John from Riverside Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Lets talk here and now 2009-2010 Certain people on this board have been drinking the kool aid in Buffalo. There is absolutey no way Walker is an upgrade over Peters. Further, there is absolutely no way that whatever unproven, late round draft pick the Bills plug in at RT will be an upgrade over Walker, who I thought looked pretty good last year at RT (if he hadn't he wouldn't be getting moved). At center, what you HAD, was a below average center in Fowler. He sucked, especially against Jenkins. HOWEVER, what you HAVE now is a college kid who has never seen an NFL DT. He MAY be an EVENTUAL upgrade, but TODAY, he's an athletic college kid who set down his beer long enough to show up on draft day. Sorry, but he's a DOWNGRADE for THIS season. No one THIS YEAR will even come close to replacing Dockery. He was not worth the money, but our next best alternative, (which is what a responsible FO looks at) was ... you guessed it another college kid...who oh by the way...you reached for high in the draft...so now you get to pay him top flight money, kind of like Dockery, but without the experience. So, for THIS YEAR, despite COMPLETELY losing our OL, We DID upgrade for ONE YEAR at WR, a backup QB, and 3rd string RB. So yeah, right...our Front office did a truly brilliant job....of dismantaling one of the better O-lines in the game and replacing them with college kids who MIGHT be good someday... Overall Walker is not an upgrade over Peters....when I say overall you are average out his one good season at LT along with the one where he gave up the most sacks in the league. Walker IS going to get beat here and there.......and every bills fan should expect that and then be pleasantly surpised if he does not........ What doesn't seem to be coming through is that Wood is not going to be our starting center this next year.....they brought in a free agent who they are absolutely thrilled with to play the pivot which means Wood will play the LG spot and be sandwitched between two veteran guys. Butler is moving from the RG spot back to his natural position at LT.....Levitre takes over hte RG position. If nothing else this is AS GOOD as what we had last year on the right side......what you get overall is an increase in talent, and nastiness across every OL spot except for LT (Walker doesn't play with a mean streak to me) which probably means that what you give up on occasion to an edge rusher from the LT spot you are going to gain in pass protection and running up the middle....... We got weaker at one spot and got as good or better at all of the other spots..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Protect the QB and open holes for the RB. Did I miss anything? Is a lineman supposed to do more? He didn't do a good job of protecting the QB and the line as a whole did not do a good job of opening holes for the RB. Actually, he was very good at opening holes in the run game, and dominant at times. The Bills ran very well to the left around left tackle. The second best in the entire league according to some serious statisticians who looked at every play on every team. http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol The Bills struggled up the middle. And of course, you mentioned nothing about the running game at all when you decided if he gave up less sacks he would automatically be better. Those 11 sacks (which is an inflated number to begin with) were also about 2% of the plays he lined up on. Put it this way, if you asked all 32 GMs, all 32 head coaches, all 32 OCs and all 32 OL coaches who would they honestly would rather have, Jason Peters or Langston Walker, I would be you anything that the result would be pretty close to, if not precisely, 128 for Peters and 0 for Walker. That's a downgrade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Actually, he was very good at opening holes in the run game, and dominant at times. The Bills ran very well to the left around left tackle. The second best in the entire league according to some serious statisticians who looked at every play on every team. The Bills struggled up the middle. And of course, you mentioned nothing about the running game at all when you decided if he gave up less sacks he would automatically be better. Those 11 sacks were also about 2% of the plays he lined up on. Put it this way, if you asked all 32 GMs, all 32 head coaches, all 32 OCs and all 32 OL coaches who would they honestly would rather have, Jason Peters or Langston Walker, I would be you anything that the result would be pretty close to, if not precisely, 128 for Peters and 0 for Walker. That's a downgrade. Kelly not that I disagree with you but I think that question needs to be amplified......would you rather have L. Walker or a MOTIVATED AND HAPPY Jason Peters...... Because if you asked that question about last years Jason Peters I am not sure that vote would be so lopsided.....you gotta give Walker one thing.....he brings his lunch pail every day and "doesn't try as hard because he is thinking about his contract" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Kelly not that I disagree with you but I think that question needs to be amplified......would you rather have L. Walker or a MOTIVATED AND HAPPY Jason Peters...... Because if you asked that question about last years Jason Peters I am not sure that vote would be so lopsided.....you gotta give Walker one thing.....he brings his lunch pail every day and "doesn't try as hard because