Thurman#1 Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Check it out in their podcast. http://www.democratandchronicle.com/...gory=PODCAST01 I hadn't heard this at all, so this is big news. It's around 4:30. Roth: "... he [Peters] came in out of shape and late and got tagged with a lot of sacks before ... took half the year before he rounded into any kind of form, but I think you're going to miss Jason Peters. Why wouldn't you miss Jason Peters? Maiorano: Yeah. Roth: He was one of the true ... he was the only Pro Bowl player they had. Langston Walker ... and he's ... it's all over Langston Walker's face, he's doing what he's ... he's doing what he has to. He's a professional, he's going to play where they tell him. But he's not happy about the move. Maiorano: Yeah, I asked him yesterday or whatever day it was ... couple days ago, "Are you on board with the move yet?" And in a roundabout way he said "Uh, did I have a choice?" Roth: Right! Maiorano: And then he said "Well, they're not going to bring anybody else in at this point, so I'm kind of there." So he was never, I mean I think he had fallen into being comfortable at right tackle, it's where he's played his whole NFL career. I know he did have some brief stints at left tackle at Oakland. Roth: Yeah. Maiorana: But it was minimal. He's not a left tackle. And at 345 pounds, he's not exactly the quickest guy to be dealing with the speed rushers he's going to see. That's really to me, a big big worry. Roth: I've written this in some reports before. At right tackle, his size is a real advantage, it's a plus. He's a big man and he can cover that ... his footwork is adequate but his size is a plus. At left tackle, his size becomes almost a detriment because his footwork isn't as good against the fastest pass rusher that he's going to be seeing every week. And there's going to be ... again, if the passing game becomes Edwards dumping the ball off as fast as he can to the running backs or quick hitches, those quick sideline screens to Evans and T.O. it's going to get kind of ugly. I want to see T.O. catch a mess of these little short passes and try to make something out of it, he gets tackled and then he starts going to the sideline and moaning about it. Maiorana: Yeah. Roth: That's going to be ... you don't have to wait till December for that. That's going to happen in week one. Maiorana: Could happen right away. ... What do you think? I didn't have any idea that Langston wasn't excited about this.
billsrcursed Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Yikes, this would be unfortunate if in fact true. You don't want a guy at LT that doesn't want to be there, or lacks the confidence, whatever. I'm sure this position is the team's biggest concern, so I hope if Langston really feels this way, there's been some communication with the coaching staff about this. Hey, it's the coaching staff's job to MAKE him want to be at LT, or at least be as prepared as he can be to play there. If I were Trent and I heard this, I'd be worried....
Steely Dan Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 C'mon LW suck it up tell them you're working as hard as you can and that it's a little bit of an adjustment to get used to. Aye Yi Yi.
Chandler#81 Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 If this is true, -and I've routinely questioned both reporters- then LW doesn't have 'much' upstairs. If I'm not mistaken, LT is the second highest paid position in the NFL. Succeed, and he'll make more $$ then he could even imagine in his wildest dreams. With this attitude, if accurate, he'd probably be broke 5 years after he retires anyway. Suck it up, Lumpy! P.S. who's out there for a tryout..
Coach Tuesday Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Most people in this world are asked to do things in their jobs that make them less than happy. And most of us aren't paid millions for the pleasure of it. Suck it up fatso.
smuvtalker Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 If this is true, -and I've routinely questioned both reporters- then LW doesn't have 'much' upstairs. If I'm not mistaken, LT is the second highest paid position in the NFL. Succeed, and he'll make more $$ then he could even imagine in his wildest dreams. With this attitude, if accurate, he'd probably be broke 5 years after he retires anyway. Suck it up, Lumpy! P.S. who's out there for a tryout.. Great point. I can understand about being comfortable with a certain position, especially one that you've played your whole career, but why would you not want to move to a position where you could double your salary??? Sounds to me like Big Langston's a bit happy with mediocrity and underachieving...
Lori Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Great point. I can understand about being comfortable with a certain position, especially one that you've played your whole career, but why would you not want to move to a position where you could double your salary??? Sounds to me like Big Langston's a bit happy with mediocrity and underachieving... Or Langston knows the move isn't a good fit, as Leo and Sal (and the poster before me, although I can do without the "you morons" talk) pointed out.
