YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted October 9, 2009 Posted October 9, 2009 I notice all of you Jason Pets haters are quiet now...maybe Peters will send you a postcard from the NFL Playoffs or the Super Bowl! :wallbash: Jason Peters is a tool and a Lazy sack of S... and a whiny overpaid fat boy... there you satisfied... So he had one good game... wait till he really blows it and you Filly fans get one him... you will see how depressed he gets and then won't even return the coaches phone calls while he sits on his Moms couch eating french fries. Pullleeease.!
Kal Posted October 9, 2009 Posted October 9, 2009 Stats for individual offensive linemen are stupid to base anything on- one lineman doesn't give up a sack. I really hate fantasy football...... Have you seen Allen Barbre play for the Packers Quite often (because there is a massive misconception to the amount of double teaming that actually goes on) tackles are left one on one with rushers ... in the middle its a little different as the center often goes where help is needed almost. Before I started doing analysis I use to quote double teams and stuff like that but I had it pointed out to me that I was wrong ... and since paying more attention I realised I was (since I don't count a chip block as an actual block) Stats for individual offensive linemen in the passing game I find particularly useful. Sacks, hits and pressures they gave up normally fall down to individual responsibility (although its important to account for things like how long the QB has held the ball/ whether he has run into the pass rusher as I've just seen Derek Anderson do despite excellent containment from Joe Thomas) I'm by no means an expert (so apologies if I'm coming across as a know-it-all, which I'm not) but just sharing some stuff I've learnt
Thurman#1 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Did you really just write the above only two posts below this: Does that sound like a man who really wants to be "here?" It sounds like a man who finally decided that his team didn't want him enough to pay market price and therefore decided that because the team didn't value him that he would go wherever the money was whether or not that was Buffalo.
The Senator Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 It sounds like a man who finally decided that his team didn't want him enough to pay market price and therefore decided that because the team didn't value him that he would go wherever the money was whether or not that was Buffalo. So 'market price' for the league's worst LT is $60M????? :lol: Please send me some of what you're smokin'!!!!
Thurman#1 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Thanks for the reponse, interesting read. I'd certainly share a lot of sentiments on Peters. However that last point at the end ... I think he's very good, but I don't think he's ever going to be a dominant tackle like Ogden, Jones or Pace (if a player struggles with motivation in one aspect of his career I worry about it recurring). I would be even less surprised if Clady gets into that consideration (its amazing how having a QB who can get rid of a ball quickly can earn you some praise). The guy I always look out for, and he's playing for a team that won't lend himself to getting credit, is Joe Thomas. Excellent in every way, and for a masterclass of left tackle play look at how in week 1 he made Jared Allen his prison wife. He's the guy I'd turn to if I needed a franchise LT. As for the site as a general rule we never guess about anything (unlike say NFL scorers who guess everything - is why we have different tackle counts to them that are far more accurate since we do stuff retrospectively rather than in the moment. You'd be surprised how many times a scorer credits a tackle to a guy who isn't even on the field) I agree on Thomas, he's very good. That's interesting that you don't think much of Clady. I'll check him out again. What do you think of Long? Peters has never had the slightest problem with motivation on the field. Get him on the field and he kicks butt. That's shown by his performance in 2007. He was unhappy with his salary throughout that season too and he was absolutely dominant. He had a bad year when he didn't go to training camp. But even during that year he greatly improved over the course of the year. Well, we'll see about Peters. Thanks again for the good conversation.
Thurman#1 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Admire your honesty. I think sometimes people are too keen to give young players a free pass. Bell has given up 6 penalties from my memory which is a terrible ratio (first 3 games). His pass blocking is pretty poor as well and right now I don't think he's NFL ready. That said sometimes the only way to get players NFL ready is for them to take their lumps and learn from it. In the first three games I wouldn't say he faced any defender that was elite at getting at the QB which would be a worry considering there will be tougher tests. Unfortunately, that's what I saw too. Remember that he wasn't supposed to play this year. The Bills ran around swearing up and down that Langston Walker was going to be just fine at LT despite all evidence to the contrary. Six penalties? That is not good. Yeah, what I saw was that in most of the Pats* game he looked decent. But he was playing where there used to be a Richard Seymour who disappeared about a week before the season. Then on the last Bills drive when N.E.* absolutely had to get a stop, they ignored the two rookies on the OL and put serious pressure on Bell. They got two sacks out of that, in, what, four plays? Since then, teams noticed what the Pats* did and they've done more of it. So far, he hasn't been able to handle it. As you say, though, this is how guys learn, and with luck, that's what we'll see, a young guy getting rapidly better.
Thurman#1 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Peters has great talent, but average at best motivation at least to play for th Bills. Objectively, he was great in '06 and good in '07 and average in '08 with what he admits was a poor attitude. He admitted to being distracted at times. He did not admit to a poor attitude. Don't put words in the guy's mouth.
