dancing_joker Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 i guess the bigger question is would you rather have oher than maybin? As it stands right now, the answer is easy. YES!
Cynical Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 Can someone fill me in a little on this bold part? I think he is referring to the point the Bills do not have a legit LT on this team, and to acquire one, the Bills will need to spend a first round pick this year or next year to get one.
WellDressed Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 If the trade deadline hadn't passed yet and Philly called Russ and offered Peters for Eric Wood and Shawn Nelson would you want Russ to Get'r done? Even though the Bills desperately need a tackle I'd still say no. The two players the Bills got are worth more than Peters to me. Wood is a stud and Nelson shows a lot of promise. JMO So, how are the minority coaching interviews progressing?? ....................You were all over that after jauron was canned.
benderbender Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 Philly made a bad move. Peters is still young, but you don't regain your love for the game after you've lost it this early on. This guy, like my co-workers, works just hard enough not to get fired and no harder. If we dodged one bullet, it was Peters.
Steely Dan Posted November 19, 2009 Author Posted November 19, 2009 One in the hand is with two in the bush. Not in my opinion! That was my fear should the Bills have paid him what he wanted. I think ultimately, they should have found a replacement. But for all of his contract squabbles, and hold-outs, the Bills actually got the better end of this deal. For starters, they were able to obtain both a first round draft pick (used to select Wood) and a later round pick next year. Considering that he was an undrafted college TE which cost the Bills nothing, that is a pretty good return on investment. Secondly, his contract squabbles were an undermining influence to the team. He had just signed a contract, and before the ink is even dry he then demands a new one, holds out, and really hinders the team with his absence. Thirdly, the comments made by the Bills that they wanted to get tougher on the offensive line was a reason why Dockery, Preston, and Fowler were released. Giving the number of sacks Peters gave up last year, and his annoyingly selfish contract demands, and with the News now coming out of Philly, could it be that he was one of the weaknesses that the staff was talking of? Finally, Wood is a stud and perhaps the brightest prospect drafted by the Bills for the offensive line in almost 2 decades. Don't forget they also got a draft pick from Philly that they used to select Shawn Nelson.
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 RJ, where do you get Howard Eskin being respected. The guy golfs alone, no one will play with him. He golfs at Ashbourne and is always a single. I have run into him a dozen or so times, I know of no one who likes that clown. I know nothing about his golf habits, and was not aware that is the barometer for one's value as an analyst and human being.... I just know that he has a highly rated show on the radio and wrote for the Daily News for years. He is by no means infallible, but his opinions are far from worthless, and he is also only one of the sports voices in Philly unhappy with Peters. As other posters have said, whatever happens with Peters, it does not excuse the Bills' failure to have a plan for their tackles this year. But this does indicate that Peters may indeed have motivational issues, and he may not have been such a great long term option either.
eball Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 Indeed. For what it is worth, by the way, the Philly media are all over Peters for not being willing to play with minor injuries. Howard Eskin (well-respected local reporter and radio guy) refers to him as the "Pillsbury Doughboy," and argues that Peters has lots of talent and no desire, especially now that he has made his big bucks. Didn't see THAT coming...
PromoTheRobot Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 I know nothing about his golf habits, and was not aware that is the barometer for one's value as an analyst and human being.... I just know that he has a highly rated show on the radio and wrote for the Daily News for years. He is by no means infallible, but his opinions are far from worthless, and he is also only one of the sports voices in Philly unhappy with Peters. As other posters have said, whatever happens with Peters, it does not excuse the Bills' failure to have a plan for their tackles this year. But this does indicate that Peters may indeed have motivational issues, and he may not have been such a great long term option either. Being unpopular doesn't make a man wrong. In fact it probably means he's right. PTR
BuffaloBill Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 The JP ship has sailed. I agree with rabbit that the Bills should have done more in the off season looking for his replacement. Thinking they could go into the season with Walker and/or Tinkerbell at that spot was a horrendous mistake. Agreed the clock can't be turned back. Personally I think the Bills did what they had to do but they created the monster when they did not redo Peters deal after they moved him from RT to LT. To me the Bills came across as stupid, cheap and petty. I am not suggesting that Peters handled himself with class either. If any of us were moved into our the job currently held by our boss and were successful at it for some time we would look to be paid accordingly.
PDaDdy Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 Can someone fill me in a little on this bold part? It means we will need to spend a high pick to find a decent LT because we obviously don't have one that is even close. All of the experiments are over. All the Peters sucks, Bell, Chambers, Walker, "fill in the blank player" can do just as well.
PDaDdy Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 Philly made a bad move. Peters is still young, but you don't regain your love for the game after you've lost it this early on. This guy, like my co-workers, works just hard enough not to get fired and no harder. If we dodged one bullet, it was Peters. If you mean we dodged a bullet by diving into a spike filled pit you are correct. I can't believe you are saying that our current situation is an upgrade over what we had.
Cson76 Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 Don't forget that he has barely played becuase he's been injured almost all year. I'd take the trade becuase I don't think he'll really every be healthy.
PromoTheRobot Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 If you mean we dodged a bullet by diving into a spike filled pit you are correct. I can't believe you are saying that our current situation is an upgrade over what we had. What we dodged is paying a fat unmotivated lardass $11M a year to give up sacks and kitty out. PTR
PDaDdy Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 What we dodged is paying a fat unmotivated lardass $11M a year to give up sacks and kitty out. PTR I don't agree but I think I get what you are saying. I would hardly breathe a sigh of relief that I dodged a bullet just after a tractor trailer fell on my head! Can you say out of the frying pan and into the fire? For your attempted point to be even remotely valid our LT position should be in a BETTER situation. If Peters sucked so badly and kittied out why is it that what we have their currently kitties out even more, in terms of missed games, and isn't 1/10th the player? Peters could play on an island. Our LT stand ins have been TERRIBLE and that's WITH help from backs and TEs. I seem to also recall that Peters was able to remember the snap count!!!!! Don't let your emotions for the man's business acumen cloud your vision of how much better he was than ANYTHING we have currently or might possibly acquire in the near future. Never forget, this is a business. Sometimes people you don't like on a personal level make great working or business partners.
MRW Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 I don't agree but I think I get what you are saying. I would hardly breathe a sigh of relief that I dodged a bullet just after a tractor trailer fell on my head! Can you say out of the frying pan and into the fire? For your attempted point to be even remotely valid our LT position should be in a BETTER situation. If Peters sucked so badly and kittied out why is it that what we have their currently kitties out even more, in terms of missed games, and isn't 1/10th the player? Peters could play on an island. Our LT stand ins have been TERRIBLE and that's WITH help from backs and TEs. I seem to also recall that Peters was able to remember the snap count!!!!! Don't let your emotions for the man's business acumen cloud your vision of how much better he was than ANYTHING we have currently or might possibly acquire in the near future. Never forget, this is a business. Sometimes people you don't like on a personal level make great working or business partners. I would say that the Peters move wouldn't be a disaster if the Bills had found even a slightly below average player to play tackle, a guy that might need some help but could at least play the position. But I see no signs that they have a guy like that on the roster, and that to me is what makes the handling of the situation inexcusable. At least then you could look at it and say well, there's a downgrade at tackle but they saved money to use at other positions and picked up a promising guard and TE. Instead the situation is some people continue to pat the FO on the back for their business savvy while the QB has to keep his head on a swivel looking out for pass rushers coming off the edges. So I largely agree with you, but I don't think the LT position needed to be BETTER, just not embarrassing. But the team failed even at that.
qwksilver Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 i guess the bigger question is would you rather have oher than maybin? As it stands right now, the answer is easy. YES! The above is correct : Oher, Wood & Everette in the 2nd round worked for me. Also Peters is a FAT, LAZY, UNMOTIVATED (now that he got his paycheck) no heart for the game or desire to get after it! he will never be a leader and if the Eagles go anywhere it will not be because of him. Wood = HEART, PASSION for the game and a never ending motor with atheticism. And is better for the cap than 11 mill per. This is someone one you can build the team/line around, especially if he gets moved to C.
