Josh Allen's "awful" 1st half...THIS is the article to read

[Victory Formation]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

If we get 1st drive Josh and 4th Quarter Josh for 4 quarters next week.... then the Giants better watch out. I feel like he needs a day like that. A real complete performance to change the narrative. I thought Sunday showed real progress in those spots in the short and intermediate game. 

Yep. I hope we see a continuation of that progress against the Giants. Next you’d like to see him sprinkle in some of those big plays from last year in there and wallah we have a top 10 QB.

[Ta111]

Probably 80-85% of all games come down to the last 10 minutes of the game. Either holding onto a lead or trying to come back from a deficit. I really want to know how you play in crunch time. Josh played lights out during crunch time. We will win many more games than we lose if he continues that type of play.

[Kelly the Dog]

47 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

On the one hand, he's correct and the same could be said about a QB who throws an INT on 4th down deep in the opponent's territory.  It really shouldn't go against a QB's stats the same way to take a risk and take a shot at a point in the game where a failure doesn't change the course of the game - the opponent was gonna get the ball there from a punt anyway.

 

On the other hand, I did see that as "sugar coating" that fumbled snap.  That's the kind of fundamental execution mistake that can not happen and must be corrected.  If you do your best and the opponent stuffs you, that's one thing, but if you stuff yourself, that's something else.

It was interesting to hear Eric Wood not be able to tell who was at fault on the snap. I genuinely do not think he was sugar coating it or not wanting to blame Morse or Josh. He said it could have been either’s fault. I think it is hard to not fault Josh on the first fumble. The Jet knocked it loose pretty easily even though he made a good play and Dawkins a bad one. Josh tucked it just not strong. 

 

All of those four four were fluky to some degree and not likely to be repeated. That’s the silver lining.  

[starrymessenger]

I had toyed with the idea that the Brown TD pass was an adjustment dictated by the coverage but opted instead for the ball having been under thrown. Just didn't think Allen was there yet. If as the writer says it was a good read with perfect execution then that's huge and one of the game's most important takeaways IMO. That's something only good passers can do.

[oldmanfan]

First things first.  For the life of me I have no idea why or how Michael Lombardi has been elevated to some kind of NFL savant. 

Second, for any of these articles that show up, either positive or negative, the first question that should come to mind is this:  did you actually watch the game?  Not just highlights, not just looked at the box score, but did you actually watch the entire game? 

 

If you actually watched the game, and if you are truly interested in an objective evaluation of Allen as opposed to showing your confirmation bias (i.e. you have already decided he is either inaccurate, careless, clueless or all the above), then this is what you would have seen.  Allen unlike last year stayed in the pocket for the most part and went through his progressions, unlike last year when he was running for his life, and sometimes doing that prematurely.  If you actually watched his passes you will see that he was very accurate, delivered the ball right where he wanted.  On the pick 6, he knew he had to protect Beasley by coming in low, and he did.  It may have been 4 inches outside, but when you hit an NFL WR in the hands they normally catch the ball and don't bounce it straight up into a defender's hands.  He also did a good job for the most part (exception below) throwing it away instead of trying to be a hero when he needed to do so.  So from a read and accuracy perspective Allen looked much improved the other day.

 

Now as for negatives, he still thinks his arm strength can let him get away with things he can't get away with in the NFL.  The almost pick down near the goal line was a classic example.  He is scrambling and while on the run tried to hit Brown, and should have been picked.  He has to learn you can't do that in the NFL.  As for the other pick nullified by penalty, took a shot into double coverage; also not well advised but after watching the replay last night I think it's very possible he saw the flag and/or penalty and took a free shot knowing he had one.  As for the fumbles, one was not him - it is not a fumble of your part if you never touch the ball.  The one on the sack he has to learn to just wrap the ball up and take the sack.  He is a young QB, he is going to by definition do some dumb things.  What you hope is that with experience the frequency of dumb things declines.  But we should all fully expect as the season goes along to have moments where we scream at the field or TV NOOOOOOOO when he make a dumb decision.  That is called learning, my friends. 

