To all those who said Peters would be ready to play

[The Senator]

Peters isn't going to get any better if he doesn't play.

 

But based on what we've seen so far, he could be replaced with options we already have on the roster without much overall effect.

might actually be an improvement...

 

3...2...1...

[ans4e64]

Because Peters made two mistakes visible to our fans' naked eye does not mean he needs to be benched. He has played outstanding, as one of the other posters said, Jauron has stated, "he has played dominant football." Is it fair that because Peters made two mistakes in letting defenders get around him, and those defenders in-turn made great plays on the football, that Peters is more at fault than if the defenders didn't make great plays and instead just sacked Edwards, or missed him completely?

 

What does benching Peters accomplish, isn't the point that he isn't in game shape, and that's where we want him and need him to be? He's not going to get ready for games by taking walk-through reps in practice each week. Having Peters get the rust off for a few weeks, and then having him at his Pro Bowl level is better than shifting the two thirds of the offensive line for the entire season.

[The Senator]

Having Peters get the rust off for a few weeks, and then having him at his Pro Bowl level is better than shifting the two thirds of the offensive line for the entire season.

You're assuming he's going to get back to Pro Bowl form. I hope he does, but still say that's a big "IF".

 

(All of 'The Holdout's Cult' members insisted he'd be 100% ready by week two - we now know how laughable that notion was.)

[colin]

the spin you guys put on this is laughable.

 

peters has been bad. he's beat guys up a few times on good blocks, but hes an OT not a DT, it's about being consistent, not making the occasional big play.

 

he got benched for chambers who played better than peters has been playing. he then came in and played better.

 

this is because he is out of shape and he got a swift kick up the ass from the coaches.

 

dick came out and said peters was dominant AT TIMES.

 

any mouth breather saying that dick is lying or peters played well being the only two possibilities is dumb. dick is benching peters and then talking him up

in the post game because he thinks thats how peters will best be coached and motivated. peters is way behind where he was last year and needs to get better really quickly if he expects a big contract at the end of the season.

 

our coach is not as bad as people say, and our LT is not as good as people say. and it's a team game anyway, so put the ball washing rags down!!!!

[Phil Hansen Forever]

DJ should bench him, especially after screwing over the team during the training camp and OTA's. He showed up not in shape, not aware and has proven he is not ready to play. They should bench him and make him feel the heat. Everyone can be replaced, perhaps that hasn't sunk in yet with his big ego.

[PromoTheRobot]

Because Peters made two mistakes visible to our fans' naked eye does not mean he needs to be benched. He has played outstanding, as one of the other posters said, Jauron has stated, "he has played dominant football." Is it fair that because Peters made two mistakes in letting defenders get around him, and those defenders in-turn made great plays on the football, that Peters is more at fault than if the defenders didn't make great plays and instead just sacked Edwards, or missed him completely?

 

What does benching Peters accomplish, isn't the point that he isn't in game shape, and that's where we want him and need him to be? He's not going to get ready for games by taking walk-through reps in practice each week. Having Peters get the rust off for a few weeks, and then having him at his Pro Bowl level is better than shifting the two thirds of the offensive line for the entire season.

 

Ahem...

 

TMQ

Coaching note: After staging his inexplicable pointless summer holdout (he has three years remaining on his contract), Budgies Pro Bowl tackle Jason Peters has lacked focus in his early play. On Sunday, he struggled early against Oakland speed rusher Derrick Burgess. Buffalo coaches took Peters out, but rather than yell at him, had him stand with them and watch as undrafted Kirk Chambers played left tackle and shut Burgess down. That was all the motivation Peters needed to return and perform well in the second half.

 

Maybe our eyes are untrained but Jauron's are.

 

PTR

[Gavin in Va Beach]

You're assuming he's going to get back to Pro Bowl form. I hope he does, but still say that's a big "IF".

 

(All of 'The Holdout's Cult' members insisted he'd be 100% ready by week two - we now know how laughable that notion was.)

 

Careful Sen, all this Peters hate is making you seem worse that the 'Holdout Cult' you profess to despise.

 

 

Peters is obviously rusty, but he should continue to progress as he gets back in game shape. Benching him now will accomplish nothing and I'm sure the front office has said some words to Peters and/or Peters agent to the effect of 'you want your contract redone? We're open to it, but you better start playing a helluva lot better than you have been these last two games.'

 

The Bills are on their way, and Peters will help get them there.

[PromoTheRobot]

Careful Sen, all this Peters hate is making you seem worse that the 'Holdout Cult' you profess to despise.