he is thinking about his contract" It's my opinion that if we would have paid him he would have been happy. There is nothing to believe he didn't want to play in Buffalo, and the day he was traded he said he was shocked that it happened. He just wanted to be paid. I like what the Bills did in the draft, and if they spend the money they saved by trading him wisely, the 6-7 million or so, then it will probably be a good trade. For instance, if we sign Leroy Hill for 6-7 mil a year, we would have traded Jason Peters and his 10 mil a year salary for Eric Wood, Shawn Nelson, and Leroy Hill. I would say that would be a pretty good if not very good trade. But right now, we havent spent that money and I don't have a lot of trust in the FO right now. To say Langston Walker is an upgrade to Jason Peters, straight up, is just plain stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB Fan 4 LIFE Posted April 30, 2009 Author Share Posted April 30, 2009 Actually, he was very good at opening holes in the run game, and dominant at times. The Bills ran very well to the left around left tackle. The second best in the entire league according to some serious statisticians who looked at every play on every team. http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol The Bills struggled up the middle. And of course, you mentioned nothing about the running game at all when you decided if he gave up less sacks he would automatically be better. Those 11 sacks (which is an inflated number to begin with) were also about 2% of the plays he lined up on. Put it this way, if you asked all 32 GMs, all 32 head coaches, all 32 OCs and all 32 OL coaches who would they honestly would rather have, Jason Peters or Langston Walker, I would be you anything that the result would be pretty close to, if not precisely, 128 for Peters and 0 for Walker. That's a downgrade. THANK YOU. The GM comment is spot on. I believe you get the same result if you ask GMs about whether they would want Walker over Butler at RT. Same result as to Dockery. Short answer is, anyone with two neurons to rub together knows we got worse on the O-line in 2009. People here are struggling with that, because they don't want to believe it. They are arguing about whether these rookies will develop, but this misses the point. The thread is called upgrades/downgrades 2009. We downgraded our O-line this year, period. If you thought our o-line sucked last year, brace yourselves. All that being said, I think we did a great job using the draft to fill the holes we created for ourselves in the offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 The difference between Walker and Peters settles down to a few things: 1. Walker has played his entire career at RT or G. He has never played LT for more than a handful of games. How he holds up is a complete mystery, but... 2. Walker's physical make-up is more suited to play RT. He may have long arms (he's 6'8 for goodness sake) but his agility and lateral movement to handle edge rushers will make fans wince. If people thought Peters was slow to handle the Jets rush when Losman fumbled, wait'll they see Walker. 3. If Walker had the ability to play LT, he would have done so in Oakland. He played the entire 2006 ar RT, even when Gallery was moved. Peters has clearly shown, save for people's last memory of him, that he's more than capable of playing the position. It's not if, but how much of a downgrade this move was. Playing to potential will be Peters' issue. With Walker, he doesn't have the potential at all to handle the most demanding OL position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cookiemonster Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Someone should throw up in your mouth to replace the garbage coming out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherman Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Actually, he was very good at opening holes in the run game, and dominant at times. The Bills ran very well to the left around left tackle. The second best in the entire league according to some serious statisticians who looked at every play on every team. http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol The Bills struggled up the middle. And of course, you mentioned nothing about the running game at all when you decided if he gave up less sacks he would automatically be better. Those 11 sacks (which is an inflated number to begin with) were also about 2% of the plays he lined up on. Put it this way, if you asked all 32 GMs, all 32 head coaches, all 32 OCs and all 32 OL coaches who would they honestly would rather have, Jason Peters or Langston Walker, I would be you anything that the result would be pretty close to, if not precisely, 128 for Peters and 0 for Walker. That's a downgrade. For the "unofficial" and "inflated" sack stat please let the Philadelphia Media, Vic Carruci, Sirius NFL Radio and NFL Total Access to stop using that stat. They are the sources I heard/saw report the 11.5 sack figure. I really don't care what any of the head coaches around the league say about Jason Peters. He is gone. This thread is if it is an upgrade or downgrade for next season. Peters last year was not very good and he didn't finish the season. What I will be looking for is someone who can finish the season and give up less sacks. You do bring up a good point about the running plays and he may be missed there but I think that is supposed to be Walker's strong point so we will see how he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 