Jason Peters

[Magox]

What basis do you have for saying this? When he reported, he was at the same weight as his playing weight from 2007. Why do you think the time between training camp and week 1 is about 8 weeks? Could it be because it takes a player about 8 weeks to get into game shape, regardless of how they spend their off-season? This isn't rocket science dude.

 

As for his desire to play...you're right. Huge questions should be asked of a guy that went undrafted, went through two position changes, was thrown into live action with zero experience, and proceeded to become one of the best in the league at his position. Major questions.

 

Am I the only one that thinks this entire discussion is ludicrous?

We're just going around in circles.

 

People's opinions are heavily ingrained in their brain regarding this topic. So it's pretty much useless to try to change people's vies regarding thist topic.

 

There is no doubt that there is a negative populist sentiment towards Peters. He held out, he played poorly and people want to lash out at some of the players and rightfully so.

 

However, the reality is that he is a prized commodity, whether the local fans think so or not. Someone will step up to the plate to pay him, and I'd rather it be us. I'm tired of looking for the next good LT. We havn't had one since our super bowl days. What short memories we have. The Ironic thing is he is right here, right now, and we're still looking around for that elusive LT.

[Ramius]

What basis do you have for saying this? When he reported, he was at the same weight as his playing weight from 2007. Why do you think the time between training camp and week 1 is about 8 weeks? Could it be because it takes a player about 8 weeks to get into game shape, regardless of how they spend their off-season? This isn't rocket science dude.

 

As for his desire to play...you're right. Huge questions should be asked of a guy that went undrafted, went through two position changes, was thrown into live action with zero experience, and proceeded to become one of the best in the league at his position. Major questions.

 

Am I the only one that thinks this entire discussion is ludicrous?

 

He skipped all of last year's camp and his not being in game shape and mediocre play cost us. Its one thing to skip the OTAs and stuff in june to make your point about a contract. But to skip all of training camp and punish your team because you are a selfish ass says a lot about his character. He wants his big payday, but doesn't actually want to earn it. And if he was listening to his agent, then the guy is just plain dumb.

 

The discussion isn't ludicrous, because many of us feel it isn't worth paying 11-12 million dollars per year to a guy who might give 100%, or might not. He also may become very good consistently, or he may just be consistently mediocre. We don't know, because he's had 1 season of each.

[DazedandConfused]

He skipped all of last year's camp and his not being in game shape and mediocre play cost us. Its one thing to skip the OTAs and stuff in june to make your point about a contract. But to skip all of training camp and punish your team because you are a selfish ass says a lot about his character. He wants his big payday, but doesn't actually want to earn it. And if he was listening to his agent, then the guy is just plain dumb.

 

The discussion isn't ludicrous, because many of us feel it isn't worth paying 11-12 million dollars per year to a guy who might give 100%, or might not. He also may become very good consistently, or he may just be consistently mediocre. We don't know, because he's had 1 season of each.

I think the missing element in your line of thinking is that it is wholly different from how the rest of the NFL thinks in regard to Peters relative worth. Relative is the key word because though you may want to claim that there is some absolute level of play which Peters has achieved (an absolute value you define as mediocre) all contracts are set by a relative market determination.

 

The market has made the finding that Peters is a Pro Bowl quality LT. You can argue this is undeserved, but like it or not this is the most recent statement by the market that we have in the real world of Peters relative worth. Since the NFL sets the actual market value and you and I do not, the simple fact is what they say matters and what you and I say does not.

 

Peters big problem is that he is under contract because he signed a deal that paid him more than he had ever gotten before and was expected to get as a UDFA TE. I think you would be ignoring reality not to concede at least that he made an amazing showing by doing the work to get himself made a starting RT in an incredibly short period of time after his UDFA start.

 

Again the simple fact is that he even exceeded that amazing start by proving to be not just a starting LT but one who was judged Pro Bowl worthy by the market last year.

 

To simply boil down his career into one good season and one bad one actually defines ludicrous as an assessment. To simply ignore his his outstanding (if not totally unprecedented) first three years as a pro is just ludicrous. To totally discount a year where he qualified for the Pro Bowl as a bad year is simply ludicrous.

 

I also think he likely did not deserve the Pro Bowl honor last year, but to somehow claim that his season was bad and the coaches/peers/fans who voted him in were simply all just smoking something is ludicrous.