VJ91 Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Check it out in their podcast. http://www.democratandchronicle.com/...gory=PODCAST01 I hadn't heard this at all, so this is big news. It's around 4:30. Roth: "... he [Peters] came in out of shape and late and got tagged with a lot of sacks before ... took half the year before he rounded into any kind of form, but I think you're going to miss Jason Peters. Why wouldn't you miss Jason Peters? Maiorano: Yeah. Roth: He was one of the true ... he was the only Pro Bowl player they had. Langston Walker ... and he's ... it's all over Langston Walker's face, he's doing what he's ... he's doing what he has to. He's a professional, he's going to play where they tell him. But he's not happy about the move. Maiorano: Yeah, I asked him yesterday or whatever day it was ... couple days ago, "Are you on board with the move yet?" And in a roundabout way he said "Uh, did I have a choice?" Roth: Right! Maiorano: And then he said "Well, they're not going to bring anybody else in at this point, so I'm kind of there." So he was never, I mean I think he had fallen into being comfortable at right tackle, it's where he's played his whole NFL career. I know he did have some brief stints at left tackle at Oakland. Roth: Yeah. Maiorana: But it was minimal. He's not a left tackle. And at 345 pounds, he's not exactly the quickest guy to be dealing with the speed rushers he's going to see. That's really to me, a big big worry. Roth: I've written this in some reports before. At right tackle, his size is a real advantage, it's a plus. He's a big man and he can cover that ... his footwork is adequate but his size is a plus. At left tackle, his size becomes almost a detriment because his footwork isn't as good against the fastest pass rusher that he's going to be seeing every week. And there's going to be ... again, if the passing game becomes Edwards dumping the ball off as fast as he can to the running backs or quick hitches, those quick sideline screens to Evans and T.O. it's going to get kind of ugly. I want to see T.O. catch a mess of these little short passes and try to make something out of it, he gets tackled and then he starts going to the sideline and moaning about it. Maiorana: Yeah. Roth: That's going to be ... you don't have to wait till December for that. That's going to happen in week one. Maiorana: Could happen right away. ... What do you think? I didn't have any idea that Langston wasn't excited about this. 'Thurman#1' : Read the article, and I'll also highlight it for you. VJ91: Right! 'Thurman#1' : Could be a worrisome. VJ91: Yeah. 'Thurman#1' : Walker should not be so negative about this? VJ91: Right! VJ91: Hey Thurman#1, now we can write our own article in the D&C. How insightful. Were Roth and Maiorana stone drunk when they put this crap together??
eball Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 All the more reason to hope D. Bell is improving on a daily basis...and that Wood is as good as advertised so he can take a lot of pressure off Walker on the left side.
Mickey Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Yikes, this would be unfortunate if in fact true. You don't want a guy at LT that doesn't want to be there, or lacks the confidence, whatever. I'm sure this position is the team's biggest concern, so I hope if Langston really feels this way, there's been some communication with the coaching staff about this. Hey, it's the coaching staff's job to MAKE him want to be at LT, or at least be as prepared as he can be to play there. If I were Trent and I heard this, I'd be worried.... All the communication in the world isn't going to turn a RT into a LT. I have been saying all along that the OL moves are the product of necessity. They had to come up with something. It was clear that Dockery and the Fowler/Preston beast were failures and they couldn't get Peters on the dotted line. After what had to be a lot of head scratching, this is what they came up with. You don't have to be an expert to see that this a "celing wax and bailing wire" situation. It is not the first step in well thought out, long term plan. It is a reaction to the multiple debacles on the line. That having been said, I do think they have laid the groundwork for a solid interior line in the years to come. And sometimes you stumble on to a good idea when you are forced to cobble together something you never would have thought to do had it not been for unexpected adversity. Odds are however that we will be looking for a LT next year and if we find one, we will be wondering what to do with Butler and Walker. Maybe the long term plan is to move Wood to center once he has a year of experience behind him and then slide Butler back to G?
Mickey Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Most people in this world are asked to do things in their jobs that make them less than happy. And most of us aren't paid millions for the pleasure of it. Suck it up fatso. I am sure he will do the best he can out there but we should not delude ourselves into thinking that this is a good idea rather than the only option left after the personnel decisions that were made. It would seem rather futile for cursing at a snow plow for its not being a formula one race car. Walker seems like a class act to me and a good if not great RT who is helping the team out of the jam it got itself into by giving it a go at a position that is a poor match for his skills. I am not sure why that should engender personal insults from supposed fans. But I guess some just can't over the bitterness they feel over these uppity players getting paid more money than they do.
PromoTheRobot Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 I am sure he will do the best he can out there but we should not delude ourselves into thinking that this is a good idea rather than the only option left after the personnel decisions that were made. It would seem rather futile for cursing at a snow plow for its not being a formula one race car. Walker seems like a class act to me and a good if not great RT who is helping the team out of the jam it got itself into by giving it a go at a position that is a poor match for his skills. I am not sure why that should engender personal insults from supposed fans. But I guess some just can't over the bitterness they feel over these uppity players getting paid more money than they do. You are aware that your binky Jason Peters is already on the PUP list for the Eagles? Broken nail or yeast infection I believe. Sure wish we kept him. PTR
rpcolosi Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Check it out in their podcast. http://www.democratandchronicle.com/...gory=PODCAST01 ... What do you think? I didn't have any idea that Langston wasn't excited about this. how could you not read between the lines of his initial reaction to losing peters and being shifted to LT? he basically said he'd do what the team asked him to - not exactly a ringing endorsement. I might be crazy but i actually liked Kirk Chambers whenever he played LT. He isn't flashy, but if he does as good (or as bad) as peters last year, it shouldnt kill us. The guys who really hurt were preston/fowler and dockery. we had far too many guys come inside during the rush. also, if we use the no huddle more frequently it can take away teh teams best pass rusher. im hoping jauron/schonert are wise enough to see this can mask our O-line problems. that or they better make a play for levi jones cause no way langston makes it the whole season at LT IMO.