Thurman#1 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Some independent thoughts - minus all the passion and vitriol - on Jason 'FatSlob' Peters, the meaningless Pro Bowl, and the Bills-Eagles trade that got a $60M cancer off of our roster just in the nick of time... Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. (wiping away tears)
Thurman#1 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 No, everything on that site is 100% true - that's why everyone needs to accept it as iron-clad proof that FatBoy's the best OT that ever lived! Quiet??? Guess again. I know you've probably already sent in your Pro Bowl ballot, but I haven't been quiet at all - the only reason FatBoy didn't give up a sack yesterday is 'cause the Eagles had a bye week! FYI, Mr. 6-Wonderlic-Fat-Lazy-Stupid-Tub-o'-Goo has given up 4 sacks so far this season. If we extrapolate that over a full season, he'd be giving up over 21 sacks in a sixteen game season - or roughly double his league-leading 11.5 sacks allowed last year. (But he hasn't managed to play 16 games in either of the last 2 seasons, has he? ) Hey, give 'im a big raise and send 'im to Hawaii!!! Quiet??? Not me. Hell no. I've been screaming from the rooftops about FatBoy's failure!!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Oh, you kill me. Are YOU, the guy who claimed that Peters had four sacks when the entire team only has three, YOU, THE SENATOR, seriously critiquing someone else on the conclusions they reached on the ACTUAL facts? The hilarious thing is that you really are, and you really expect to be taken seriously.
rstencel Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Why is it re-hashed? Maybe because people like you come on and say stuff like "he did not want to be here anymore," and "isn't always motivated," none of which can even remotely be proven. That gets folks like me, who only want Peters to be looked at in a neutral light, frustrated. I really really understand people not wanting to hear more of this, but if you join the argument on one side, then you are helping cause it to go on and on. I personally haven't started a Peters thread since a few days after he got traded. But if people start negative threads or say negative things, hey, I feel very justified in pointing out if they say stuff that has never been proven or is a flat-out mistake. And another point is that I just didn't think that Bell looked good when healthy. I wish he had, but I thought he was getting beaten like a drum. Like you, though, I hope he improves and think there's a chance that he will. Feel its rehashed because the off-season is over. Time to move on from players that aren't on the team anymore, and talk about the team you have. Ok point out how good he was all you want. I don't think he wanted to be here, and I'm ecstatic that hes not. Keep loving the ex bills all you want, I'll enjoy watching the current ones. I do understand why allot of people that wanted to stay though. He has a ton of talent, and has had moments of greatness even in his worst games. I personally do not like people who don't give 100 percent while there on the field, when they are being paid good money to be there. If your ego is more important than you team mates, then you know where the door is. Yes he was underpaid, that was a good reason to hold out. But if you report and step on the field, you should play your best while your out there, and I do not think he gave solid effort for most of the season. Even with his talent, I feel very comfortable in saying I am glad he is gone. He needed a change of scenery as bad as the Bills needed to get rid of him.
rstencel Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 He admitted to being distracted at times. He did not admit to a poor attitude. Don't put words in the guy's mouth. He may not have said it explicitly, but she sure sounded like he implied it. I don't remember the quote, but he said something about giving up a sack because he was thinking about how underpaid he was rather than about the play. May be misquoting, but something to that affect. Guess could look it up, but spent enough time talking about Eagles players already.
NyQuil Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Well a message board can never have too many Jason Peters threads.
ddaryl Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 just watchin gthe crabtree situaiton and it is very easy to understand why Peters in not a Bill.. the guy would only play here if he was the highest paid player at his position.... That was a rediculous thing to think... I still loathe Peters, I don't respect that sort of greed... Yes he deserved a 8 - 9 mil contract but that wasn't good enough for him... and with that I say !@#$ you, you greedy B word
Thurman#1 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Feel its rehashed because the off-season is over. Time to move on from players that aren't on the team anymore, and talk about the team you have. Ok point out how good he was all you want. I don't think he wanted to be here, and I'm ecstatic that hes not. Keep loving the ex bills all you want, I'll enjoy watching the current ones. I do understand why allot of people that wanted to stay though. He has a ton of talent, and has had moments of greatness even in his worst games. I personally do not like people who don't give 100 percent while there on the field, when they are being paid good money to be there. If your ego is more important than you team mates, then you know where the door is. Yes he was underpaid, that was a good reason to hold out. But if you report and step on the field, you should play your best while your out there, and I do not think he gave solid effort for most of the season. Even with his talent, I feel very comfortable in saying I am glad he is gone. He needed a change of scenery as bad as the Bills needed to get rid of him. Hey, fine, if you want to say that you don't "think" he wanted to be here, hey, what can I say? I DO think he wanted to be here. Whatever you think is fine, we can agree to disagree. It's just that many here claim to "know" it, and that is just plain wrong. And if you want to move on and talk about players who are still on the Bills, go look at the page listing all the active threads. You will notice that 95% of them do indeed talk about current Bills. Feel free to restrict yourself to those that do. But if you come here and talk about ex-Bills yourself, how can you attack others because they are doing the exact same thing you are? Again, there's no proof that Peters didn't give 100% on the field, every time. The fact that he absolutely ripped up the league in run blocking last year certainly goes some way to showing that he did. Pass blocking is largely based on athletic ability and being synched up with the other OLs (which Peters was not after missing camp). Run blocking in mostly about how badly you want to do it and how tough you are. Peters had a sensational year run blocking, and that was in his off year. Again, he was second in the whole league at yards gained when the back ran behind him. How does that happen if he's not trying hard? For proof, just look at footballoutsiders. com and click on "statistics" and make sure you're looking at the right year. Second in the league.