 

Puuhlleeeze

[Magox]

I think the missing element in your line of thinking is that it is wholly different from how the rest of the NFL thinks in regard to Peters relative worth. Relative is the key word because though you may want to claim that there is some absolute level of play which Peters has achieved (an absolute value you define as mediocre) all contracts are set by a relative market determination.

 

The market has made the finding that Peters is a Pro Bowl quality LT. You can argue this is undeserved, but like it or not this is the most recent statement by the market that we have in the real world of Peters relative worth. Since the NFL sets the actual market value and you and I do not, the simple fact is what they say matters and what you and I say does not.

 

Peters big problem is that he is under contract because he signed a deal that paid him more than he had ever gotten before and was expected to get as a UDFA TE. I think you would be ignoring reality not to concede at least that he made an amazing showing by doing the work to get himself made a starting RT in an incredibly short period of time after his UDFA start.

 

Again the simple fact is that he even exceeded that amazing start by proving to be not just a starting LT but one who was judged Pro Bowl worthy by the market last year.

 

To simply boil down his career into one good season and one bad one actually defines ludicrous as an assessment. To simply ignore his his outstanding (if not totally unprecedented) first three years as a pro is just ludicrous. To totally discount a year where he qualified for the Pro Bowl as a bad year is simply ludicrous.

 

I also think he likely did not deserve the Pro Bowl honor last year, but to somehow claim that his season was bad and the coaches/peers/fans who voted him in were simply all just smoking something is ludicrous.

 

Puuhlleeeze

The only problem with your argument, is that it is logical.

 

Btw, I agree with everything you said.

[Mr. WEO]

No he wasnt...not sure which Bills team people have been watching, but he struggled all year. Why do people keep making excuses for him because he held out...look at the facts around that...

 

1. He goes about gettting a new contract in the exact opposite way he should have (and only 1 year into his other new deal).

2. Trying to become the highest paid LT in football, he sits around and gets way out of shape.

3. Comes in unconditioned because he sat around all off season pouting about a new contract, despite the fact he KNEW the moment he got this HUGE contract he was going to have to come out immediately and perform. He did NOT care enough about the team to stay in shape so that way once he was paid he could step in and perform up to that contract.

 

Most importantly, an ELITE player doesnt take all year to get into game shape. He should have been back to full form within the first few games, so the excuse he held out does not justify his inconsistent play in the second half of the season. Add in that he was playing at that point for this huge contract and he still couldnt put it together.

 

And the whole argument about the "stats arent official" is just an excuse. The fact remains, official or not, even with a margin of error of say 3 like someone said, he still severly underperformed in relation to his contract. In fact, if we had paid him last year and he put up that lame year, you all would be calling the FO ididts for over paying him like we did with Schobel, Dockery, etc.

 

So, with only 1, just 1, dominant year worthy of a huge contract that was in 2007, he just isnt worth the amount of money he wants IMO. Sure, he may find his form again, but there is no gaurantee and no justification for him to be the highest paid player at his position.

 

Alphadawg is right. This guy should have come to camp in top shape ready to prove he deserved (yet) another new contract. Instead he sat around all spring and summer. He was still coming out of games at the end of the season to suck on supplimental oxygen.

 

If we are not supposed to judge him just on last year, what DO we judge him on---just 2007?? Phenominal talent? How can we tell? Because of the Pro Bowl?

 

Look, if this guy played for the Fins, everyone on this board would be laughing at him for his incredibly stupid holdout, and his demand to be payed as the best.

 

There is absolutely NO reason to believe that if we give him 9, 10, 11 million per year, he will do anything but coast the rest of the contract.

[thebandit27]

Alphadawg is right. This guy should have come to camp in top shape ready to prove he deserved (yet) another new contract. Instead he sat around all spring and summer. He was still coming out of games at the end of the season to suck on supplimental oxygen.

 

If we are not supposed to judge him just on last year, what DO we judge him on---just 2007?? Phenominal talent? How can we tell? Because of the Pro Bowl?

 

Look, if this guy played for the Fins, everyone on this board would be laughing at him for his incredibly stupid holdout, and his demand to be payed as the best.

 

There is absolutely NO reason to believe that if we give him 9, 10, 11 million per year, he will do anything but coast the rest of the contract.

 

Except, of course, for that very inconvenient fact that he played his best football right after the last contract extension he signed.

 

I reiterate that this entire discussion is absurd. There isn't one other organization in the league that would even think about trading a 27-year old LT with Peters' ability. I love how fans on this board want to call the guy fat, selfish, and every other inflammatory word they can spell because he wants to be paid according to the market.