For the "unofficial" and "inflated" sack stat please let the Philadelphia Media, Vic Carruci, Sirius NFL Radio and NFL Total Access to stop using that stat. They are the sources I heard/saw report the 11.5 sack figure. I really don't care what any of the head coaches around the league say about Jason Peters. He is gone. This thread is if it is an upgrade or downgrade for next season. Peters last year was not very good and he didn't finish the season. What I will be looking for is someone who can finish the season and give up less sacks. You do bring up a good point about the running plays and he may be missed there but I think that is supposed to be Walker's strong point so we will see how he does. The Bills themselves, in their own film study, attributed 11 sacks to Peters and Dockery combined. It's not an official stat for many reasons, some of them quite good reasons. Take Peters completely out of the equation in this discussion, but: If you are just watching tape of a play, you often don't know whose responsibility it was for the guy who made the sack. On some plays, an OL is GREAT, holds his man for 5 seconds, the QB stands in the pocket forever and then the guy gets a sack. That's not his fault. Sometimes there are three rushers for two blockers, an OT blocks the closest or most important guy and his man eventually gets the sack but it wasn't his fault. Sometimes the stats keepers say okay it was a sack, someone must be accountable for it but it was more of a "team sack". Sometimes a OT has such a terrible OG next to him that he constantly overcompensates and tries to help out so much that his guy gets around him. I am not saying that excuses any of Peters sacks, but the stats are often misleading. The 11.5 sacks comes from STATS, which is a pretty reliable statkeeper, although I don't know how they determine who was responsible on certain kinds of plays like those mentioned above. I do know that the Bills themselves, as stated above, allotted 11 sacks to Peters and Dockery combined. Their "sacks given up" by players seemed to amount to 24 of the 38 sacks, which indicates to me that they blamed 14 of the 38 to the "team" or QB or just the wrong play called against the wrong blitz, or mental error by a back or whatever. Jason Peters had a poor year for him overall, worse than 2007, and almost inarguably because of the holdout. He gave up far too many sacks. He also didn't suck, which was pretty evident when the Eagles watched every play he made, traded a #1, #4 and #6 for him and gave him 60 million dollars, making him the second highest paid tackle in the game, only behind the #1 pick overall from the year before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Get off the ratings on Madden and watch how Peters actually played last year. Walker is an upgrade. Is Walker an upgrade over the player Peters COULD be? No, and its not even close. But for the play of our LT last year, Walker is an upgrade. I'm not sure what games you were watching. Peters was far and away superior on virtually every play. Did he give up sacks? Yea...did they leave him in isolation by himself? Every play. Can they even entertain the thought of doing that with Walker? They would probably chuckle at the suggestion. You really make yourself look stupid with this argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bills Freak Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 THANK YOU. The GM comment is spot on. I believe you get the same result if you ask GMs about whether they would want Walker over Butler at RT. Same result as to Dockery. Short answer is, anyone with two neurons to rub together knows we got worse on the O-line in 2009. People here are struggling with that, because they don't want to believe it. They are arguing about whether these rookies will develop, but this misses the point. The thread is called upgrades/downgrades 2009. We downgraded our O-line this year, period. If you thought our o-line sucked last year, brace yourselves. All that being said, I think we did a great job using the draft to fill the holes we created for ourselves in the offseason. Of all these posts your is probably the closest. Everyone wants us to believe we will be better once new players are brought on but the main problem is "WE ARE REBUILDING" Probably will be better in time but as all educated fans know it takes an 0-line, particularly, time to be cohesive whether talent is better or not. With that said though, the interior of our line was the problem, NOT Peters. In a short time that should be an upgrade since our Center(s) were walking zombies & Dock was bad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 One thing is for certain......opposing defenses will be dialing up ways to get pressure from Langston's side until we prove we can stop it...... We might need to keep a TE in to chip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I'm not sure what games you were watching. Peters was far and away superior on virtually every play. Did he give up sacks? Yea...did they leave him in isolation by himself? Every play. Can they even entertain the thought of doing that with Walker? They would probably chuckle at the suggestion. You really make yourself look stupid with this argument. You are asking people to believe something that is far too complex for many of them to comprehend. The idea that a guy can kick be dominant on many/most plays, yet miss the occasional assignment that results in a sack is more than their minds can handle. That is