The Dean Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 or about how little opposing players know about anyone other than the guy that plays opposite them! "The rosters for the 2009 Pro Bowl have been announced, which of course means it is time for the annual rite of passage in which all of the media pundits will harp on the same three things: the players that were snubbed, the players that got in but didn't deserve to and, perhaps most importantly, the flaws in the selection process. Though I'm quite sure some of my personal opinions regarding players that didn't deserve to get in (I'm talking to you, Jason Peters) and vice versa will come to the forefront, my focus will be on the process itself because more often than not that is where the problems originate." link How does that account for the coaches vote? And are you honestly taking Ross Tucker analysis as gospel on this? The guy was a marginal player who wasn't qualified to sniff Peters' jock. But even his comments suggest reputation plays an important factor. My previous post remains unscathed by this weak attempt at a misdirect. Harrumph!
The Senator Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 How does that account for the coaches vote? And are you honestly taking Ross Tucker analysis as gospel on this? The guy was a marginal player who wasn't qualified to sniff Peters' jock. But even his comments suggest reputation plays an important factor. My previous post remains unscathed by this weak attempt at a misdirect. Harrumph! Nonsense. I thoroughly trumped your specious counterargument. So there.
The Dean Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 Nonsense. I thoroughly trumped your specious counterargument. So there.
Guest dog14787 Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 Yes, players are often selected on reputation. Reputations tend to be earned on the field...they are rarely a PR product. In Peters case, his reputation is obviously not a PR product. If the worst you can say about a player is "he made the Pro Bowl based on his reputation" (as many used to say about Reuben Brown), well...that's quite a compliment, actually. Considering Peters has only been in the league for 5 years, an offensive line starter for 4 and a LT for 2, to have that kind of reputation speaks volumes about how he is perceived by his peers, and the opposing coaches. Seriously, I thought this thread was done with and your not convincing anyone of anything except how stuck up Jason Peter's big, fat arse you must be so give it a break Dean, geesh
The Dean Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 Seriously, I thought this thread was done with and your not convincing anyone of anything except how stuck up Jason Peter's big, fat arse you must be so give it a break Dean, geesh Another insightful post...for a 12-year old.
thebandit27 Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 Sorry Bandit, but beg to differ - as does Ross Tucker... "There is no way that I, as an offensive lineman, would know how well the corners or safeties around the league are truly playing. And do you honestly think the wide receivers really know what defensive tackle is doing the best job stopping the run? Please. All they know is what they hear on the scouting report, if they were even listening during that portion, or from the media hype machine that carries certain players to Hawaii every year." link Two major holes in your hypothesis - 1) Coaches and players do not 'study the entire league 5 times over, year-round' (you really don't believe they're that studious, do you?) - they study the teams they will face that season, and likely only the team they will face that week, and likely only the week before they face that particular team; 2) Coaches and players tend to study opposing positional players, rather than every single player in the league - i.e., an opposing WR, RB, QB, etc. is unlikely to spend any time at all studying film of Jason Peters or any other LT. You needn't beg, Senator, go right ahead and differ. I'm not saying that reputation has nothing to do with it, but if--as Ross Tucker seems to indicate--the players are getting their information from scouting reports of opposing teams, hows does that denigrate the integrity of the selection? I mean, who do you think puts those reports together? I'm guessing team coaches and scouts. As to your points: I'd certainly hope that--in the very least--defensive linemen are scouting the offensive tackles that they have to face on a weekly basis. That means that, in the course of 2 to 3 seasons, a defensive lineman would likely study film of 75-80% of the OL in the league. 5 times year round? Perhaps not, but I remember Michael Strahan saying that he used to study one OT per day during the off-season just to be prepared for all possible opponents.
thebandit27 Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 Seriously, I thought this thread was done with and your not convincing anyone of anything except how stuck up Jason Peter's big, fat, $10M+/year, pro bowl, plays-for-a-perrenial-playoff-team-arse you must be so give it a break Dean, geesh Just thought I'd fix that up for you.
