WHY is Allen really starting?

[JerseyBills]

23 hours ago, greeneblitz said:

By the end of next season we will have a answer on Allen one way or another.

Yup. We'll have an idea by the end of this season but won't have an answer til next.

[PittsforDave]

4 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

The fans will not impact any decisions.  The team is committed to Allen's development and no journeyman factors into the equation.  Everyone should get this as it's obvious.

Fans and Media play a bigger part in decisions than you think. 

 

We will see. I say the Billsy thing happens.

 

Allen needs to perform. (Period)

5 minutes ago, JerseyBills said:

Yup. We'll have an idea by the end of this season but won't have an answer til next.

We can’t ruin our new qb, we must groom him to succeed.

 

Year 2 is where we will see the greatest leap in improvement. 

 

We must prepare him to succeed. 

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, PittsforDave said:

Fans and Media play a bigger part in decisions than you think. 

 

We will see. I say the Billsy thing happens.

 

Allen needs to perform. (Period)

 

 See Nathan Peterman as proof that fans and media simply don't. Allen needs to show improvement, but it's not as if he won't be the unquestioned starter next season.  They will build up the supporting cast around him in the draft and UFA next season as other teams have done.  No controversy at all. 

[PittsforDave]

2 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

 See Nathan Peterman as proof that fans and media simply don't. Allen needs to show improvement, but it's not as if he won't be the unquestioned starter next season.  They will build up the supporting cast around him in the draft and UFA next season as other teams have done.  No controversy at all. 

I would love this to happen, sounds like a fairytale though. 

 

After last week performance, we are all expecting the offense to work from here on out. No more excuses. We saw a capable qb move the ball and score points against a good D. We have the ability.

[Tcali]

On ‎11‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 6:57 PM, PUNT750 said:

I feel the Bills are doing the right thing in starting Allen for the balance of the season. It really isn't an NFL learning experience for him - rather a gut check for the Bills HC and GM.

IF he doesn't show an awareness for the game, a quick release or can't MANAGE the game he's not our man. We've been through this before with Johnson, Losman and EJ. Great talent but not winners in the NFL.

I hope he's "the man" and he's getting his chance!

I wasn't for allen starting...but I like your reasoning

[26CornerBlitz]

2 minutes ago, PittsforDave said:

I would love this to happen, sounds like a fairytale though. 

 

After last week performance, we are all expecting the offense to work from here on out. No more excuses. We saw a capable qb move the ball and score points against a good D. We have the ability.

 

At 3-7 all I care about is Allen's development with an eye towards the future. Immediate results aren't that important just as they weren't in Goff's and Trubisky's respective rookie seasons.  Eyes on the prize!

[Tcali]

On ‎11‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 7:04 PM, Teddy KGB said:

eehh yes.     He’s not our guy if he doesn’t look like Tom Brady in his 6th start ??‍♂️??‍♂️

A morerational statement would be he's not our guy if he continues to often not be able to it the broadside of a barn,,if he stands there like a wooden indian staring down the  primary receiver,if he takes sacks after having good protection,and if he doesn't show any touch on a) screen passes and b)short passes where a DB is closing in for a brutal hit.

 

He needs to show that he has the instincts to play QB in the nfl

 

Im still somewhat optimistic

Edited November 16, 2018 by Tcali

[Shaw66]

On 11/14/2018 at 10:01 PM, greeneblitz said:

By the end of next season we will have a answer on Allen one way or another.

Right, the end of NEXT season.  Not the end of THIS season.

[iinii]

6 hours ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

That’s what team doctors are supposed to do. Assess the realistic chance he reinjures the elbow. If they clear him, he’s in. 

Really? You might want to read the rest before weighing in.

[benderbender]

On 11/14/2018 at 11:47 PM, FearLess Price said:

Ham and Pinapples Hand Toss Pizza

Why bother with hand? What else would toss it?

[Ol Dirty B]

21 hours ago, BillsRdue said:

Not entirely true. Barkley is only 28, was viewed as a potential top 10 pick. If Allen is not ready, Barkley gives them the best chance to win now and maybe next year if Allen does not pan out. Barkley can sign a team friendly backup deal for 3-4 yrs at 5-8m a year. If he beats out Allen, then we have stability while we look for the next franchise guy. If Allen wins, we have a solid backup under team control until the end of Allen's rookie deal. Win/Win 

 

Wow he really slipped from a top 10 pick to the 4th round. That must have been a long few days in NY at the draft.

[FearLess Price]

2 hours ago, benderbender said:

Why bother with hand? What else would toss it?

 

Lesbians.

