Saints signed QB Nathan Peterman (1 Viewer)

[Saint KayBee]

The Peter Man!

 

[Mr. Sparkle]

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Anytime you can add a guy with a sub-40 passer rating, you gotta do it.

 

[Nonreg]

Someone fill me in on everyone laughing.

Is there some backstory on Peterman I'm unaware of?

Or did everyone think we were going to sign a high priced, stud backup QB... and therefore views this as a comical signing by our FO?

watch the video i posted

peterman is horrible and if he has to start we will go winless.

hes probably great at the communication side of QB2; but god help us if he actually ever starts / plays

 

[Stalwart385]

A lot of strong emotions for this guy, probably because he was a national meme a while back.

I will never complain about the team bringing in a vet on a minimum contract. The only risk is 1 spot on a 90 man offseason roster.

 

[SonOfNOLA]

watch the video i posted

peterman is horrible and if he has to start we will go winless.

hes probably great at the communication side of QB2; but god help us if he actually ever starts / plays

The intent isn’t to have Peterman as an option to start after Carr. It’s strictly to prepare Haener for the next 5 months through competition. Hill would start for a game if necessary if we weren’t comfortable with Haener after months of installation by then which we should be.

 

[Infoman]

Well... Still need to draft one.... and If Jake can't beat out Peterman... then he needs to go too... and TH7 is our backup QB as of today... so this is a non-issue.

 

[Saint Spud]

Well... Still need to draft one.... and If Jake can't beat out Peterman... then he needs to go too...

Agree. We need to keep drafting QBs until we get a certified hit.

 

[Fiyo]

Good news is we should get a lot of Haener in the preseason which isn't a bad thing. And they can always replace Peterman when teams make their cuts and a better QB goes on the market.

This ... and I'm good with it, actually ... I have seriously hopeful belief that Haener is our future QB1 ... (but I would have Kellen Mond on speed dial because he took some regular season snaps when Kubiak was the Vikings' OC)

 

[Kegger]

Still need to draft one

 

[Nonreg]

The intent isn’t to have Peterman as an option to start after Carr. It’s strictly to prepare Haener for the next 5 months through competition. Hill would start for a game if necessary if we weren’t comfortable with Haener after months of installation by then which we should be.

I understand that, which is why I replied the way I did.

 

[Fiyo]

Well... Still need to draft one.... and If Jake can't beat out Peterman... then he needs to go too... and TH7 is our backup QB as of today... so this is a non-issue.

And this, too ... at least the TH7 part ... we need trench players on both sides of the ball, a DB (probably safety or dual role) ... as far as offensive skills players, I'm not QB desperate with Carr, Haener and Hill in the room ... if we don't sign Renfrow, I'd spend a 5th rounder on Luke McCaffrey to handle the slot WR role ... and Bowers would be hard to pass up if he's there at 14 (he won't be) ... but what we need most on offense is beef up front

 

[2009ring]

they should sign me to compete with Peterman. Might be close.

 

[Taker597]

Ehhhh... I see no real point of getting a QB to motivate another QB. So, this is a nothing burger for me personally. If you have to find one of the worst QB to ever play of the last 10 years to prop a guy to be #2 QB.

Maybe you should draft another QB

Even if you want a vet QB. You don't want a vet QB like Peterman.

 

[GeneHansen]

The intent isn’t to have Peterman as an option to start after Carr. It’s strictly to prepare Haener for the next 5 months through competition. Hill would start for a game if necessary if we weren’t comfortable with Haener by then which we should be.

It all seems pretty rational to me (which probably has no place on a message board).

They like Haener, and feel pretty comfortable with his as QB2. They don't want to hand it to him so they're going to bring in a low priced QB familiar with the system and coaches. Plus more arms are needed for TC. We might well bring in an UDFA type to camp.

At the same time they probably identified a QB or two about whom they said, "Even though we feel good about Haener, who are the guys we would put on the 54 ahead of Haener if we could sign them? Flacco was such a guy, and they apparently reached out to him.

Just because we looked into / reached out to / went after Flacco...
doesn't mean we don't like Haener.
doesn't mean we were heck bent on landing a top tier QB2.
doesn't mean we swung and missed horribly at everyone and landed Peterman.

 

[Rouxble]

Not really. The only thing we know about Flacco is that we were interested in and perhaps offered. No evidence that we were anywhere near what he eventually got, which would explain why we pivoted to an option more in our price range.

It’s two completely different strategies. Signing Flacco says Haener isn’t ready, signing Peterman says he is.

Probably inconsequential, but there’s a clear difference in roster building plans based on signing one or the other.