Dwight Drane Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 Pros: 1) Jason Peters is an athletic freak that has both enormous size as well as muscular tone. 2) Because of 1, he has above average speed, strength and balance for his position 3) Because of 2, he is an ideal choice to run behind and IDEALLY, use in misdirection 4) He was acquired on the cheap, but was rewarded with a stepped up contract prior to expiration 5) The only player with the physical stature of Peters available to replace him was Jason Smith of Baylor Cons: 1) Jason Peters lay face down with a torn groin at the end of 2007, and in my opinion has not regained his same level of speed and balance 2) Jason Peters did not take his injury seriously and held out of all training and team sponsored rehabilitation while at the same time demanding another contract adjustment 3) Jason Peters is a highly functioning invalid, given his score on the Wonderlic 4) Because of 3, Jason Peters is not an ideal choice in an offense geared to quick, intelligent decision making, which the Bills have assembled the pieces for over the past few years and look to employ this season 5) Jason Peters put unreasonable demands on the team given his production level and dedication over the past 18 months This does not mean he was unreasonable in wanting an extension for his overall body of work Result..... The Bills made what I consider to be a wise decision given Peters play after return from injury, their new offensive philosophy, and the position Peters and his agent had taken As for his ProBowl visit last year, anyone doubting Union politics in the NFL needs to understand the power the players have. Watching Troy Vincent in action off the field as well as talking to many former players will let you know how tight it is to those with understanding. For the love of the baby Jesus, they all wore a Gene Upshaw patch on their jerseys, even if they all weren't on board. Will the Bills be a better team because of Brad Butler in the lineup instead of Peters.....no. But when you take salary, system, draft picks, and the example this trade sends into account....the franchise is ahead on a whole.
Flbillsfan#1 Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 Pros: 1) Jason Peters is an athletic freak that has both enormous size as well as muscular tone. 2) Because of 1, he has above average speed, strength and balance for his position 3) Because of 2, he is an ideal choice to run behind and IDEALLY, use in misdirection 4) He was acquired on the cheap, but was rewarded with a stepped up contract prior to expiration 5) The only player with the physical stature of Peters available to replace him was Jason Smith of Baylor Cons: 1) Jason Peters lay face down with a torn groin at the end of 2007, and in my opinion has not regained his same level of speed and balance 2) Jason Peters did not take his injury seriously and held out of all training and team sponsored rehabilitation while at the same time demanding another contract adjustment 3) Jason Peters is a highly functioning invalid, given his score on the Wonderlic 4) Because of 3, Jason Peters is not an ideal choice in an offense geared to quick, intelligent decision making, which the Bills have assembled the pieces for over the past few years and look to employ this season 5) Jason Peters put unreasonable demands on the team given his production level and dedication over the past 18 months This does not mean he was unreasonable in wanting an extension for his overall body of work Result..... The Bills made what I consider to be a wise decision given Peters play after return from injury, their new offensive philosophy, and the position Peters and his agent had taken As for his ProBowl visit last year, anyone doubting Union politics in the NFL needs to understand the power the players have. Watching Troy Vincent in action off the field as well as talking to many former players will let you know how tight it is to those with understanding. For the love of the baby Jesus, they all wore a Gene Upshaw patch on their jerseys, even if they all weren't on board. Will the Bills be a better team because of Brad Butler in the lineup instead of Peters.....no. But when you take salary, system, draft picks, and the example this trade sends into account....the franchise is ahead on a whole. Good Post.
The Senator Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 Don't make me separate you two!! The Dean & I are just joshin' - besides, he knows I'm right!
The Dean Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 The Dean & I are just joshin' - besides, he knows I'm right!
toddgurley Posted June 30, 2009 Author Posted June 30, 2009 Another insightful post...for a 12-year old. dean, what is the infatuation with 12 year old's. According to you, everyone on this board is 12.
stuckincincy Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 dean, what is the infatuation with 12 year old's. According to you, everyone on this board is 12. He uses ape years.