[Sweats]

I say we throw Allen to the wolves and he either figures it out or he doesn’t.......sink or swim.

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, Sweats said:

I say we throw Allen to the wolves and he either figures it out or he doesn’t.......sink or swim.

 

Next! 

[1st Ammendment NoMas]

8 hours ago, Ol Dirty B said:

 

Wow he really slipped from a top 10 pick to the 4th round. That must have been a long few days in NY at the draft.

 

He had a rough senior year at USC. At the end of his junior year, he was considered top 10, but he lost a few pieces on offense and his arm was exposed a bit at the combine. Still he has the tools to be a solid QB, and as we saw from the mental standpoint- he picked up the offense quick, made quick decisions and was fairly accurate with his throws. 

[jrober38]

8 hours ago, Ol Dirty B said:

 

Wow he really slipped from a top 10 pick to the 4th round. That must have been a long few days in NY at the draft.

 

Where a guy was projected at one point in time doesn't really matter much.

 

Christian Hackenberg was projected as the #1 overall pick after his freshman year. He was a colossal bust.

 

Aaron Murray was projected as a 1st rounder as a Junior. He was a 7th rounder who quickly fell out of the league. 

 

Jevan Snead was projected as a top 5 pick after his sophomore year. He went undrafted. 

 

Barkley was "projected" as a top 10 pick by Walter Football and other amateur draft sites. No one in the NFL ever thought he had the arm or difference making ability as a passer to ever be a top pick. He was a 4th round pick for a reason. 

Edited November 16, 2018 by jrober38

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Barkley was "projected" as a top 10 pick by Walter Football and other amateur draft sites. No one in the NFL ever thought he had the arm or difference making ability as a passer to ever be a top pick. He was a 4th round pick for a reason. 

 

True, but his stock definitely slipped even with NFL teams his final year at USC. If he had come out the year before I reckon he'd have gone in the 2nd.

[MJS]

By this logic, haven't we already seen enough of him? If he couldn't do it in his first few starts, why should we see anything different the rest of the season?

 

Or are you saying it IS possible for him to improve and progress? Of so, why couldn't he continue to improve and progress in year 2? Then year 3? And throughout his career?

11 hours ago, PittsforDave said:

Fans and Media play a bigger part in decisions than you think.

 

And what makes YOU think this is true? What evidence do you have?

[jrober38]

39 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

True, but his stock definitely slipped even with NFL teams his final year at USC. If he had come out the year before I reckon he'd have gone in the 2nd.

 

Doubtful. 

 

Barkley was always a flawed QB with limited arm strength, zero mobility, and mediocre height who put up huge numbers at USC because he was surrounded by NFL talent. He threw a ton of wide receiver screens to Marquis Lee, Robert Woods and Nelson Agholor and they did most of the heavy lifting. 

 

Honestly there's not much difference between Barkley and someone like AJ McCarron. Both are limited players who excelled in college because they were surrounded by studs who could compensate for their short comings. 

 

Barkley was throwing to not 1, not 2, but 3 future starting NFL Wide Receivers and a future NFL tight end. Of course he looked "good". 

 

Edited November 16, 2018 by jrober38

[GunnerBill]

49 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Doubtful. 

 

Barkley was always a flawed QB with limited arm strength, zero mobility, and mediocre height who put up huge numbers at USC because he was surrounded by NFL talent. He threw a ton of wide receiver screens to Marquis Lee, Robert Woods and Nelson Agholor and they did most of the heavy lifting. 

 

Honestly there's not much difference between Barkley and someone like AJ McCarron. Both are limited players who excelled in college because they were surrounded by studs who could compensate for their short comings. 

 

Barkley was throwing to not 1, not 2, but 3 future starting NFL Wide Receivers and a future NFL tight end. Of course he looked "good". 

 

 

The point wasn't whether he would have been a successful NFL QB, just whether he'd have gone higher. Right or wrong, I believe he would have done. Not in the 1st round, but I do think he'd have gone higher.

[aceman_16]

Because he is a good Christian young man? Too soon??

[PromoTheRobot]

Joe Licata is in today's Athletic and broke down Barkely's game against the Jets. Then said the following. I think he hits the nail on the head...

 

Licata understands why the Bills are doing that (starting Allen.) They just spent a first-round pick on Allen and already committed to him when they put him in the starting lineup for Week 2... “I would (start Barkley) just because from the stuff we’ve seen, I don’t think Allen’s ready,” Licata said. “Just from an X’s and O’s standpoint, it doesn’t look like he’s ready. I just hate to see a guy get killed out there that’s not quite ready. But he’s the guy.”