 

So what I saw, and anyone who actually watched the game should have seen, is a young QB figuring it out.  You should have seen progress in his reads and in standing in the pocket delivering accurate passes.  You should have seen the impertinence of youth at times.  But you would only see this if you actually watched the game.  Which is what makes the commentator stuff so maddening, because you know some guys either don't watch, or refuse to let their eyes change their opinions.  The guy on mad dog sports from 6-10, don't know his name but I listened for a bit while in the car last night.  And he said that you could ignore the bad game Mayfield had Sunday, because he clearly is the best of the 4 first round Bs from last year.  That Jackson because of his game is the second best.  And Allen, despite the moxie coming back, despite showing well all game?  According to him he's the worst of the four and will never change. 

When you hear this kind of stuff, when you see sites like the PFF drivel saying he and Singletary were rated poor, just ignore them, good or bad.  They have agendas and refuse to let data change them. 

 

[Kwai San]

Who The Actual $!%! is Michael Lombardi and why should anyone care as to what he has to say.

 

Personally I would rather the Bills fly below the radar for as long as possible.  EXTREMELY hard to do in the day and age of 24/7 news coverage but I would rather see the Bills as underdawgs each and every week.

 

I was happy with JA's effort in the 1st half not to happy with the score.  The D is UNFREAKING real!!!!

 

Go Bills!

[Hapless Bills Fan]

23 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

It was interesting to hear Eric Wood not be able to tell who was at fault on the snap. I genuinely do not think he was sugar coating it or not wanting to blame Morse or Josh. He said it could have been either’s fault. I think it is hard to not fault Josh on the first fumble. The Jet knocked it loose pretty easily even though he made a good play and Dawkins a bad one. Josh tucked it just not strong. 

 

All of those four four were fluky to some degree and not likely to be repeated. That’s the silver lining.  

 

Woods is objectively correct from the film - it’s clear there was a miscue but who is right or wrong can’t be determined from that.  But, the QB probably knows what he just called for.  So either it wasn’t clearly communicated in the noise or Morse got it wrong.  Wood ain’t gonna throw a fellow center under the bus.

[Brand J]

Ask the Jets if they’d be willing to trade Sam Darnold and Quinnen Williams for Josh Allen and Ed Oliver straight up, right now. To me, Darnold is Dalton-Lite, Allen looks like much more of a gamer. Oliver seems to be a more disruptive DT and already had Jets fans wishing they had picked him. I know it’s early, but I’d laugh at that trade if I were the Bills.

[BuffaloBillsGospel]

I've said this in another article but to me Allen has Brett Favre's gun slinger mentality (which I love) but with that mentality you are going to make mistakes, we should not make excuses for him since there is no need to, as long as he can come back from those mistakes and win games which he did. If we have the next Brett Favre with more athleticism, do we really give 2 ***** about whether or not he makes mistakes as long as were getting to the playoffs or Superbowls?

[K-9]

1 hour ago, Another Fan said:

Aah he didn’t play well in the 1st half.  HOWEVER  ultimately Allen still kept good body language throughout and kept his composure for the winning strike 

 

 

This is the most important aspect of the position. While everybody wants to focus on passer ratings, I prefer to look at him as a quarterback and his ability to get off the mat when things go bad. Allen was tested numerous times in that regard on Sunday and came through with flying colors. The kid is a flat out competitor who can take a punch in the jaw, come back, and knock your ass out. And if I can borrow a line from Jarvis Landry, that is CONTAGIOUS! To everybody on the team, including coaches. 

 

Bad plays happen to everyone. The key is all about how you respond. Always. 

[NewEra]

4 hours ago, Chris from Rochester said:

Not to sound cheap, but is it worth subscribing to the athletic? I feel like most of these writers are worse then the people we have on TSW. For those who have it, do you get your moneys worth? 

The athletic is absolutely worth it.  Full price, maybe not, but I’ve seen more than a couple different discounted rate offers.  I think I paid $20-25 bucks for a year.  Great content.

 

i also have a blitz sub.  paid about $35 for the year.  The athletic has better Bills content (and insane sports content) Blitz has more Bills content.  If you love reading lots of Bills content, both are worth it imo.

[Warcodered]

43 minutes ago, starrymessenger said:

I had toyed with the idea that the Brown TD pass was an adjustment dictated by the coverage but opted instead for the ball having been under thrown. Just didn't think Allen was there yet. If as the writer says it was a good read with perfect execution then that's huge and one of the game's most important takeaways IMO. That's something only good passers can do.