 

 

Peters is obviously rusty, but he should continue to progress as he gets back in game shape. Benching him now will accomplish nothing and I'm sure the front office has said some words to Peters and/or Peters agent to the effect of 'you want your contract redone? We're open to it, but you better start playing a helluva lot better than you have been these last two games.'

 

The Bills are on their way, and Peters will help get them there.

I have no doubt Peters can get better, and that the Bills staff expects him to play like a Pro Bowler if he wants a new deal. That said, why does a guy who wants to be paid like a premiere LT need to watch Kirk Chambers from the sideline to motivate him to pick up his game?

 

PTR

[tumaro02]

Bench Peters?

 

During our long protracted debate over Peters hold out, a few of us (me included) said that Peters would suffer for missing OTA's and training camp. Others (who coincidentally were arguing on Peters behalf, predicting Armageddon for Edwards if anyone but Peters played LT) said that Peters was so crazy good that he didn't need camp. Being "the best player on the team" meant that he can just walk ont the field and be better than what the Bills had.

 

Now two games in and we are seeing that Peters is more of a liability to the Bills than an asset. Twice in two weeks, "our best player" has been beaten badly enough that the rusher caused Trent Edwards to fumble. Wasn't this the kind of stuff that wasn't supposed to happen with Peters at LT? Fortunately the Bills are 3-0 so we all just laugh it off, but I wonder if we were 1-2, and both games turned on those Peters-induced turnovers, how would we be feeling about "the best player on the team?"

 

PTR

 

I don't know if this had been addressed or not and I was not at the game, but did the Bills announce the Offensive Starting Lineup or not and, if so, what was the crowd reaction to Peters??

[The Senator]

I have no doubt Peters can get better, and that the Bills staff expects him to play like a Pro Bowler if he wants a new deal. That said, why does a guy who wants to be paid like a premiere LT need to watch Kirk Chambers from the sideline to motivate him to pick up his game?

 

PTR

I think you hit the nail on the head, PTR - it's doesn't so much matter to PayMe if he is a premiere LT, so long as he's paid like one.

[eball]

I agree that benching Peters now would be extreme going into St.Louis. But going forward I think benching him should be an option.

 

PTR

That's really counterintuitive, since the argument seems to be that he needs to play (and practice) his way back into shape. By the time the Bills face San Diego, he'll have had another two games and four weeks of practice.

 

No reason to sit the big man against St. Louie or 'Zona, and by the time the Chargers come to Orchard Park he'll hopefully have rounded back into form.

 

Just be thankful the Bills' early season schedule didn't include Pittsburgh, Philly, Baltimore, or the Giants.

[Gavin in Va Beach]

I have no doubt Peters can get better, and that the Bills staff expects him to play like a Pro Bowler if he wants a new deal. That said, why does a guy who wants to be paid like a premiere LT need to watch Kirk Chambers from the sideline to motivate him to pick up his game?

PTR

 

 

Because he's out of shape. He gambled and lost on the holdout and it cost him/is costing him. However the Bills still believe in him or he wouldn't be starting. The Bills are wisely giving him a breather from time to time. They are not freaking out and playing head games.

 

It's also important to remember All linemen get beat occasionally. Even All-Pros. Sure Jason will probably get beat a few extra times as he get's back into shape. It should start to happen less and less.

[ChasBB]

Bench Peters?

 

During our long protracted debate over Peters hold out, a few of us (me included) said that Peters would suffer for missing OTA's and training camp. Others (who coincidentally were arguing on Peters behalf, predicting Armageddon for Edwards if anyone but Peters played LT) said that Peters was so crazy good that he didn't need camp. Being "the best player on the team" meant that he can just walk ont the field and be better than what the Bills had.

 

Now two games in and we are seeing that Peters is more of a liability to the Bills than an asset. Twice in two weeks, "our best player" has been beaten badly enough that the rusher caused Trent Edwards to fumble. Wasn't this the kind of stuff that wasn't supposed to happen with Peters at LT? Fortunately the Bills are 3-0 so we all just laugh it off, but I wonder if we were 1-2, and both games turned on those Peters-induced turnovers, how would we be feeling about "the best player on the team?"

 

PTR

I would have liked to see him held out until the Oakland game to just practice the first 2-3 weeks. Well, that didn't happen and so what's the point in pulling him out now? Not that you are suggesting this, but there's no point in this. Peters was essentially allowed to use the first few games of the season as his personal training camp. While this was probably not the way to go about it, it's done and Peters will ultimately be better for it. By tossing him in there, he'll be more valuable to the Bills in the upcoming weeks than he would have been sitting on the bench.

 

He WILL get better as the year goes on.

 

And, what, a guy -- even a pro bowl selection -- can't make a mistake? I've got news for you -- he'll make more. And guess what -- pro bowl players on other teams will make mistakes, too. You are asking for perfection and that is unreasonable.