 

Doing things because you're expected to, or doing what's right? Why is that so hard for some people?

Edited November 16, 2018 by PromoTheRobot

[HOUSE]

Josh Allen is the best jumping QB in the league

[JD Hill]

On 11/15/2018 at 8:00 AM, BmarvB said:

I'd be more inclined to stick with the hot hand and start Barkley against Jacksonville, then hand the keys over to Allen. It won't hurt to give him one more game to watch and learn from a different veteran who's at least accomplishing something with this offense.

Agree with this. Barkley played so well And for team chemistry you need to play the guy that gives us the best chance to win. If Barkley doesn’t play well it’s a easy substitution. Allen is cool with sitting and learning. Love his attitude. He will get plenty of action this year still. If he can stay healthy.

[billsfan89]

The only truly negative scenario is Allen gets hurt. At worst the coaching staff gets to see what Allen's weaknesses are and what he needs to work on. At best Allen improves and shows you what he can build on. There is very minimal risk as injury is always a constant factor when deciding to play players. Now I will say if Allen has any minimal injury risk from his current injury don't play him, sit him out for another week or two as needed. There is the long term picture to think of and Barkley can try and build on a strong game. But if Allen is healthy throw him out there.

Edited November 17, 2018 by billsfan89

[Thurman#1]

On ‎11‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 12:01 PM, greeneblitz said:

By the end of next season we will have a answer on Allen one way or another.

 

 

Unfortunately, we can't assume that.

 

It would be much better if it turns out that way. But the Giants didn't know for sure about Eli till near the end of his fifth season. The Chargers thought so little of Drew Brees at the end of his third season that they drafted his replacement. 

 

Sometimes you know by the end of the second year. Other times ... you don't. With a Marino, you know. With an Alex Smith you don't.

 

On ‎11‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 5:29 PM, GunnerBill said:

 

"Winning now" 

 

The disease that kept the Bills out of the playoffs for 17 straight years.

 

Who gives us the best chance to scrape to 9-7 is not the way we need to think.

 

 

God, yes, Bill. Thank you. Exactly this!!! 

 

From your mouth to God's ear!!

 

 

On ‎11‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 5:29 PM, GunnerBill said:

 

This needs to be Josh Allen's job until it is clear he is not the guy. Whether that is sometime in 2019 or whether it is sometime in 2035 after a couple of Superbowl wins. 

 

 

Wait, what? Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!

 

This doesn't need to be Josh Allen's job until it's clear he is or is not the guy.

 

This job should belong to whoever ... will most improve the long-term chances of Josh's success. And there's no reason why sitting on the bench might not help him if he's not ready.

 

Some guys need to sit. It's not completely clear if he's one of those, but to me he sure looks like it.

 

Edited November 20, 2018 by Thurman#1

[GunnerBill]

11 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Unfortunately, we can't assume that.

 

It would be much better if it turns out that way. But the Giants didn't know for sure about Eli till near the end of his fifth season. The Chargers thought so little of Drew Brees at the end of his third season that they drafted his replacement. 

 

Sometimes you know by the end of the second year. Other times ... you don't. With a Marino, you know. With an Alex Smith you don't.

 

 

 

God, yes, Bill. Thank you. Exactly this!!! 

 

From your mouth to God's ear!!

 

 

 

Wait, what? Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!

 

This doesn't need to be Josh Allen's job until it's clear he is or is not the guy.

 

This job should belong to whoever ... will most improve the long-term chances of Josh's success. And there's no reason why sitting on the bench might not help him if he's not ready.

 

Some guys need to sit. It's not completely clear if he's one of those, but to me he sure looks like it.

 

 

The chance to sit him has gone. Name me one NFL QB who got in, struggled, was sat and then bounced back to be a franchise guy? 

 

Once you have put him in he has to play through the struggle for good or bad. 

[Thurman#1]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The chance to sit him has gone. Name me one NFL QB who got in, struggled, was sat and then bounced back to be a franchise guy? 

 

Once you have put him in he has to play through the struggle for good or bad. 

 

 

Terry Bradshaw. He turned out pretty good, didn't he?

 

Rich Gannon. Alex Smith. Kirk Cousins. Joe Theismann. Kurt Warner. All were benched for performance at some points in their careers and came back. Several were benched early in their careers, same as Allen. Jake Delhomme. Mark Bulger. Was he a franchise guy? I can see arguments that he wasn't, but I think so. Bet I could find some more with not all that much work.

 

You don't have to put him in. He doesn't have to play. There's another very very reasonable option.

