.  That is a failure.

 

I won't sit here and pretend that I know what they should have done.  That's just one reason I"m sitting in my dining room typing this and not an NFL GM.  But as a football fan, I can say with certainty that going into this season with Peterman and a rookie was Bush League, inept crap.

Edited November 2, 2018 by Gugny

[LSHMEAB]

1 hour ago, ganesh said:

You get a 5th round pick as a pro bowl player once every 10 years....last we had a successful 5th round pick was Kyle Williams

The 2017 fifth round included, Milano, George Kittle, Jayon Brown, Jake Elliott, and Aron Jones.

 

 

[klos63]

4 hours ago, mjt328 said:

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. 

McCarron played the final preseason game after his injury. He was ok to play

If the coaches still thought Peterman was an NFL QB, that's on them. Fans can get fooled by preseason, coaches can't.

Who cares what the fans were calling for?

Who cares what the media thought about the trade?

 

A very poor defense of the QB decisions IMO.

[BillsVet]

51 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

The 2017 fifth round included, Milano, George Kittle, Jayon Brown, Jake Elliott, and Aron Jones.

 

Tell me historically what you think the hit rate for dependable NFL starters (not including K or P) is from the 5th round.    

 

In 2012 there were 34 5th round picks and of that, 5 have played in 80 games (out of 104 possible).  

 

In 2013 it was 6 out of 32 who've played more than 70 games (out of 88 possible).

 

In 2014 it's 4 out of 36 who've played more than 60 games (out of 72 possible).  

 

In a random sample of 3 draft years, that's 15 out of 102 players who have some staying power in the league, not necessarily that they're very good players.  Not what I'd call a good bet.  

[Thurman#1]

7 hours 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?

 

 

How's Keenum working out for Denver? As for the other two, it seemed pretty obvious to me that they didn't want either guy because you have to run a different offense to maximize them, as neither can run a passing game out of the pocket. And rebuilding teams don't want to have to change the offense. Even in a horrible season like this one at least the team is learning the system so that next year when they upgrade the offensive personnel

 

I see why people might want to ask those questions, but I think the answers are pretty obvious. Now, if Keenum was kicking butt in Denver, the Broncos would look like geniuses and the Bills like eejits for that Keenum decision. Yeah, Keenum's been better than anyone we have but he hasn't been that good and Denver has a lot better talent around Keenum than we have on offense.

 

IMHO Wawrow has an interesting point. If you think that's the narrative on this major problem, more questions should be asked right now, and also in the past.

 

 

7 hours ago, mjt328 said:

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. 

 

 

My understanding is that McCarron's diagnosis of a hairline collarbone was later found to have been mistaken.

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/report-bills-aj-mccarron-didnt-fracture-collarbone-expected-to-return-to-practice-soon/

 

But yeah, he was outplayed. Looking back, they should have kept him anyway, but Carucci reported that they were worried that he had problems with being the third-stringer and they thought he might let his dissatisfaction show.

 

What they have is surely a major mess, but I understand letting him go if they thought he was going to cause problems in the locker room.

 

 

3 hours ago, Gugny said:

Here's where I get rubbed:  Going into the season with a rookie (take Allen's name out of it) and Nathan Peterman is irresponsible.

 

There's not a football fan on the face of the earth who didn't know that Nate Peterman is not an NFL QB ... let alone a backup ... let alone a starter.

 

I don't begrudge the Bills getting rid of McCarron for a 5th.  He made it pretty clear in preseason that there was a reason he's a career backup.  I also don't begrudge them for not going after Bridgewater for the reasons outlined upstream in this thread.

 

But, Christ.  Peterman and a rookie???  Why not get Anderson in here earlier?  Or kick Barkley's tires earlier?  Or any other FA QBs out there.

 

The entire attitude taken with regard to this position (the most important in all sports) was casual.  That is a failure.

 

I won't sit here and pretend that I know what they should have done.  That's just one reason I"m sitting in my dining room typing this and not an NFL GM.  But as a football fan, I can say with certainty that going into this season with Peterman and a rookie was Bush League, inept crap.

 

 

Yeah, this is a good point, I think. Bringing in Anderson or Barkley earlier would have been playing it safe and smart.

Edited November 2, 2018 by Thurman#1

[BobbyC81]

3 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

But, Christ.  Peterman and a rookie???  Why not get Anderson in here earlier?  Or kick Barkley's tires earlier?  Or any other FA QBs out there

 

They claimed the injury situations at other positions prevented them from bringing Anderson in sooner.

[GunnerBill]

Here is how it was mishandled:

 

A man who can not play was still on the roster. He. Can. Not. Play. And we get to see him fail spectacularly on Sunday. 

 

The difference is for the first time other than the snow game where offensive expectations for everyone were low they are trotting him out at home. It is a big risk for McDermott and Beane because if the man who can't play ***** the bed again I reckon the Ralph will be pretty toxic in a way the Pegulas have not seen yet. Toxic to a point where an owner who has already shown a propensity to panic might start to panic. 