[DanInUticaTampa]

the line worked out fine against the seahawks without him. he is too slow right now. if he is not in shape by the bye week, he should be benched in the chargers game.

[Lurker]

It's just plain silly to think every play can be run to perfection, whether it's Peters or Schobel or whatever whipping boy de jour TSW is going off on (but not surprising I suppose, given the Madden-ization of the NFL fan base).

 

sh-- happens. Plays don't always work and players make mistakes. What matters is overcoming adversity and working as a team, which we've seen more of over three games than in the past decade.

 

The O-line, including Peters, sure played well in the fouth quarter and that's the reality that matters most.

[Lurker]

undrafted Kirk Chambers played left tackle and shut Burgess down. That was all the motivation Peters needed to return and perform well in the second half.

The fact that Gerard Warren got injured in the second half and didn't provide the push up the middle that prevented Edwards from stepping up in the pocket to avoid the DE's speed rush didn't hurt either. Nothing's ever as B&W/simple as it appears....

[The Senator]

I would have liked to see him held out until the Oakland game to just practice the first 2-3 weeks. Well, that didn't happen and so what's the point in pulling him out now? Not that you are suggesting this, but there's no point in this. Peters was essentially allowed to use the first few games of the season as his personal training camp. While this was probably not the way to go about it, it's done and Peters will ultimately be better for it. By tossing him in there, he'll be more valuable to the Bills in the upcoming weeks than he would have been sitting on the bench.

 

He WILL get better as the year goes on.

 

And, what, a guy -- even a pro bowl selection -- can't make a mistake? I've got news for you -- he'll make more. And guess what -- pro bowl players on other teams will make mistakes, too. You are asking for perfection and that is unreasonable.

 

He DAMNED WELL BETTER improve as the year goes on, 'cause right now he's not even close to being "the best most important player on the team", and he's playing at a level nowhere near the money he thinks he's worth.

 

No one's asking for perfection from PayMe - or any player. They'll all make mistakes; that's a given - but instead of acting like an a-hole, Peters would have benefited from doing what the rest of his teammates did, namely, honor his contract, work like hell in the off-season to get even better, show up for OTAs and camp, be in game shape and ready to go at the start of the season, and do everything a GREAT player would do to improve every season.

 

Don't care if some don't like or agree with my opinion - Peters let me down, and he let the team down.

[bobblehead]

I do not think the issue is whether or not Peters should be playing.

 

I think the real issue is how can Buffalo get Chambers on the field? that's alot of good and improving talent to keep on the sideline.

[BillsWatch]

I have no doubt Peters can get better, and that the Bills staff expects him to play like a Pro Bowler if he wants a new deal. That said, why does a guy who wants to be paid like a premiere LT need to watch Kirk Chambers from the sideline to motivate him to pick up his game?

 

PTR

 

Maybe Kirk Chambers can be the next Pro Bowl tackle if he had same opportunity as Peters did replacing a whiffing starter. He was a UDFA too.

[Mickey]

A rusty Peters is better than the alternative. Additionally, he has made several plays where he took out 2 defenders on running plays; at least 1 resulted in a touchdown.

His holdout, while it might seem (for now) ill advised, has not cost the team a game, right? We are 3-0, and Jason Peters should be the least of your worries, my friend.

Actually, two. He took out an outside backer in J'ville and took out 2 guys when he pulled to lead the blocking on Lynch's first TD on Sunday. He put his man on the carpet and the heap made by his substantial bulk and the player he pancaked got in the way of a pursuing linebacker, taking him out of the play.

 

Kelly exhaustively examined Peters on a play by play basis for the J'ville game and as it turns out, he played pretty well.

 

You have to consider that this thread was started by a guy who, of the Jacksonville game, said "...every hard hit Edwards has taken came from Peters getting beaten like an old rug..." Conveniently forgetting the blast Edwards took when he was sacked at our own 5 yard line from an inside rush that beat Fowler and Butler.

 

The sack that Warren got on Sunday was the result of Walker getting bullrushed in to Trent's face and Butler's man getting loose. Trent saw the right side disintegrating and headed back and to his left, right where Peters had shoved his man deep. Fouts even said that Trent should have stepped up in to the pocket where he might have had more time.

 

The anti-Peters crowd is just never going to get over it.

 

And, as I have said over and over, this hasn't cost Peters anything and if, as his haters are sure, his performance is not what it otherwise would have been, it has hurt the team, not Peters. That was as much a choice made by Brandon as it was by Peters. That was the price the team paid for not giving him a new deal. Whether in the long run it will ever cost Peters anything, remains to be seen.