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Terry Bradshaw. He turned out pretty good, didn't he?

 

Rich Gannon. Alex Smith. Kirk Cousins. Joe Theismann. Kurt Warner. All were benched for performance at some points in their careers and came back. Several were benched early in their careers, same as Allen. Jake Delhomme. Mark Bulger. Was he a franchise guy? I can see arguments that he wasn't, but I think so. Bet I could find some more with not all that much work.

 

You don't have to put him in. He doesn't have to play. There's another very very reasonable option.

 

Warner was established when he was benched. He was a Superbowl Champion and an MVP. 

 

That isn't what I am asking. Equally Cousins wasn't benched for bad play he was benched because he was the backup and the starter got healthy. Alex Smith was benched a couple of times in San Fran but when they benched him it was because they thought he was done. They weren't sitting him to learn. They were sitting him to move on and at the point Harbaugh arrived Smith was actually a FA they had made little attempt to keep. 

 

The others are before my time but none of those three are really equivalent to what would be happening with Josh. 

Edited November 20, 2018 by GunnerBill

[fergie's ire]

3 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Terry Bradshaw. He turned out pretty good, didn't he?

 

Rich Gannon. Alex Smith. Kirk Cousins. Joe Theismann. Kurt Warner. All were benched for performance at some points in their careers and came back. Several were benched early in their careers, same as Allen. Jake Delhomme. Mark Bulger. Was he a franchise guy? I can see arguments that he wasn't, but I think so. Bet I could find some more with not all that much work.

 

You don't have to put him in. He doesn't have to play. There's another very very reasonable option.

What about Drew Brees?  Not only benched but they had moved on from him and drafted another first round quarterback because they had seen enough to know he was never going to be the guy.

 

[HOUSE]

He shouldn't be starting if you believe Sean McDermott's comments about giving the Bills the best chance to win

 

We finally scored some TD's and now its back to Allen ??

 

My bet is  its a smoke screen and at some point McD will change his mind

[billsredneck1]

49 minutes ago, HOUSE said:

He shouldn't be starting if you believe Sean McDermott's comments about giving the Bills the best chance to win

 

We finally scored some TD's and now its back to Allen ??

 

My bet is  its a smoke screen and at some point McD will change his mind

i hope so.

[26CornerBlitz]

54 minutes ago, HOUSE said:

He shouldn't be starting if you believe Sean McDermott's comments about giving the Bills the best chance to win

 

We finally scored some TD's and now its back to Allen ??

 

My bet is  its a smoke screen and at some point McD will change his mind

 

Friendly advise. Don't bet the HOUSE. 

Edited November 20, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz

[BillsFan17]

6 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Unfortunately, we can't assume that.

 

It would be much better if it turns out that way. But the Giants didn't know for sure about Eli till near the end of his fifth season. The Chargers thought so little of Drew Brees at the end of his third season that they drafted his replacement. 

 

Sometimes you know by the end of the second year. Other times ... you don't. With a Marino, you know. With an Alex Smith you don't.

 

 

 

God, yes, Bill. Thank you. Exactly this!!! 

 

From your mouth to God's ear!!

 

 

 

Wait, what? Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!

 

This doesn't need to be Josh Allen's job until it's clear he is or is not the guy.

 

This job should belong to whoever ... will most improve the long-term chances of Josh's success. And there's no reason why sitting on the bench might not help him if he's not ready.

 

Some guys need to sit. It's not completely clear if he's one of those, but to me he sure looks like it.

 

The Giants went 11-5 in Eli's sophomore year. Eli then proceeded to have very similar stats, basically for the rest of his career on. Then went on to win the SB in his fourth season, so what are you talking about it took five years for the Giants to know about Eli?

[oldmanfan]

Allen starts for one simple reason:  he's the starting QB for the team. 

[Thurman#1]

4 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Warner was established when he was benched. He was a Superbowl Champion and an MVP. 

 

That isn't what I am asking. Equally Cousins wasn't benched for bad play he was benched because he was the backup and the starter got healthy. Alex Smith was benched a couple of times in San Fran but when they benched him it was because they thought he was done. They weren't sitting him to learn. They were sitting him to move on and at the point Harbaugh arrived Smith was actually a FA they had made little attempt to keep. 

 

The others are before my time but none of those three are really equivalent to what would be happening with Josh. 

 

 

Cousins was benched because he was the backup. And because of bad play, which kind of resulted in him staying the backup. I mean, in his first three years his QB ratings were 101.6 his rookie year when RGIII was having that great year and nobody was displacing him. But the next year Griffin was much worse and Cousins was much worse yet with a 58.4. Their third year Cousins again couldn't beat out a beatable Griffin as both had ratings of 86. It was there for the taking and he couldn't take it.