particularly true when it is someone they have decided not to like. So, apparently, is the idea that you can replace a great player with one who is merely good, yet have a better overall result due to the improvement/upgrading of others surrounding him, change in scheme, etc. The OL works as a unit, not as individual parts that are interchangeable. It is very possible that, with the new interior, more weapons on offense including TE, and perhaps the move to a no-huddle, the line will be better this coming year. It may not happen in game #1, and might not happen all year...but it is certainly possible. The current group gives the coaches more options to see what grouping works best, and while losing the athleticism of Peters, raises the intelligence of the line, by quite a bit, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB Fan 4 LIFE Posted May 29, 2009 Author Share Posted May 29, 2009 For those of you still holding out hope that the ROLB position would not be downgrade because of a last minute free agent acquisition... Pisa Tinoisamoa just signed a one year deal with the Bears. ROLB = Ellison vs. Crowell = DOWNGRADE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toddgurley Posted May 29, 2009 Share Posted May 29, 2009 Walker for Peters is an upgrade.Wood for Dockery is an upgrade. Hangartner for Fowler/Preston is an upgrade. Crowell didn't even play last year. So it's not Ellison for Crowell. It's Ellison for Ellison, which is even. It's not Youboty for Greer. It's McKelvin for Greer. Fine/Nelson for Royal is an upgrade. I dont like this Pats fan, but he is right moslty! I mean Dockery and Fowler were terrible, and the rest I WOULD agree with. Even Peters did not play that great last year. Anyone who watch knows he should not have made the pro bowl, and our line seemed to play better with Peters out of the line-up. And oh ya, how about T.OWENS who is a large upgrade over our past #2 WR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toddgurley Posted May 29, 2009 Share Posted May 29, 2009 Here's a breakdown of upgrades/downgrades at our positions for 2009-2010. Upgrades Owens for Reed Rhodes for Omon Kelsay for Kelsay on 1st&2d down + Maybin on 3d Down. Downgrades: LT Walker for Peters RT Chambers for Walker LG Lavitrie ® for Dockery C Fowler for ® Wood/2d String Hangengartner (Rosenbagger) OLB Ellison for Angelo Crowell CB Youboty for Jabari Greer Even: Fine for Robert Royal After writing this, I threw up in my mouth a little. Did I miss anything or inaccurately characterize the change? Buddy, your missing a lot obviously. The biggest thing is the upgrade at the WR position. We brought in some guy named Terrell Owens, have you ever heard of him? Also, anyone would be an upgrade over our terrible centers last year and dockery too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zazie Posted May 29, 2009 Share Posted May 29, 2009 Walker for Peters is an upgrade.Wood for Dockery is an upgrade. Hangartner for Fowler/Preston is an upgrade. Crowell didn't even play last year. So it's not Ellison for Crowell. It's Ellison for Ellison, which is even. It's not Youboty for Greer. It's McKelvin for Greer. Fine/Nelson for Royal is an upgrade. Get over the stupidity of thinking that Peters was not a great LT. Walker is a HUGE downgrade. Wood for Dockery is up in the air, but I tend to agree woith the original poser, Dockery has a lot of experience Wood is untested. Maybe in the next year or two he will be an upgrade though. Hangartner is a career backup-quality guy, even with those other 2 caree backup quality guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zazie Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 Kelly not that I disagree with you but I think that question needs to be amplified......would you rather have L. Walker or a MOTIVATED AND HAPPY Jason Peters...... Because if you asked that question about last years Jason Peters I am not sure that vote would be so lopsided.....you gotta give Walker one thing.....he brings his lunch pail every day and "doesn't try as hard because he is thinking about his contract" Russ Brandon blows. Could have easily secured this by giving Peters a reasonably nominal RT to LT raise after 2007 season. Instead, stood on 'principle', read tried to show he was a good tough management guy. This led to him getting completely used and thrown away like a used day 1 tampax, by Peters agent. Way to stand up for yourself and show the league how good and tough you are, Russ. I am sure you are getting league wide respect. We have now a 28th pick and a way out of position LT (which will start to really show by about week 5) and Philly has our best player. PEters, by the way, is smiling all the way to he liberty bell bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djcalvin79 Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 pot-stirring, or pot-smoking? we're in no position to decide upgrades/downgrades before the team has even played a down.. remember this thread, we'll be visiting it often once the season begins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 For those of you still holding out hope that the ROLB position would not be downgrade because of a last minute free agent acquisition... Pisa Tinoisamoa just signed a one year deal with the Bears. ROLB = Ellison vs. Crowell = DOWNGRADE Duh, you do realize that Ellison started all last year, right? I mean, you've been told about twenty times so far. So it's "even" at worst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts