Peterman

[9nationalchampionships]

nice article from Jerry D this morning for your reading pleasure.

Anyone else think something went off in Peterman's head to move him from a game manager to a play maker? He will make at least an NFL practice squad if not a roster.

http://triblive.com/sports/college/pitt/11682157-74/peterman-pitt-quarterback

 

[thebadby2]

He wasn't never really a "playmaker" but he did start to make some individual plays here and there later in the season. I suspect it wasn't any epiphany he had as much as it was him getting more and more comfortable with the playbook and the offense as the weeks went by. Now if we could've had Peterman and Canada together for 3 years.....

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

I don't know why people always use the word "game manager" as a pejorative? Calling a quarterback a "game manager" is one of the best compliments you could pay him.

It simply means that he knows what he's doing and he consistently keeps the offense on schedule – which is his primary job. It also describes Peterman to a T.

To me, that's like calling a running back a "chain mover" or a receiver "sure-handed" or a defender a "sure tackler." Those are all good things as far as I'm concerned.

 

[NTOP]

I don't know why people always use the word "game manager" as a pejorative? Calling a quarterback a "game manager" is one of the best compliments you could pay him.

It simply means that he knows what he's doing and he consistently keeps the offense on schedule – which is his primary job. It also describes Peterman to a T.

To me, that's like calling a running back a "chain mover" or a receiver "sure-handed" or a defender a "sure tackler." Those are all good things as far as I'm concerned.

I'd rather just call him: "Winner".

 

[CaptainMurphy]

He would be a solid backup in the NFL. He's got the whole package....smarts, strong enough arm, decent scrambler, good leader, doesn't make many unforced errors. Won't wow you with pure physical talent but he just gets the job done. He seems like the kind of guy who you could plug into a situation in year one and be confident that he won't truly f it up like Landry Jones. I think that is his floor. Who knows, a few breaks and he could be the next Kirk Cousins.

 

[Delpanther]

Have to say that my respect for Peterman by year end tripled...he played with a lot of heart, played well in the clutch and was a playmaker himself. His transfer to Pitt was a real positive.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

Trent Dilfer is the one who seemed to permanently change what the term "game manager" meant.

Prior to him coming around, it was used properly.

However, as broadcasters lazily tried to make every single issue come back to the quarterback, they we left in a conundrum with the Ravens/Dilfer.

That Baltimore team in the early 2000s had one of the best defenses the NFL has ever seen. They were truly exceptional. Also, people forget about him now but Jamal Lewis was an excellent running back – one of the best of that generation.

They where one of those extremely rare teams that ran the ball so well and defended so incredibly well but they really didn't need a good quarterback to be successful.

The Chicago Bears of the mid-80s were another such team. Jim McMahon was a very average player who was always hurt anyway. However, they had Walter Payton and that amazing defense, so it simply didn't matter.

So, everyone could see with their own two eyes that the Ravens didn't have a quarterback. However, they kept winning anyway. So, people began to associate the term "game manager" with a quarterback who stinks but who plays on a team that wins anyway and suddenly it became a negative.

However, Tom Brady is definitely a game manager. Peyton Manning won the Super Bowl last year by consistently and brilliantly managing games. Troy Aikman won three Super Bowls mostly by managing games.

It's not a negative at all – at least it shouldn't be.

 

[CaptainMurphy]

Yes, I think most good QBs are game managers. I think to be a good QB you are either a good game manager or a gunslinger who takes big risks often like Brett Favre. I think Peterman could be a very successful NFL QB in the right situation. I think his style would fit perfectly with the Texans.

 

[VAPanther91]

I wish we would have let him throw more than a two yard quick out in the 4th qtr of the UNC game as we would have won that game had we let him complete anything to Orndorf 5-7 yds down field in the middle of the field.

I think that was the epiphany by the staff---we need to take the training wheels off and see what happens if we are going to win any of the big games after UNC.....

 

[PhPanther1]

PittPoker still thinks he sucks.

 

[vegasgreed]

It was Chaney's best contribution while at Pitt.

Have to say that my respect for Peterman by year end tripled...he played with a lot of heart, played well in the clutch and was a playmaker himself. His transfer to Pitt was a real positive.

 

[jtbuba]

Have to say that my respect for Peterman by year end tripled...he played with a lot of heart, played well in the clutch and was a playmaker himself. His transfer to Pitt was a real positive.

I think he is the catalyst that makes this offense very good.

 

[mjsdoc3]

What are the thoughts here, PittPoker and TD_isnotapittman?

 

[OriginalEther]

I don't know why people always use the word "game manager" as a pejorative? Calling a quarterback a "game manager" is one of the best compliments you could pay him.

It simply means that he knows what he's doing and he consistently keeps the offense on schedule – which is his primary job. It also describes Peterman to a T.

To me, that's like calling a running back a "chain mover" or a receiver "sure-handed" or a defender a "sure tackler." Those are all good things as far as I'm concerned.

I think most people equate the term with being average.
Which is certainly better than being terrible.

But, it's hard to Win championships with just an average quarterback. And since society...not just Pitt fans...often view anything less than a championship as failure, there becomes the issue.

 

[EastOhioPanther]

Here is a comparison.. Nate Peterman or Landry Jones... I would take "Nate".
I'm not saying the Steelers will go after Nate.. I am saying Nate could do a better job than some of the backups that are out there now, across the NFL.....

H2P

 

[NCanton Panther]

Nate definitely improved as the season went on and overall had a good year. That's all you can ask for. It was a long season though and easy to forget some things from early on. Not a knock on Nate but it sure seemed like the coaches didn't have much confidence in him early on. If they had and if he was up to the task, the UNC game may have turned out differently, maybe the OSU game as well. And PSU may not have had the opportunity to make it close in the 2nd half.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

I think most people equate the term with being average.
Which is certainly better than being terrible.

But, it's hard to Win championships with just an average quarterback. And since society...not just Pitt fans...often view anything less than a championship as failure, there becomes the issue.

No, I get how people are using the term nowadays, I just think they are using it very poorly.

If you think the guy is an average player, just say he's average. That's way more accurate. If you think a receiver is too slow, just say so. Don't talk about his moxie, or his leadership skills, or how sure-handed he is, just call it like you see it.

Antonio Brown is very sure-handed. However, if I call him "a sure-handed receiver," that doesn't diminish him. It just means he catches most of the balls he should.

Calling a quarterback a game manager doesn't make sense because teams with quarterbacks who manage the game well tend to be teams who win, which is after all, why you play the game.



The Denver Broncos won the Super Bowl last year with a quarterback who could not throw the ball 20 yards down the field. Peyton Manning, at that point in his career, could only win with his brain.

Remarkably, he did just that.

Tom Brady is definitely a masterful game manager. He basically just takes with the defense gives him and makes the right decision every single time.

Brady is not going to electrify you with his legs like Michael Vick used to be able to do. He's not going to blow you away with his arm strength like Brett Favre could. He just makes the right decisions play after play after play, in game after game after game. He also wins lots and lots of Super Bowls.

I just think it's a horrible term to describe a player. It has taken a really good quality and turned it into a negative and that annoys me to no end because it doesn't make sense.

 

[jsawyer95]

I can't help but think what people were saying last year about Peterman. Peterman had a good year, but I'm not sure if he'll make a NFL team based on this year's production.