Thurman#1 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Some independent thoughts - minus all the passion and vitriol - on Jason 'FatSlob' Peters, the meaningless Pro Bowl, and the Bills-Eagles trade that got a $60M cancer off of our roster just in the nick of time... 'The Pro Bowl is a joke. Some of the top players opt out. Those who go don't really try. It's not even a real football game. And it's impossible to bet on because no one puts forth any effort. As a degenerate gambler, I do not find this appealing. However, the reason I hate the Pro Bowl more than anything is that there are far too many crappy players named to the two squads. I don't think the NFL should strip the fans of all of the decision-making, but it's a joke because there too many clueless voters out there. Jason Peters is the perfect example. Peters, a 6-4, 340-pound mauling left tackle, is entering his sixth year. In 2006, he started all 16 games and surrendered just two sacks.... Since the 2006 campaign, Peters' play has regressed exponentially. In 2007, Peters gave up six sacks in 15 contests. And last year, things got downright ugly, as Peters surrendered a whopping 11.5 sacks in just 13 games, good for tops in the NFL. Peters was also whistled for eight penalties, a career high for him. Now you see why I hate the Pro Bowl so much. How could the league's worst left tackle, statistically speaking, be voted in as one of the premier players at his position?' link You and he are both using the horrendously flawed "sacks allowed" stat, which would better be called "sacks guessed at." He's using it as his only argument.
Thurman#1 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 So 'market price' for the league's worst LT is $60M????? :lol: Please send me some of what you're smokin'!!!! Study economics, bonehead.
Max997 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 I notice all of you Jason Pets haters are quiet now...maybe Peters will send you a postcard from the NFL Playoffs or the Super Bowl! :lol: trading Peters wasnt the mistake, not drafting Oher was which would make this a non issue and its not like Peters is playing great in Philly, ok at best...Winston Justice is the guy everyone is talking about on the Eagles line believe it or not
Thurman#1 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 He may not have said it explicitly, but she sure sounded like he implied it. I don't remember the quote, but he said something about giving up a sack because he was thinking about how underpaid he was rather than about the play. May be misquoting, but something to that affect. Guess could look it up, but spent enough time talking about Eagles players already. You're right. You are indeed misquoting. And since I have already linked to the exact quote on this thread, let it sufficeto say that he in no way and at no time linked sacks to what he was thinking about. As I said, there are lots of other threads if you only want to talk about current Bills.
Thurman#1 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 just watchin gthe crabtree situaiton and it is very easy to understand why Peters in not a Bill.. the guy would only play here if he was the highest paid player at his position.... That was a rediculous thing to think... I still loathe Peters, I don't respect that sort of greed... Yes he deserved a 8 - 9 mil contract but that wasn't good enough for him... and with that I say !@#$ you, you greedy B word Nothing like being wrong. He had already lowered his offer to below the amount that the highest paid LT received. He would have been in the top 3, though, and since he's a top 3 guy, that was about right.
Thurman#1 Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 trading Peters wasnt the mistake, not drafting Oher was which would make this a non issue and its not like Peters is playing great in Philly, ok at best...Winston Justice is the guy everyone is talking about on the Eagles line believe it or not Oher is an RT, not an LT. But you're right, if the Bills had managed to pick up one of the top 3 LTs in the draft or otherwise replaced Peters, this would not have been much of an issue. But they didn't. Which is the point, for me. You never see elite LTs traded. For good reason. But at least, for God's sake, have a legitimate backup plan if you're going to make the move. Hey, if Bell develops into a top 10 guy soon, you won't hear more from me about this. If he does it next year, it will still have been a stupid trade in terms of giving up on this season. And if it never happens ... I'm hoping Bell develops not just quickly but instantaneously. But until we all see it, the FO's moves here are at best questionable and at worst outright stupid.
Recommended Posts