 

The fact of the matter is that good organizations avoid these situations altogether. They sign their good players to deals before holdouts occur. They recognize when a player's contract grossly underpays him, and they rectify the situation.

 

If you want great players, you have to pay great players. That's the law of the land in every business in the universe. The only difference in the NFL is that you can't just shop your services to another employer, but you CAN get cut at the drop of a hat. In light of that knowledge, to fault the guy for wanting to make as much as others in his position is--in my opinion--very short sighted. To question the man's character, after how hard he's worked to get where he is, is (again, my opinion) deplorable.

[BuffaloBill]

He skipped all of last year's camp and his not being in game shape and mediocre play cost us. Its one thing to skip the OTAs and stuff in june to make your point about a contract. But to skip all of training camp and punish your team because you are a selfish ass says a lot about his character. He wants his big payday, but doesn't actually want to earn it. And if he was listening to his agent, then the guy is just plain dumb.

 

 

Why is it so hard to understand the Bills own half of this situation? They attempted to have an elite LT pay for average to above average RT pay. The Bills could have easily have cut off any thought of a holdout and had Peters for less money had they redone his deal after the 2007 season. Did they give him a big boost the year before -yes - but the guy went from the bench to starting RT. The Bills know that the pay differential between RT and LT is huge. if the positions were one and the same why not leave him at RT?

 

If you think Peters demands are out of line keep in mind he has now played the LT position for 2+ years in a grossly underpaid status. At any point and time injury could have ended his career. the guy only gets one chance to play in the league. If you were in his shoes would you not try to make the best of your one shot?

 

People can get pissy about this and I suppose everybody is dug into their respective beliefs but the situation is that the Bills line has been an absolute mess for a decade. It is time to straighten this out. Signing peters to a market value deal is a part of this.

[Leonidas]

Except, of course, for that very inconvenient fact that he played his best football right after the last contract extension he signed.

 

I reiterate that this entire discussion is absurd. There isn't one other organization in the league that would even think about trading a 27-year old LT with Peters' ability. I love how fans on this board want to call the guy fat, selfish, and every other inflammatory word they can spell because he wants to be paid according to the market.

 

The fact of the matter is that good organizations avoid these situations altogether. They sign their good players to deals before holdouts occur. They recognize when a player's contract grossly underpays him, and they rectify the situation.

 

If you want great players, you have to pay great players. That's the law of the land in every business in the universe. The only difference in the NFL is that you can't just shop your services to another employer, but you CAN get cut at the drop of a hat. In light of that knowledge, to fault the guy for wanting to make as much as others in his position is--in my opinion--very short sighted. To question the man's character, after how hard he's worked to get where he is, is (again, my opinion) deplorable.

 

You're right, it is absurd. There isn't a single organization that would pay a tackle $10M/year after sitting out all required mini-camps, OTA's, and pre-season games, showing up fat and out of shape, and giving up a league-high 11.5 sacks. Good point.

[Leonidas]

Why is it so hard to understand the Bills own half of this situation? They attempted to have an elite LT pay for average to above average RT pay. The Bills could have easily have cut off any thought of a holdout and had Peters for less money had they redone his deal after the 2007 season. Did they give him a big boost the year before -yes - but the guy went from the bench to starting RT. The Bills know that the pay differential between RT and LT is huge. if the positions were one and the same why not leave him at RT?

 

If you think Peters demands are out of line keep in mind he has now played the LT position for 2+ years in a grossly underpaid status. At any point and time injury could have ended his career. the guy only gets one chance to play in the league. If you were in his shoes would you not try to make the best of your one shot?

 

People can get pissy about this and I suppose everybody is dug into their respective beliefs but the situation is that the Bills line has been an absolute mess for a decade. It is time to straighten this out. Signing peters to a market value deal is a part of this.

 

He wasn't grossly underpaid last year. If you lead the league in sacks allowed and you're NOT the lowest paid player then you aren't underpaid, much less "grossly" underpaid.

 

"Market value." People don't seem to know what that means. Just because Jake Long is absurdly overpaid doesn't mean that Peters' market value is all of a sudden $10M+/year. If Peters didn't plan on honoring the contract then he shouldn't have signed a FIVE year deal. That being said, he does deserve to get paid more as a starting LT. But if he thinks he deserves anywhere near what he's asking he's on some serious drugs. I just hope the FO isn't on the same drugs.

[thebandit27]

You're right, it is absurd. There isn't a single organization that would pay a tackle $10M/year after sitting out all required mini-camps, OTA's, and pre-season games, showing up fat and out of shape, and giving up a league-high 11.5 sacks. Good point.