thewildrabbit Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 A man has got to know his limitations, Walker understands he has been given a position he is not suited fill and it will surely make him look bad. The Dwight Freeney types will blow right by him and he knows it, So every Bills fan will be crying and saying he sucks, it is more of the fact that he is being put into a position to fail. It is what every NFL personnel man has been stating all off season, The Bills traded away their left tackle and then don't even try and replace him in the draft or free agency.
Arkady Renko Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 To be honest, I would feel better if Langston and Butler were at the same positions as last year and if Kirk Chambers was holding down LT.
GaBillsFan Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Sal and Leo must be great guys to party with. They have to be the most negative sports writers in the country and just generally miserable people overall. If you listen to the Podcast, they can't even pronounce T.O.'s first name correctly. They can talk all they want about the Bills being losers, but Sal and Leo define the term. Will the Bills' O-Line perform poorly this year? Sure, it's a possibility. But given their performance last year, the Bills had to shake things up. If Langston Walker allows 11 sacks this year, it'll be one less than "All-Pro" Jason Peters did, and he didn't even play the whole year. I am not a blind Bills' follower, but let's give the new O-Line a chance before burying them.
thewildrabbit Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 how could you not read between the lines of his initial reaction to losing peters and being shifted to LT? he basically said he'd do what the team asked him to - not exactly a ringing endorsement. I might be crazy but i actually liked Kirk Chambers whenever he played LT. He isn't flashy, but if he does as good (or as bad) as peters last year, it shouldnt kill us. The guys who really hurt were preston/fowler and dockery. we had far too many guys come inside during the rush. also, if we use the no huddle more frequently it can take away teh teams best pass rusher. im hoping jauron/schonert are wise enough to see this can mask our O-line problems. that or they better make a play for levi jones cause no way langston makes it the whole season at LT IMO. All the no huddle does is limit substitutions by the defense,how on earth does it take away the opposing teams best pass rusher? In plain fact it doesn't and never will, the Bills will face the same players down after down and the idea is to keep the opposing team from switching defensive packages and players.It may help with not allowing defensive substitutions, which would limit teams from rotating the defensive linemen in and out. The fact is, if the O line can't handle the initial pass rush put on the field, then the no huddle is useless. The latter part of that bold statement is the most ridiculous thing I've read recently
Bill from NYC Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Odds are however that we will be looking for a LT next year and if we find one, we will be wondering what to do with Butler and Walker. Maybe the long term plan is to move Wood to center once he has a year of experience behind him and then slide Butler back to G? If Jauron is here I wouldn"t be so sure. Its getting near time to replace Whitner and MaGee. It's hard to visualize him drafting a LT before the 3rd or 4th round under these conditions. Wrt Butler, this stint at RT should be make or break imo. All he has proven thus far is that he is a decent, if not injury prone guard. The chance of success at RT seems OK to me. And, I think that Levitre and Wood are both better players, or at least will be. Walker? Imo Chambers will get a lot of reps at LT. The article claims that Walker is 345. I am betting that he is closer tp 375. A good season from him at LT would be a miracle.
thebandit27 Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 A man has got to know his limitations, Walker understands he has been given a position he is not suited fill and it will surely make him look bad. The Dwight Freeney types will blow right by him and he knows it, So every Bills fan will be crying and saying he sucks, it is more of the fact that he is being put into a position to fail. It is what every NFL personnel man has been stating all off season, The Bills traded away their left tackle and then don't even try and replace him in the draft or free agency. Respectfully disagree. Forget knowing his limitations, he needs to focus on what abilities he does have and find a way to apply them to his new position. The only thing that knowing limitations does for a person is remind them of what they cannot do. With Walker's current state of mind, I don't think he can afford that type of focus. That said, I do agree that he's not a great fit at LT, but he's what they've got, unless they want to throw Chambers (ugh) or Butler (uncertain ugh) into the fire. Just my 1 cent.
Heitz Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 'Thurman#1' : Read the article, and I'll also highlight it for you. VJ91: Right! 'Thurman#1' : Could be a worrisome. VJ91: Yeah. 'Thurman#1' : Walker should not be so negative about this? VJ91: Right! VJ91: Hey Thurman#1, now we can write our own article in the D&C. How insightful. Were Roth and Maiorana stone drunk when they put this crap together?? lol - post of the thread...
Recommended Posts