[Dan]

I think another key point to remember in all this is that they continued to shuffle the Oline and QBs, with no clear starters until after the preseason.   There was no time for any chemistry or the offense to become established.   They shuffled the WRs quite a bit as well. But with their injury status that's a little more understandable. 

 

But that is ..never.. a recipe for success in the NFL. Especially when you consider they had a new OC, it seems an even greater amount of hubris. 

 

It seemed obvious to me at the time, the most likely route to success was name your starters early and give them time to gel in a new offense.   Not that it would be successful, but it was the best chance for success.  That was start AJM as the only guy to have won an NFL game and had a few years prepping for NFL defenses.  Peterman as his backup.  And Allen watching, learning, and continuing to work on his footwork/mechanic/accuracy issues so that he doesn't revert to the flawed mechanics as soon as he's under pressure in a game. 

 

They all acted with a great amount of naivety or perhaps just plain cockiness.  But they clearly underestimated, or just simply do not know, how hard it is to field a proper offense. 

 

 

[Rochesterfan]

9 hours ago, Commonsense said:

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. 

 

I agree - except they tried to get Anderson in the off season and he was not interested at the time.  They talked with Matt Moore - he was not coming back this off season.  McCown decided to resign with the NYJs where he had already played last off season. They talked with a lot of options, but the veterans were mostly already signed or holding out to see what opens up.

 

So the real options were pay big money for Keenum or Bradford - or take a risk on McCarron/Bridgewater.  With little money - the Keenum/Bradford option was eliminated (and that was good as neither has played well this year in their new homes) - so that left what they did McCarron.  They could not go into the camp with Bridgewater unless they were sure he was 100% and if he was not allowing physicals - there is your answer.  The Bills would of had to sign both and although that is an option- I believe they wanted Josh to get as much time playing as possible.

 

The big issue is Peterman- they trusted what they saw in preseason and that was their mistake.  They seemed to want to get to about the bye week with an alternate starter and Peterman blew up a half into week 1.  

 

They lost a gamble - bad on them.  Since that point they are trying to get in order, but they have limited options and just need to get through until Josh is healthy again.

 

They bungled the Peterman situation badly, but it is not like he was not the best in training camp at all levels against 1,2, &3s - so that sort of pushed them into the bad choice.

[fansince88]

10 hours 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?

Ask the Brown's. They may know the answer to this.

[The Process]

It's Monday morning in my arm chair......let me tell you what should have happened yesterday.....

[BuffaloWings]

12 hours 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.

 

Let's not forget that he's not that good of a QB. Defenses figured out how to defend him with the read-option and he couldn't adjust to that.

 

So then he stirs up controversy just to get himself into the spotlight again.

 

Nut case is pretty spot on.

Edited November 2, 2018 by BuffaloWings

[JESSEFEFFER]

9 hours ago, QCity said:

The fans that are whining about McCarron not being here are the same people that would be whining if McCarron was still here.

 

They call that a whine-whine situation. 

 

Whine-whine situation.  Outstanding!  I might ask if I could borrow that because I know a few people in my world to whom it may be applied.  It may be worthy of a copyright.

[SoTier]

12 hours 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.

 

What is there to defend in the QB situation???  

 

• They got rid of a competent veteran QB in Taylor to save some $$$. 
• They signed a backup QB, McCarron, who plainly was looking for a starting gig to prove himself and saw Buffalo as a good place to do it.  Then they trade McCarron when he objected to being third string behind Nate "Picksix" Peterman on the very specious argument that Peterman looked better playing against scrubs than McCarron did playing against first stringers.
• The dead cap space the Bills incurred by trading Taylor and McCarron was around $10 million, but hey, that's okay because they saved millions in current salary by getting rid of these guys.  That extra cap space could have gotten them 1 or 2 or maybe even 3 better offensive players than the ones currently on the team, but dead cap is only "on the books" it's not actual $$ out of the owner's pockets.
• When Peterman crapped the bed in the season opener, the Bills were fine with going with raw rookie Josh Allen and the incompetent Peterman for a MONTH before they finally got around to adding a competent backup QB, in this case a washed up 35-year-old who hadn't played a snap in 2 years and hadn't started in 7. 
• Now, they're back to Picksix Peterman as the starter backed up by Matt Barkley who's only been on the team for a few days, but hey, the Pegulas are making a fat profit by filling the stadium while fielding the lowest paid roster in the NFL, so all's good.

 

 

Edited November 2, 2018 by SoTier

[billsredneck1]

12 hours 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.

that was a major,major blunder fo sho.

[GunnerBill]

8 hours ago, Gugny said:

Here's where I get rubbed:  Going into the season with a rookie (take Allen's name out of it) and Nathan Peterman is irresponsible.

 

There's not a football fan on the face of the earth who didn't know that Nate Peterman is not an NFL QB ... let alone a backup ... let alone a starter.

 

I don't begrudge the Bills getting rid of McCarron for a 5th.  He made it pretty clear in preseason that there was a reason he's a career backup.  I also don't begrudge them for not going after Bridgewater for the reasons outlined upstream in this thread.