 

Sure about that? Just off the top of my head, here are the ones that have done so in recent memory:

 

- St. Louis made Orlando Pace the richest OT in the NFL after he held out the entire off-season.

- Seattle made Walter Jones the richest OT in the NFL after he held out the entire off-season.

- Indianapolis made Tarik Glenn the 2nd richest OT in the NFL after he held out the entire off-season.

 

So it seems that, yes, teams will pay an OT premium money after sitting out all required mini-camps, OTA's, and pre-season games. Do you know what those three teams have in common since they paid those OT's? Go ahead, take a guess...

 

They made the Superbowl, 2 of them won it.

 

Not that that counts for anything, of course, because it doesn't contribute to the idea that Peters is fat, lazy, overrated, or anthing else you can drum up to say about the guy.

 

By the way, what do you think is going to happen if Buffalo trades Peters? That's right, he's going to get a deal worth $10M+/year. So it would appear that your retort, as well-thought-out and clearly stated though it may be, is completely incorrect by all reasonable accounts.

 

As far as the myths about being fat and giving up the most sacks...well, I'm not going to repeat myself for the 47th time, so see my previous posts.

[Alphadawg7]

Sure about that? Just off the top of my head, here are the ones that have done so in recent memory:

 

- St. Louis made Orlando Pace the richest OT in the NFL after he held out the entire off-season.

- Seattle made Walter Jones the richest OT in the NFL after he held out the entire off-season.

- Indianapolis made Tarik Glenn the 2nd richest OT in the NFL after he held out the entire off-season.

 

Are you kidding with these comparisons? Not totally sure about Glenn, but Pace and Jones were dominant EVERY year from the moment they stepped into the NFL...Peters has been dominant once in 5 years. Big difference...

[Alphadawg7]

Except, of course, for that very inconvenient fact that he played his best football right after the last contract extension he signed.

 

I reiterate that this entire discussion is absurd. There isn't one other organization in the league that would even think about trading a 27-year old LT with Peters' ability. I love how fans on this board want to call the guy fat, selfish, and every other inflammatory word they can spell because he wants to be paid according to the market.

 

The fact of the matter is that good organizations avoid these situations altogether. They sign their good players to deals before holdouts occur. They recognize when a player's contract grossly underpays him, and they rectify the situation.

 

If you want great players, you have to pay great players. That's the law of the land in every business in the universe. The only difference in the NFL is that you can't just shop your services to another employer, but you CAN get cut at the drop of a hat. In light of that knowledge, to fault the guy for wanting to make as much as others in his position is--in my opinion--very short sighted. To question the man's character, after how hard he's worked to get where he is, is (again, my opinion) deplorable.

 

Hold on here, when he got his last contract it was a nice contract, but no where near what he wanted if he got better (obviously as he asked for yet another one the following year). So he still had plenty to play for, so what you wrote that I put in bold says nothing to what he might do once he gets his dream contract. Keep in mind, Buffalo had taken VERY good care of him his whole career, yet he chose Nazi style tactics the very next year to get more money...

 

The bottom line for me is that here is a guy who sat out and cut off communication with the FO in an effort for us to give him top LT money. WRONG way to go about it, and if we cave, it sets a bad example for other players, so its a bad situation to put the FO in and they handled it right and stood their ground. Then the guy holds out in hopes of this huge contract, but reports to us in a condition that wont allow him to play to that level? Are you kidding me? That says, in a big loud voice, that "All I care about is my money and not about what I do on the field!" If he cared about his teammates and his on field performance, he would have shown up in way better shape and ready to play.

 

His first and only concern was to get paid and not to stay in top form so that he could live up to that money once he got it. That says volumes about him. If he had been dominant for 5 years like Pace, then fine, but he hasnt and often looked pedestrian last season.

 

The front office told him to go out and play for it and we will take care of you...the problem is, he went out and played himself out of that contract, and thats falls 100% on HIS shoulders. As a professional athlete, its his responsibility to be ready for the season, especially if he holds out.

 

I say give him a modest raise to 8 or 9 million, and if he wants more, he has to go out and EARN this year and show he is worth it. If he does, pay him next year.

[Leonidas]

Sure about that? Just off the top of my head, here are the ones that have done so in recent memory:

 

- St. Louis made Orlando Pace the richest OT in the NFL after he held out the entire off-season.