From the article on that drive Allen was 8/10 with a throwaway and Bradley's drop of possibly Allen's best throw of the day. Allen was seriously dialed in on that drive.

[Albwan]

      To put this in perspective, IF Darnold had the same 4 turnovers and still won the game,

the media would be slobbering  over the dude.

    The media will never stop treating the Bills like the NFL's bottom feeders,

even if they won the SB, the media would spend their time talking about how the

other teams deserved it more, the other teams beat themselves, the Bills got 

lucky in a horrible NFL down year, etc etc etc

Edited September 10, 2019 by Albwan

[Nextmanup]

I agree a few of the actual turnovers were bad luck and unfortunate bounces.

What concerns me much more are the 2 turnovers which are not included in the box score.

You know, the two glaringly bad throws for INTs when Allen started to panic and play hero ball for a while there.

 

One was erased by a defensive holding call away from the play (thank God) and the other INT to be was dropped when it hit the Jets player in his hands.

 

If you want to look at the whole game and try to understand what happened, look at the entire thing, not just the feel good parts.

 

 

[Kelly the Dog]

2 minutes ago, K-9 said:

This is the most important aspect of the position. While everybody wants to focus on passer ratings, I prefer to look at him as a quarterback and his ability to get off the mat when things go bad. Allen was tested numerous times in that regard on Sunday and came through with flying colors. The kid is a flat out competitor who can take a punch in the jaw, come back, and knock your ass out. And if I can borrow a line from Jarvis Landry, that is CONTAGIOUS! To everybody on the team, including coaches. 

 

Bad plays happen to everyone. The key is all about how you respond. Always. 

You get to quote Jarvis Landry once. Maybe. Otherwise you were bang on.

 

Josh is a gamer. You want him to improve, be more accurate, take what is given, use better fundamentals, take better care of the ball, and most importantly win games. He did five of six. 

[K-9]

48 minutes ago, starrymessenger said:

I had toyed with the idea that the Brown TD pass was an adjustment dictated by the coverage but opted instead for the ball having been under thrown. Just didn't think Allen was there yet. If as the writer says it was a good read with perfect execution then that's huge and one of the game's most important takeaways IMO. That's something only good passers can do.

I’ll take Brown’s word for it on that play. He said the CB had good coverage and had taken away anything over the top. He said Allen saw that and deliberately took something off the ball and let Brown make the adjustment. So yeah, that’s something good passers have to do on occasion.

2 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

You get to quote Jarvis Landry once. Maybe. Otherwise you were bang on.

 

Josh is a gamer. You want him to improve, be more accurate, take what is given, use better fundamentals, take better care of the ball, and most importantly win games. He did five of six. 

Bless ‘em!

[Giving' em the Business]

4 hours ago, FLFan said:

Absolutely. 

Yes, there's no better coverage than the athletic. Worth every penny.

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

4 hours ago, Chris from Rochester said:

Not to sound cheap, but is it worth subscribing to the athletic? I feel like most of these writers are worse then the people we have on TSW. For those who have it, do you get your moneys worth? 

 

i feel I'm getting my moneys worth because I only paid half price.  Will I renew next year at $70, maybe but not so sure?  The articles are very well written, sometimes a bit longer than I'd like, (my leg tends to falls asleep when I sit on the toilet too long)  But during the off-season not alot of Bills coverage it seems in that respect BN has much more coverage then.  But if you just like sports in general, like reading an NBA article something, then much more worthwhile. 

 

Good articles, just not a tremendous amount of Bills coverage.

[Kelly the Dog]

Buy the Bn Blitz. It costs one half of one beer a month! That will be a community service in two ways!

[mrags]

The only thing I didn’t agree with was the TD to Brown when he said it was a perfectly placed back shoulder throw. 

 

I could be wrong, but I thought I heard in WGR yesterday, some with the team said it wasn’t intended to be a back shoulder throw. That he just threw it up and gave Brown a chance at it. If that was Joshs intent to put it in that spot, then great, but if he just “threw it up for a chance at it” and that’s what we got, I’m not 100% super duper excited about it. I mean it worked and we won the game because of it, but that doesn’t mean it was an accurately placed throw like the article states. 

[Kelly the Dog]

1 minute ago, mrags said:

The only thing I didn’t agree with was the TD to Brown when he said it was a perfectly placed back shoulder throw. 