 

But, Christ.  Peterman and a rookie???  Why not get Anderson in here earlier?  Or kick Barkley's tires earlier?  Or any other FA QBs out there.

 

The entire attitude taken with regard to this position (the most important in all sports) was casual.  That is a failure.

 

I won't sit here and pretend that I know what they should have done.  That's just one reason I"m sitting in my dining room typing this and not an NFL GM.  But as a football fan, I can say with certainty that going into this season with Peterman and a rookie was Bush League, inept crap.

 

 

I am exactly here. I don't hate trading McCarron. I wasn't a fan before he got here and he didn't convince me. A 5th back for him I'm pretty happy with. It is the faith in Peterman that is so obviously perplexing. Having been stung by it twice they were still willing to let him serve as the only backup for a month before taking action. He should have been cut within a week of the Baltimore game and if he wasn't then within 24 hours of the Houston debacle.

 

I'm sure he is a good guy, he talks about God a lot.... I'm sure he is a great family man. But cut the emotion and look at it rationally. He is out of his depth. He should not be on this roster any longer. Instead he starts on Sunday.

[billsredneck1]

10 hours ago, ganesh said:

You get a 5th round pick as a pro bowl player once every 10 years....last we had a successful 5th round pick was Kyle Williams

i think karlos williams was handled wrong....mainly because we had other options.  didn't we pick johnathan in the 5th as well?

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, billsredneck1 said:

i think karlos williams was handled wrong....mainly because we had other options.  didn't we pick johnathan in the 5th as well?

 

Yea old leaden foot JWill was a 5th rounder. His number was called in the 4th round but by the time he got his feet moving it was mid 5th when he answered the call.

[rpmfla]

13 hours 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?"

 

 

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 don't understand what Thurman Thomas has to do with the QB situation.

[Rigotz]

13 hours 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?

 

Is this a joke? Why are people liking this post?

- You actually want CASE KEENUM to be the future of our franchise? He signed a 2 year deal with a better franchise to be a starter. We would need to offer at least 3 years.

- You would rather have TYROD TAYLOR than Harrison Phillips? Seriously? You disliked that trade?

- You want COLIN KAEPERNICK .... a player that would completely BLOW UP our locker room and potentially franchise?

 

...do you guys have zero concept of how to build for the future?

[oldmanfan]

Wawrow makes a good point.  We all agree it would have been good to bring in a vet when they traded McCarron.  Who? And would that have really changed the season at all?

[stony]

3 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

 

Is this a joke? Why are people liking this post?

- You actually want CASE KEENUM to be the future of our franchise? He signed a 2 year deal with a better franchise to be a starter. We would need to offer at least 3 years.

- You would rather have TYROD TAYLOR than Harrison Phillips? Seriously? You disliked that trade?

- You want COLIN KAEPERNICK .... a player that would completely BLOW UP our locker room and potentially franchise?

 

...do you guys have zero concept of how to build for the future?

I don't know how to build a franchise, hopefully McBeane do.  

 

What I do know, is during the period of Rex's firing and McD's hiring, Terry stood up at the podium and made some very pointed remarks concerning how his franchise is perceived nationally.  Criticisms during the Rex period were largely and justifiably aimed at Rex because he was a buffoon.  The criticisms leveled at the team presently point at bungled QB management and a historically putrid offense.   I'm curious how Terry's reacted to this, and just how much equity McBeane have squandered given how the current season has played out.   

[Jrb1979]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

Wawrow makes a good point.  We all agree it would have been good to bring in a vet when they traded McCarron.  Who? And would that have really changed the season at all?

You keep saying would it change the season at all?  IMO yes it would. As bad as Anderson is, he atleast put up some yards and the offense looked a little respectable. Any other QB other then Allen or Picksix would be better. Allen is not ready to play and it shows by how he can't read defenses. 

[GG]

I think most everyone missed jw's rationale for starting his tweetstorm. 

[DCOrange]

13 hours 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.

 

I don't really know when this became a thing, but this is flat out false.

 

Denver offered to trade for Kaepernick on the condition that Kaepernick would take a 50% paycut, to which he declined like anybody else would have. This happened BEFORE he had ever protested and before the league allegedly colluded against him.

 

The only offer that Kaepernick has reportedly received since he began protesting was a league-minimum deal from Seattle. It's not really shocking that a guy that played decently well as a starter the last time we saw him would want more than the minimum to continue playing.

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, Jrb1979 said:

You keep saying would it change the season at all?  IMO yes it would. As bad as Anderson is, he atleast put up some yards and the offense looked a little respectable. Any other QB other then Allen or Picksix would be better. Allen is not ready to play and it shows by how he can't read defenses. 

May have picked up one extra win.  May not have had the game Allen had against Tennessee or MInny. 

 

Arguments are made both ways on Allen playing vs. not playing.  In the end he was doing about as well as the other rookie QBs; all are having ups and downs.