 

And come on, you asked me, "Name me one NFL QB who got in, struggled, was sat and then bounced back to be a franchise guy." All those guys fit that. Now you're throwing in all of these extra little caveats about how he can't be sat because they think he's finished and he can't have someone above him, he can't be established when he gets benched for bad play and so on. Which proves my point exactly. There are a ton of guys who "got in, struggled, were sat and then bounced back to be a franchise guy." It happened for different reasons for many different guys. And yet they bounced back and became franchise guys. It can be done. It has been done many times. It's a legitimate option, a reasonable choice. Not doing that could be a mistake. Or not. I don't know for sure, of course, but it absolutely could be a mistake.

 

23 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Allen starts for one simple reason:  he's the starting QB for the team. 

 

 

If they, you know, start him. If they don't, he's, like, not.

[oldmanfan]

Just now, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Cousins was benched because he was the backup. And because of bad play, which kind of resulted in him staying the backup. I mean, in his first three years his QB ratings were 101.6 his rookie year when RGIII was having that great year and nobody was displacing him. But the next year Griffin was much worse and Cousins was much worse yet with a 58.4. Their third year Cousins again couldn't beat out a beatable Griffin as both had ratings of 86. It was there for the taking and he couldn't take it.

 

And come on, you asked me, "Name me one NFL QB who got in, struggled, was sat and then bounced back to be a franchise guy." All those guys fit that. Now you're throwing in all of these extra little caveats about how he can't be sat because they think he's finished and he can't have someone above him, he can't be established when he gets benched for bad play and so on. Which proves my point exactly. There are a ton of guys who "got in, struggled, were sat and then bounced back to be a franchise guy." It happened for different reasons for many different guys. And yet they bounced back and became franchise guys. It can be done. It has been done many times. It's a legitimate option, a reasonable choice. Not doing that could be a mistake. Or not. I don't know for sure, of course, but it absolutely could be a mistake.

 

 

 

If they, you know, start him. If they don't, he's, like, not.

The HC says he's the starter.  Starters start.  Unless they're hurt.  Simple.

[Matt_In_NH]

This year is all about developing Allen and everything else is secondary.

 

Because he is the young talented guy the Bills need to develop.  They pushed all their chips in on Allen so he gets to play and hopefully improve.  I suppose people think Barkley should start because he had a decent game and I guess if they were trying to win at all costs he might be considered.  But this team is building for the future not for week 11 against the Jags.

[Thurman#1]

32 minutes ago, BillsFan17 said:

The Giants went 11-5 in Eli's sophomore year. Eli then proceeded to have very similar stats, basically for the rest of his career on. Then went on to win the SB in his fourth season, so what are you talking about it took five years for the Giants to know about Eli?

 

 

Win loss records are team stats, not QB stats. Yes the Giants went 11-5 in Eli's second season. They didn't do it because of Eli. Eli's passer rating that year was 75.9, 26th in the league that year. And he absolutely did NOT go on and have similar stats for the rest of his career. If he had, he wouldn't have had the career he has had or anything close to it.

 

There were still huge arguments about whether Eli would ever be a franchise guy in his fourth year. Then the light came on in the last few games of the season.

 

But thanks for making me go back and look the stats over. You're right, I made a mistake. It was his fourth year, not his fifth that the light came on during. My mistake. Sorry. 

 

But in those first four years his total four year passer rating was 73.4. And he absolutely did NOT have similar stats the rest of his career.

 

 

 

 

[BillsFan17]

10 minutes ago, mattynh said:

This year is all about developing Allen and everything else is secondary.

 

Because he is the young talented guy the Bills need to develop.  They pushed all their chips in on Allen so he gets to play and hopefully improve.  I suppose people think Barkley should start because he had a decent game and I guess if they were trying to win at all costs he might be considered.  But this team is building for the future not for week 11 against the Jags.

There is no tried and true method to bringing along a QB. If there was, every team would follow the same model. 

 

Therefore, by saying playing is the absolute best way to develop Allen is not a fair statement.

 

The Bills have an entire offense to evaluate going into this off season. I'd rather have a QB who can do what Barkley did and give our playmakers a chance to do just that, make plays. 

 

Moreover, Barkley forced the Jets to stay honest and allowed for the run game to open up. Also, the ability to drift in the pocket and read a defense which in turn helps the offensive line.

 

There is more to Barkley starting than just trying to win games, it will help evaluate other players on the offense.