- Seattle made Walter Jones the richest OT in the NFL after he held out the entire off-season.

- Indianapolis made Tarik Glenn the 2nd richest OT in the NFL after he held out the entire off-season.

 

So it seems that, yes, teams will pay an OT premium money after sitting out all required mini-camps, OTA's, and pre-season games. Do you know what those three teams have in common since they paid those OT's? Go ahead, take a guess...

 

They made the Superbowl, 2 of them won it.

 

Not that that counts for anything, of course, because it doesn't contribute to the idea that Peters is fat, lazy, overrated, or anthing else you can drum up to say about the guy.

 

By the way, what do you think is going to happen if Buffalo trades Peters? That's right, he's going to get a deal worth $10M+/year. So it would appear that your retort, as well-thought-out and clearly stated though it may be, is completely incorrect by all reasonable accounts.

 

As far as the myths about being fat and giving up the most sacks...well, I'm not going to repeat myself for the 47th time, so see my previous posts.

 

 

Are you kidding with these comparisons? Not totally sure about Glenn, but Pace and Jones were dominant EVERY year from the moment they stepped into the NFL...Peters has been dominant once in 5 years. Big difference...

 

Thanks AD, you took the words out of my mouth. The point was, not only did he skip out on all of that but he turned in a terrible performance to boot. You can pretend like he didn't and call the sacks stat a "myth" if it makes you feel better, but the face is Peters sucked last year. Remember, sacks weren't an official stat until 1982, but getting to the quarterback was still important in the 60's and 70's.

[Ramius]

Why is it so hard to understand the Bills own half of this situation? They attempted to have an elite LT pay for average to above average RT pay. The Bills could have easily have cut off any thought of a holdout and had Peters for less money had they redone his deal after the 2007 season. Did they give him a big boost the year before -yes - but the guy went from the bench to starting RT. The Bills know that the pay differential between RT and LT is huge. if the positions were one and the same why not leave him at RT?

 

If you think Peters demands are out of line keep in mind he has now played the LT position for 2+ years in a grossly underpaid status. At any point and time injury could have ended his career. the guy only gets one chance to play in the league. If you were in his shoes would you not try to make the best of your one shot?

 

People can get pissy about this and I suppose everybody is dug into their respective beliefs but the situation is that the Bills line has been an absolute mess for a decade. It is time to straighten this out. Signing peters to a market value deal is a part of this.

 

The Bills didn't "attempt" to pay Peters anything. They paid him the contract that he signed, the same contract he was only 2/5th of the way through. The Bills also told Peters than there would be no discussions if he didn't show up to camp. He didn't, so there were no discussions about a new deal. Perhaps the Bills never intended to give him a new deal, but we'll never know, because Peters chose to sit home eating doritos instead of coming to training camp. Had Peters showed to camp, showed he was a team player and that he was ready to bust his ass to be paid like a top-flight LT, then all the sentiment would be on his side now. The front office would look bad if they didn't give him a deal. But since he held out, he still looks like the petulant child, and he looks like someone who is only in it for the cash, and isn't willing to give 100% to earn his money.

 

Peters also hasn't played LT for 2 years in a grossly underpaid status. He was an up and coming LT going into 2007, so his salary was right where it should have been. Just because you switch positions doesn't mean you get paid like the top players at that position. You have to prove you are worth it.

 

And for those saying that Peters showed in 2007 that he was worth it, since we are going on single year evaluations, his 2008 season proved that he doesn't deserve to be anywhere the top of the LT pay scale.

 

It all comes down to the fact that we have a lazy, selfish LT who has 1.5 good years at LT and 1 very mediocre year at LT, yet wants to be paid like the top LT in the game. I need to see more proof of 1)he is going to continue to pay at a high level, and 2)he isn't just some worthless slob motivated by a big payday. Remember, we have a player who decided that he was more important than the team.

[Leonidas]

The Bills didn't "attempt" to pay Peters anything. They paid him the contract that he signed, the same contract he was only 2/5th of the way through. The Bills also told Peters than there would be no discussions if he didn't show up to camp. He didn't, so there were no discussions about a new deal. Perhaps the Bills never intended to give him a new deal, but we'll never know, because Peters chose to sit home eating doritos instead of coming to training camp. Had Peters showed to camp, showed he was a team player and that he was ready to bust his ass to be paid like a top-flight LT, then all the sentiment would be on his side now. The front office would look bad if they didn't give him a deal. But since he held out, he still looks like the petulant child, and he looks like someone who is only in it for the cash, and isn't willing to give 100% to earn his money.