billsfan89 Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 Pros: 1) Jason Peters is an athletic freak that has both enormous size as well as muscular tone. 2) Because of 1, he has above average speed, strength and balance for his position 3) Because of 2, he is an ideal choice to run behind and IDEALLY, use in misdirection 4) He was acquired on the cheap, but was rewarded with a stepped up contract prior to expiration 5) The only player with the physical stature of Peters available to replace him was Jason Smith of Baylor Cons: 1) Jason Peters lay face down with a torn groin at the end of 2007, and in my opinion has not regained his same level of speed and balance 2) Jason Peters did not take his injury seriously and held out of all training and team sponsored rehabilitation while at the same time demanding another contract adjustment 3) Jason Peters is a highly functioning invalid, given his score on the Wonderlic 4) Because of 3, Jason Peters is not an ideal choice in an offense geared to quick, intelligent decision making, which the Bills have assembled the pieces for over the past few years and look to employ this season 5) Jason Peters put unreasonable demands on the team given his production level and dedication over the past 18 months This does not mean he was unreasonable in wanting an extension for his overall body of work Result..... The Bills made what I consider to be a wise decision given Peters play after return from injury, their new offensive philosophy, and the position Peters and his agent had taken As for his ProBowl visit last year, anyone doubting Union politics in the NFL needs to understand the power the players have. Watching Troy Vincent in action off the field as well as talking to many former players will let you know how tight it is to those with understanding. For the love of the baby Jesus, they all wore a Gene Upshaw patch on their jerseys, even if they all weren't on board. Will the Bills be a better team because of Brad Butler in the lineup instead of Peters.....no. But when you take salary, system, draft picks, and the example this trade sends into account....the franchise is ahead on a whole. Good take on the Peters situation. HOWEVER to say the franchise is ahead on a whole is a little early. IF Wood and Levitre are busts and Peters goes on to have a HOF career than we look like dopes in that trade. I like how the Bills are trying to build the line once Peters was gone. They used the picks to try and fill up the other 4/5's of the offensive line with young talent that could gel into a unit that is good in the long term. Once again I think you got a good feel for how the Peters situation turned out. But to say we were the winners once you take into account the fact that he might be a little overrated, we don't have to pay him, we got three draft picks including a first rounder, and the fact that we are running a system he might not be best for is still even with that good logic too early to tell. And besides I think Peters could have fit into the no huddle and I think he will be very good for Philly although not great. But if Wood and Levitre develop into good guards and if Butler was better at RT all along than I say the trade worked out for both we got two good guards and it allowed us to move Butler to a position where he was better at. While Philly got a long term anchor for their o-line.
The Dean Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 dean, what is the infatuation with 12 year old's. According to you, everyone on this board is 12. You'll get there someday. Don't you worry. Is that your mommy calling?
VOR Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 5) The only player with the physical stature of Peters available to replace him was Jason Smith of Baylor I still find it interesting that despite this, only the Eagles offered anything substantial for Peters. I mean, if you were the Rams, wouldn't you rather trade your 2nd overall pick to the Bills and get "the best LT in the NFL" for less money than the wholly unproven #2 overall pick will be getting? What about the Bengals at 6th overall, who will have to spend the same amount for Andre Smith, a guy with major question marks? Why didn't the Giants (the only other team mentioned by name who was interested in Peters) offer their 29th overall pick and their 3rd rounder? I'm betting it's because of the cons you listed.
The Senator Posted July 1, 2009 Posted July 1, 2009 I still find it interesting that despite this, only the Eagles offered anything substantial for Peters. I mean, if you were the Rams, wouldn't you rather trade your 2nd overall pick to the Bills and get "the best LT in the NFL" for less money than the wholly unproven #2 overall pick will be getting? What about the Bengals at 6th overall, who will have to spend the same amount for Andre Smith, a guy with major question marks? Why didn't the Giants (the only other team mentioned by name who was interested in Peters) offer their 29th overall pick and their 3rd rounder? I'm betting it's because of the cons you listed. Actually, I think it's because the rest of the NFL coaches, GMs, and scouts are not privy to the knowledge that FatStupidLazyLardAss is the bestest, greatest LT alive - that fact is only known by a select few posters here on TSW who, quite selfishly, have chosen not to share it with every other front office in the league.
spartacus Posted July 1, 2009 Posted July 1, 2009 I still find it interesting that despite this, only the Eagles offered anything substantial for Peters. I mean, if you were the Rams, wouldn't you rather trade your 2nd overall pick to the Bills and get "the best LT in the NFL" for less money than the wholly unproven #2 overall pick will be getting? What about the Bengals at 6th overall, who will have to spend the same amount for Andre Smith, a guy with major question marks? Why didn't the Giants (the only other team mentioned by name who was interested in Peters) offer their 29th overall pick and their 3rd rounder? I'm betting it's because of the cons you listed. and you know that there were not other offers - ---how??? The Bills don't even release contract info on their own players - why would you think they released info on potential trade offers? but just keep making up stuff and watch the Eagles challenge for a Super Bowl with a stud LT
VOR Posted July 1, 2009 Posted July 1, 2009 and you know that there were not other offers - ---how??? The Bills don't even release contract info on their own players - why would you think they released info on potential trade offers? but just keep making up stuff and watch the Eagles challenge for a Super Bowl with a stud LT I know there were no other substantial offers, because the Bills ended-up settling for the 28th overall pick. And the only other team interested was the Giants, and some unnamed 3rd team, again both of whom didn't offer more than the 28th overall pick. As for the Eagles and challenging for the SB, they've been doing that without Peters. Not to mention the Steelers and Giants won SB's without "stud" and overpriced LT's.
Recommended Posts