 

I could be wrong, but I thought I heard in WGR yesterday, some with the team said it wasn’t intended to be a back shoulder throw. That he just threw it up and gave Brown a chance at it. If that was Joshs intent to put it in that spot, then great, but if he just “threw it up for a chance at it” and that’s what we got, I’m not 100% super duper excited about it. I mean it worked and we won the game because of it, but that doesn’t mean it was an accurately placed throw like the article states. 

I'm a believer that 33-50% of all back shoulder throws are actually front shoulder misses.

[Chuck Wagon]

Allen missed on both interceptions.  But they aren't the type of picks to raise concern.  The Beasley play is complete fluke, the ball COULD have been put in a better spot but that needs to be a catch, getting popped up into a defenders arms is the type of thing to happen with any QB.

 

It would be one thing if Josh badly overthrew someone over the middle of the field and there was a defender waiting, or if he stared down a receiver and didn't see a breaking DB.  Unfortunately a lot of the national people aren't going to any sort of level of nuance and are knee jerking to what they see on a stat sheet.

[eball]

5 minutes ago, mrags said:

The only thing I didn’t agree with was the TD to Brown when he said it was a perfectly placed back shoulder throw. 

 

I could be wrong, but I thought I heard in WGR yesterday, some with the team said it wasn’t intended to be a back shoulder throw. That he just threw it up and gave Brown a chance at it. If that was Joshs intent to put it in that spot, then great, but if he just “threw it up for a chance at it” and that’s what we got, I’m not 100% super duper excited about it. I mean it worked and we won the game because of it, but that doesn’t mean it was an accurately placed throw like the article states. 

 

Smoke and Josh both said the route was supposed to go over the top but the DB had good coverage and took that away.  What happened next is why you hear so much about QBs and WRs needing to build chemistry.  Both players knew that if the coverage was taking away the deep shot Josh would intentionally underthrow it because the receiver almost always has the advantage there.  It worked perfectly, and Smoke even drew the DPI had he not come down with the ball.  And Josh absolutely looked off the safety before throwing, which kept him from being able to make a play on the ball.  These things are actually practiced and it's not "dumb luck" most of the time.

 

3 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

I'm a believer that 33-50% of all back shoulder throws are actually front shoulder misses.

 

The game is 90% mental and the other half physical.

[Warcodered]

8 minutes ago, mrags said:

The only thing I didn’t agree with was the TD to Brown when he said it was a perfectly placed back shoulder throw. 

 

I could be wrong, but I thought I heard in WGR yesterday, some with the team said it wasn’t intended to be a back shoulder throw. That he just threw it up and gave Brown a chance at it. If that was Joshs intent to put it in that spot, then great, but if he just “threw it up for a chance at it” and that’s what we got, I’m not 100% super duper excited about it. I mean it worked and we won the game because of it, but that doesn’t mean it was an accurately placed throw like the article states. 

I mean Allen was locked in that drive he didn't really miss going 8/10 and the two uncompleted being a throwaway and a perfect pass dropped by Beasley. It's possible it was off but it'd have to of been off in a way that coincided with reading the defender perfectly.

[yungmack]

47 minutes ago, BuffaloBillsGospel said:

I've said this in another article but to me Allen has Brett Favre's gun slinger mentality (which I love) but with that mentality you are going to make mistakes, we should not make excuses for him since there is no need to, as long as he can come back from those mistakes and win games which he did. If we have the next Brett Favre with more athleticism, do we really give 2 ***** about whether or not he makes mistakes as long as were getting to the playoffs or Superbowls?

Go back thru all the Super Bowls and I think you'll find that the by-the-book, system-type classic QB, with but a couple of outlier exceptions, wins. The more exciting pull-it-out-of-your butt "gunslinger" QBs get the fan mania but tend not to get the brass ring. Two of that type - Tarkenton and Kelly -- alone count for 8 losses and no SB wins. Compare Stabler & LaMonica with Bradshaw in the 70s, or think of Favre, the ultimate gunslinger who, for all the raves, managed one SB win in an era that overlapped with the dull Troy Aikman and the highly "system" QB John Elway. 

 

What's winning me over with Josh Allen is his growing competence as a system QB who retains some fine gunslinger ability. That just might be the secret sauce for major success.

[Prickly Pete]

5 hours ago, Ta111 said:

So you believe we will have balls bouncing off receivers hands, hitting their thigh and going straight into the arms of a linebacker going forward?

 

No, read my prior post... I think Allen will be fine. I think those were aberrations.

[VW82]

1 hour ago, Nextmanup said:

I agree a few of the actual turnovers were bad luck and unfortunate bounces.

What concerns me much more are the 2 turnovers which are not included in the box score.

You know, the two glaringly bad throws for INTs when Allen started to panic and play hero ball for a while there.

 

One was erased by a defensive holding call away from the play (thank God) and the other INT to be was dropped when it hit the Jets player in his hands.

 

If you want to look at the whole game and try to understand what happened, look at the entire thing, not just the feel good parts.

 

 

 

Pretty much this. I don't understand why we have to perform all these mental gymnastics trying to convince ourselves that he was actually good on Sunday. He did a lot of good things, yes, but overall? Way too many mistakes. Remember that pass to Knox on the crossing route that was so far behind him he got completely spun around?

 

One game doesn't make him a bad QB or mean he's going to bust. He had a bad game against a soft Jets D where many of his bugaboos resurfaced. Why is it so hard to admit that? I expect he'll be much better this Sunday.

 

Edited September 10, 2019 by VW82

[Thurman Kelly]

Like almost everyone here, I was glad the Bills were able to pull out this win, and Allen deserves a lot of credit for composing himself at the half (it certainly helped that the defense played great and the Jets made very little out of all those turnovers by half) and for playing an excellent 4th quarter.  Also, I don't expect a 2nd year QB who didn't start every game of his rookie season to be perfect.  I'm just looking to see enough improvement in seeing receivers open downfield, avoiding foreseeable interceptions, improved accuracy (particularly in short passing), and better decision making (particularly when it comes to throwing the ball away when nothing is there).

 

Notwithstanding that outlook, a reasonable description of his performance in the first half is "Petermanesque".  The Beasley interception was largely his fault.  He threw it behind him, if only slightly, but it was off target enough that at that range and velocity a bounce of some kind was foreseeable.  The pick 6 is entirely on him.  The first fumble was a little sloppy and little unlucky (he felt the sack coming, but didn't secure the ball to his body, or get rid of it), but the fumbled snap was on him (he left the exchange too early - I don't buy the explanation that the exchange failed because the centre was pushed back by the defense).  He wasn't to blame for the safety (unless you think he should have pushed into Gore's back when it looked like he was stacked up at the line - frankly, I don't want the starting QB to risk injury by getting involved in line play).  Let's remember that Peterman, similarly, also wasn't entirely to blame for his 5 first half interceptions, but his performance is now legend.

 

The difference is that Peterman was benched after his nightmare half, the Bills were out of the game by the time he left, and so Peterman never got the chance to "redeem" himself with a better 2nd half performance.

 

I think that Allen is much more talented than Peterman and has a much higher upside, but his performance in the first half was one of the worst ever by a Bills starting QB.

[section122]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

If we get 1st drive Josh and 4th Quarter Josh for 4 quarters next week.... then the Giants better watch out. I feel like he needs a day like that. A real complete performance to change the narrative. I thought Sunday showed real progress in those spots in the short and intermediate game. 

 

I thought week 17 last year was a complete game from him but agree with you.  It is easy to see the 4 turnovers without context and think that it is the same pre-draft Allen.  What we saw watching the game was much improved accuracy and overall grasp of the game and what the defense was throwing at him.  

 

If we were doing heat maps though... 

 

This win is one for the defense to hang their hat on.  They kept the team in the game until the 4th quarter.  They only gave up 8 points on the road to a division rival.  Josh is getting a lot of credit for the comeback but that defense should be getting more play this week.

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, section122 said:

 

I thought week 17 last year was a complete game from him but agree with you.  It is easy to see the 4 turnovers without context and think that it is the same pre-draft Allen.  What we saw watching the game was much improved accuracy and overall grasp of the game and what the defense was throwing at him.  

 

If we were doing heat maps though... 

 

This win is one for the defense to hang their hat on.  They kept the team in the game until the 4th quarter.  They only gave up 8 points on the road to a division rival.  Josh is getting a lot of credit for the comeback but that defense should be getting more play this week.

 

And week 17 is always a bit odd you are never sure who is already running for the bus. Doing that week 2 in New York against a storied franchise would make people stand up and take notice. 

[MDH]

46 minutes ago, mrags said:

The only thing I didn’t agree with was the TD to Brown when he said it was a perfectly placed back shoulder throw. 

 

I could be wrong, but I thought I heard in WGR yesterday, some with the team said it wasn’t intended to be a back shoulder throw. That he just threw it up and gave Brown a chance at it. If that was Joshs intent to put it in that spot, then great, but if he just “threw it up for a chance at it” and that’s what we got, I’m not 100% super duper excited about it. I mean it worked and we won the game because of it, but that doesn’t mean it was an accurately placed throw like the article states. 

 

Yeah, it wasn't really back shoulder, it was too far inside to be that.

 

He still gave his best playmaker a chance to win a one on one battle which is what I want to see.

[BillsfaninSB]

5 hours ago, 32ABBA said:

 

 

I think the way Allen plays the next few games will let us know if it was just a string of bad luck, or if he is actually the guy that the rest of the stats imply.

 

I believe it will be the latter.

 

I suppose you expect 3 or 4 turnovers game?

 

 

 

I agree.  The Jets game was weird and made it hard to truly evaluate QB play.  It felt kind of like a pre season game with how uneven it was.  But we did see how he handled himself under pressure.

 

We need a couple more data points. 

 

 

[Success]

I was thrilled with Allen’s game.  The turnovers were generally flukey.  Not entirely, but I didn’t see him misread coverages or make dumb throws.

 

And accuracy?  Such an overblown concern about Allen.  

 

He’s such a gamer.  I feel like it’s been a long time since we had a QB who was this kind of leader, and who just seemed like a winner.  

 

[teef]

the only real thing i worry about with josh is his playing hero ball.  i'm not sure if he gets panicky or what, but when he starts to force plays, that when the nonsense starts.  i think the turnovers threw him a bit, hero ball came out, and once he settled down, we saw how effective he can be.  i'm not worried about accuracy at this point, but i'm sure he'll miss some easy plays a couple of times a game.  all qbs do.  i know everyone loved the heavy passing, but i'd love to see the run game help him out more.

[oldmanfan]

29 minutes ago, VW82 said:

 

Pretty much this. I don't understand why we have to perform all these mental gymnastics trying to convince ourselves that he was actually good on Sunday. He did a lot of good things, yes, but overall? Way too many mistakes. Remember that pass to Knox on the crossing route that was so far behind him he got completely spun around?

 

One game doesn't make him a bad QB or mean he's going to bust. He had a bad game against a soft Jets D where many of his bugaboos resurfaced. Why is it so hard to admit that? I expect he'll be much better this Sunday.

 

Why do we say this.  Because you're being ridiculous.  See my post above, and then see what you wrote here.  You claim he made way to many mistakes and then cite ONE PASS. 

 

Do this.  go back and actually watch the game.  Go back and chart each throw, hen tell me he made way too many mistakes.  Tell me he was inaccurate.  If you do, it will confirm you simply want to slam the kid for no reason. 

 

 

[oldmanfan]

52 minutes ago, Thurman Kelly said:

Like almost everyone here, I was glad the Bills were able to pull out this win, and Allen deserves a lot of credit for composing himself at the half (it certainly helped that the defense played great and the Jets made very little out of all those turnovers by half) and for playing an excellent 4th quarter.  Also, I don't expect a 2nd year QB who didn't start every game of his rookie season to be perfect.  I'm just looking to see enough improvement in seeing receivers open downfield, avoiding foreseeable interceptions, improved accuracy (particularly in short passing), and better decision making (particularly when it comes to throwing the ball away when nothing is there).

 

Notwithstanding that outlook, a reasonable description of his performance in the first half is "Petermanesque".  The Beasley interception was largely his fault.  He threw it behind him, if only slightly, but it was off target enough that at that range and velocity a bounce of some kind was foreseeable.  The pick 6 is entirely on him.  The first fumble was a little sloppy and little unlucky (he felt the sack coming, but didn't secure the ball to his body, or get rid of it), but the fumbled snap was on him (he left the exchange too early - I don't buy the explanation that the exchange failed because the centre was pushed back by the defense).  He wasn't to blame for the safety (unless you think he should have pushed into Gore's back when it looked like he was stacked up at the line - frankly, I don't want the starting QB to risk injury by getting involved in line play).  Let's remember that Peterman, similarly, also wasn't entirely to blame for his 5 first half interceptions, but his performance is now legend.

 

The difference is that Peterman was benched after his nightmare half, the Bills were out of the game by the time he left, and so Peterman never got the chance to "redeem" himself with a better 2nd half performance.

 

I think that Allen is much more talented than Peterman and has a much higher upside, but his performance in the first half was one of the worst ever by a Bills starting QB.

This to me is way, way off base.  I refer you to my previous post above, but to comment on stuff here I'm sorry, but when you hit an NFL receiver in the hands - in the hands- and he pops it up that is not a pick that is entirely on the QB.  It simply is not, and claiming it is is just dumb.  The fumble on the snap.  Morse hiked the ball into himself it appeared; it is not a fumble if you never even touch the ball.  The fumble on the sack entirely on Allen; he has to learn to take the sack and protect the ball.  And the other pick was a deflection and it's a crap shoot when that occurs.

 

To compare that half to Peterman, to claim it is one of the worst halves ever by a Bills QB, is so over the top it's ridiculous.  Bad breaks are not poor performance.  You ignore the fact that they were moving the ball down the field for most of the half is simply looking for reasons to be negative.  You claim you want to see improvement in seeing receivers open downfield (checked, although he could get the ball out sooner sometimes), avoiding foreseeable interceptions (the throw to the corner where it should have been picked is a throw he can't make-see my commentary above), improved accuracy (anyone who watched that game and can't see how accurate he was is either blind or refuses to see), better decision making (he went through progressions and di throw it way more - even Gannon commented on how he was doing that).  So for the most part he showed improvement in the areas you wanted to see, and that makes him Petermanesque???

 

The kid did a lot more good than bad the other day.  He  did some bad things, he'll continue to do some bad things as young QBs do, but hopefully at much lower frequencies. Yet some around here want to apparently crucify the kid for reasons that remain a mystery. 

Edited September 10, 2019 by oldmanfan

[teef]

26 minutes ago, BillsfaninSB said:

 

I agree.  The Jets game was weird and made it hard to truly evaluate QB play.  It felt kind of like a pre season game with how uneven it was.  But we did see how he handled himself under pressure.

 

We need a couple more data points. 

 

 

it was one of the more bizarre games i have seen in a long time.

[dakrider]

 I watched game late on dvr and cheated and checked the halftime score/stats (not final score though).  So yeah watching the game it wasn't near as bad as the stats made it out to be.  Josh did have a hand in the turnovers, no doubt but as the article points out was not result of poor decisions.  The 2 almost ints were worse than the actual turnovers. 

 

One thing too, which I doubt anyone argues, is last year's Allen / Bills team would not have won this game. 

Edited September 10, 2019 by dakrider

[Thurman Kelly]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

This is kind of absurdity that I find laughable around here.  I refer you to my previous post above, but to comment on stuff here I'm sorry, but when you hit an NFL receiver in the hands - in the hands- and he pops it up that is not a pick that is entirely on the QB.  It simply is not, and claiming it is is just dumb.  The fumble on the snap.  Morse hiked the ball into himself it appeared; it is not a fumble if you never even touch the ball.  The fumble on the sack entirely on Allen; he has to learn to take the sack and protect the ball.  And the other pick was a deflection and it's a crap shoot when that occurs.

 

To compare that half to Peterman, to claim it is one of the worst halves ever by a Bills QB, is so over the top it's ridiculous.  Bad breaks are not poor performance.  You ignore the fact that they were moving the ball down the field for most of the half is simply looking for reasons to be negative.  You claim you want to see improvement in seeing receivers open downfield (checked, although he could get the ball out sooner sometimes), avoiding foreseeable interceptions (the throw to the corner where it should have been picked is a throw he can't make-see my commentary above), improved accuracy (anyone who watched that game and can't see how accurate he was is either blind or refuses to see), better decision making (he went through progressions and di throw it way more - even Gannon commented on how he was doing that).  So for the most part he showed improvement in the areas you wanted to see, and that makes him Petermanesque???

 

The kid did a lot more good than bad the other day.  He  did some bad things, he'll continue to do some bad things as young QBs do, but hopefully at much lower frequencies. Yet some around here want to apparently crucify the kid for reasons that remain a mystery. 

 

I disagree, but I'll be a bit more respectful than you. 

 

NFL receivers typically have a large catch radius, but on the perimeter of that radius receivers stand an equal chance of either catching the ball or just deflecting it.  No point is made by stating that the pass hit Beasley's hands.  The fact is that the pass was behind him.  It was inaccurate, even though it was a short pass.  It was thrown into the middle of the field where there is less forgiveness for inaccuracy.  The best QBs don't make this mistake very often.  They make their short passes to the center of the catch radius, or at least outside of the catch radius of coverage.  That's why their INT totals are low (at least relative to their TD passes).

 

I watched the replays of the snap as well.  I saw a snap lifted to the right position.  It wasn't fumbled on the way up by the center (which you also seem to have noticed).

 

You seem to miss my point somewhat.  I didn't say he's a lost cause, or that his entire game was Petermanesque, just that the first half was.  He  did some things well during that half (just as Peterman did against the Chargers), was a little unlucky (as Peterman also was), but made far too many errors for one half of football.  If that performance had been against the Patriots and not the Jets, and had the Bills been trailing by 30 at the half, he might have found himself on the bench.  Fortunately for him, the defense gave him a second chance, and fortunately he took advantage of that opportunity and played well in the second half (and eliminated his 1st half errors).

 

I think he's still the best chance we have to win, both now and in the immediate future, but let's not pretend he didn't have an awful first half last week.

[oldmanfan]

13 minutes ago, Thurman Kelly said:

 

I disagree, but I'll be a bit more respectful than you. 

 

NFL receivers typically have a large catch radius, but on the perimeter of that radius receivers stand an equal chance of either catching the ball or just deflecting it.  No point is made by stating that the pass hit Beasley's hands.  The fact is that the pass was behind him.  It was inaccurate, even though it was a short pass.  It was thrown into the middle of the field where there is less forgiveness for inaccuracy.  The best QBs don't make this mistake very often.  They make their short passes to the center of the catch radius, or at least outside of the catch radius of coverage.  That's why their INT totals are low (at least relative to their TD passes).

 

I watched the replays of the snap as well.  I saw a snap lifted to the right position.  It wasn't fumbled on the way up by the center (which you also seem to have noticed).

 

You seem to miss my point somewhat.  I didn't say he's a lost cause, or that his entire game was Petermanesque, just that the first half was.  He  did some things well during that half (just as Peterman did against the Chargers), was a little unlucky (as Peterman also was), but made far too many errors for one half of football.  If that performance had been against the Patriots and not the Jets, and had the Bills been trailing by 30 at the half, he might have found himself on the bench.  Fortunately for him, the defense gave him a second chance, and fortunately he took advantage of that opportunity and played well in the second half (and eliminated his 1st half errors).

 

I think he's still the best chance we have to win, both now and in the immediate future, but let's not pretend he didn't have an awful first half last week.

I will respectfully disagree.  I have said here many times, and some disagree, that there is a difference between accuracy and precision.  The pass that was the pick 6 is a perfect example.  It was accurate, it hit the WR in the hands.  Accuracy is how close you are to a given target, , and by any measure that pass was accurate.  It could have been more precise, i.e. hitting a specific spot.  Now from my measure that throw could have been maybe 4 inches more to the left.  But I'm sorry, NFL WR's who get hit right in the hands (and the pass was low, where it should have been away from the defender)  get paid to catch that pass.  To somehow conflate that with some of the terrible Peterman picks is just looking to be overly negative, in my opinion.

 

The bad snap.  Snaps are between a C and QB.  It looked  to me (and to Gannon) that the snap was on the C. But again to place all the blame on Allen when, at the least, a poor snap involves both parties. 

 

The other pick.  A tipped ball which is a crap shoot.  And the other fumble that was on him as a said above.

 

Three fo the four issues were not truly his, but if you watch the half objectively you see that the team was moving very well offensively, and some dumb luck and dumb penalties such as Feliciano kept them from scoring.  Your conclusion that he was Petermanesque, that it was one of the worst halves of football ever by a Bills QB, and so on, is just over the top.  I go back to 1960 with this team and there have been plenty of QBs that have had worse halves.  If you can, go back and watch the replay, look at every throw he made, then tell me he was inaccurate and so on.  If you're being objective you'll find he wasn't.

Edited September 10, 2019 by oldmanfan