 

Peters also hasn't played LT for 2 years in a grossly underpaid status. He was an up and coming LT going into 2007, so his salary was right where it should have been. Just because you switch positions doesn't mean you get paid like the top players at that position. You have to prove you are worth it.

 

And for those saying that Peters showed in 2007 that he was worth it, since we are going on single year evaluations, his 2008 season proved that he doesn't deserve to be anywhere the top of the LT pay scale.

 

It all comes down to the fact that we have a lazy, selfish LT who has 1.5 good years at LT and 1 very mediocre year at LT, yet wants to be paid like the top LT in the game. I need to see more proof of 1)he is going to continue to pay at a high level, and 2)he isn't just some worthless slob motivated by a big payday. Remember, we have a player who decided that he was more important than the team.

 

I don't know what I like better: your analysis of the Jason Peters situation (which is spot on) or your TSW drafting formula (which I also think, after seeing the posts since I joined about six weeks ago, is spot on).

[The Dean]

NFL contracts specify a position? I didn't know that.

 

 

Really? You actually took note of my opinion about Dockery being cut and still remember it a month later? Well, I'm flattered and all, but I don't recall posting my thoughts about it. Care to refresh my memory?

 

 

NFL contracts do not specify a position, but are made to accomodate, and reward, a player's contribution at a certain position. Have you noticed that QBs tend to make more than Safeties? LT is one of the better paid positions on a football team. A player who signed a contract, as a new RT would expect better monetary remuneration at LT. Dont' believe me? Take a look at the salaries of RTs and LTs, the proof is in the real world data.

 

And, my point was, I didn't see you object to the Bills cutting Dockery, because "they had a contract!". So I assumed you weren't too concerned about that. I will stand corrected if you decide that it, too, is a violation.

[The Dean]

There is absolutely NO reason to believe that if we give him 9, 10, 11 million per year, he will do anything but coast the rest of the contract.

 

 

Really? Is there any reason to think that ANY player won't coast on the rest of his contract?

 

Peters played his ass off, after singing his last contract. Actually, there is no evidence to suggest he won't play his ass off, if properly compensated, as he always has.

[apuszczalowski]

stop throwing #'s out there.

 

 

What if the running back missed the chip block? or a blitzing LB got by on his side with no help?

 

 

please.....

 

 

 

These stats are worthless

Just to be a devils advocate, but even if the RB missed a chip block, the defensive player has already broke by the o-line and is in the backfield and going to the last line of defence for the offence, so its the same as if the QB was sacked and the RB was not supposed to block. The fact is, the defensive player beat the o-line player

[apuszczalowski]

Really? Is there any reason to think that ANY player won't coast on the rest of his contract?

 

Peters played his ass off, after singing his last contract. Actually, there is no evidence to suggest he won't play his ass off, if properly compensated, as he always has.

That contract was for a player still developing and still able to move up the pay scale. If/When he gets that big contract, there not much higher he can go on the pay scale.

 

Not saying he would or would not coast, but guys that are willing to sit when not getting there way are typically guys looking at their bank accounts first before caring about their play on the field, so its a little more likely he could coast or not try and overachieve if given a bigger deal

[UB Bull]

A lousy year. Yup. Did you notice that he missed training camp? Think that might have something to do with it?

 

And every time somebody posts this same set of stats - I'd guess it's been done 175 times, but I might well have missed a hundred or so - I invite the person to post the same stats for the year before. Strangely, not one person has taken me up on that. So, I'll invite you, UBBULL, and the OP, THEDRIZZ, to get up the guts and the energy to post the same stats for 2007. Come on, if you have the stones.

 

Of course, I don't expect that you will, because that would show what Peters can do when he DOES go to training camp.

 

Why don't you actually read the last few sentences of my post before you huff and puff.

 

I'm not talking about Peters' previous years, or his future potential. I'm only talking about his 2008 stats.

 

Nor am I discussing the reasons why he had a bad year. His holdout probably had something to do with it. Regardless, that was not the subject of my post.

 

My only point was that the stats, while not official or precise, do have some meaning, and are not rendered completely useless by their lack of accuracy. In stating that they do track something, albeit with a large margin of error, I was supporting the idea that Peters had a sub-par year in 2008.

 

I have no idea where to find 2007 sack stats. I assume Peters' 2007 sack numbers are good, as it is universally accepted that he had a good year in 2007. If they somehow explain what kind of year Peters had in 2008, then I'd love to hear why.