PDaDdy Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 I would say that the Peters move wouldn't be a disaster if the Bills had found even a slightly below average player to play tackle, a guy that might need some help but could at least play the position. But I see no signs that they have a guy like that on the roster, and that to me is what makes the handling of the situation inexcusable. At least then you could look at it and say well, there's a downgrade at tackle but they saved money to use at other positions and picked up a promising guard and TE. Instead the situation is some people continue to pat the FO on the back for their business savvy while the QB has to keep his head on a swivel looking out for pass rushers coming off the edges. So I largely agree with you, but I don't think the LT position needed to be BETTER, just not embarrassing. But the team failed even at that. We are sort of on the same page. I might be more inclined to buy the Peters fiasco if we chose to spend that money somewhere else of equal importance. As I have said in another post good teams like the Patriots make choices between which allstar or pro bowler to keep due to cap reasons and which one to trade for more picks. Bad teams just trade away or even worse let walk their all stars and probowlers even if they could easily fit them under the cap. In our situation our choice was Peters vs nobody!!! If we had some other probowl stud on the team that we kept or a HIGH priced difference making free agent we brought in with his salary then perhaps I could swallow it. Instead we just got a bunch of rookies that will hopefully continue to progress. ***PLEASE don't allege that TO is that "HIGH" priced difference maker. He came at a BARGAIN and no WR can make a difference if your o-line stinks out loud and your QB is terrible!
PDaDdy Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 The above is correct : Oher, Wood & Everette in the 2nd round worked for me. Also Peters is a FAT, LAZY, UNMOTIVATED (now that he got his paycheck) no heart for the game or desire to get after it! he will never be a leader and if the Eagles go anywhere it will not be because of him. Wood = HEART, PASSION for the game and a never ending motor with atheticism. And is better for the cap than 11 mill per. This is someone one you can build the team/line around, especially if he gets moved to C. BLAH BLAH BLAH! I love it when people allege that their greatest reason for wanting to be without Peters are things you can't prove!!! How about we stick to things like....oh....performance....oh hey ...I got it.....accolades like probowls!!! Peters plays on a good line and Woods plays on a terrible one!!! Do you think Trent really cares how good Wood "COULD" be in 2 years. I stressed "COULD" because he is nothing stellar right now. I hope Wood never suffers an injury lest he be called a fat lazy slob who has lost his motivation. All things that can't be proved in the least.
MRW Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 We are sort of on the same page. I might be more inclined to buy the Peters fiasco if we chose to spend that money somewhere else of equal importance. As I have said in another post good teams like the Patriots make choices between which allstar or pro bowler to keep due to cap reasons and which one to trade for more picks. Bad teams just trade away or even worse let walk their all stars and probowlers even if they could easily fit them under the cap. In our situation our choice was Peters vs nobody!!! If we had some other probowl stud on the team that we kept or a HIGH priced difference making free agent we brought in with his salary then perhaps I could swallow it. Instead we just got a bunch of rookies that will hopefully continue to progress. ***PLEASE don't allege that TO is that "HIGH" priced difference maker. He came at a BARGAIN and no WR can make a difference if your o-line stinks out loud and your QB is terrible! I basically agree with you. The one caveat I would add is that without Peters' salary on the books the team is theoretically free to pursue big-ticket free agents (DT or DE are the only two positions I could think of where there's any chance a player of comparable worth to a good LT could be found at some point) in the future, even if none are available now. So it is possible to realize some benefit from not paying Peters in the future. Without a front office change I'm not optimistic about it, but it could happen. Really I'm just trying to look on the bright side because I think the team mishandled the Peters situation from the start, and all they can do now is try to gain some benefit.
PDaDdy Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 I basically agree with you. The one caveat I would add is that without Peters' salary on the books the team is theoretically free to pursue big-ticket free agents (DT or DE are the only two positions I could think of where there's any chance a player of comparable worth to a good LT could be found at some point) in the future, even if none are available now. So it is possible to realize some benefit from not paying Peters in the future. Without a front office change I'm not optimistic about it, but it could happen. Really I'm just trying to look on the bright side because I think the team mishandled the Peters situation from the start, and all they can do now is try to gain some benefit. I agree with that. If we spent that money on a difference maker as I said. Instead.....nothing. Typical cheap move by the front office which is notorious for being cheap. This time with Peters they just engaged in a slimey smear campaign to get the public on the side of the cheap front office for once. I would love to have kept Peters and built upon that talent instead of tearing it all down as we did to end up with the worst line in Bills history which is something that conveniently none of the Peters haters talk about. I MEAN WORST LINE EVER!!!! Potential is one thing but as of this day I have seen nothing worse. Perhaps that supposed saved money will someday be used on another difference maker. Cap money doesn't add up like roll over minutes. You use it that year or you don't. Bonus money though comes directly from coffers of the crypt keeper and is amortized over the length of the contract. That is perhaps the only money that is really "saved" that could be used later as opposed to just being spent or not being spent year to year like cap money.
Recommended Posts