thebandit27 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 There's been discussion of this item on this board, so I thought I'd post this link. An unbiased observer's view on the 11.5 sacks: http://blogs.nbcsports.com/home/archives/2...illy-press.html Of course, he's pretty wishy-washy with his true feelings about the player. Of course, DK Turtle has the links to all the sacks, so decide for yourself... What's the real number, TSW Nation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleed Bills Blue Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 What's the real number, TSW Nation? Well, if Jason Piggers didn't care enough to know, I don't either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans4e64 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Who cares what the actual number is? He's still an !@#$ that needed to be off the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan_in_raleigh Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Who cares what the actual number is? He's still an !@#$ that needed to be off the team. Agreed he was a cancer in the locker room based on all the stuff I have heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 He's still an !@#$ that needed to be off the team. He's actually an !@#$ that should have been resigned, and would have been by any other NFL team in that situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 He's actually an !@#$ that should have been resigned, and would have been by any other NFL team in that situation. If he had done something, ANYTHING, to make contact last offseason I would agree. But he literally took the worst approach possible. He should have skipped voluntary workouts, showed up for the preseason, started off strong and negotiated during the season like Evans did. He'd be a Bill right now and we wouldn't have to be looking for a new LT. He'd be only making $8-9M/year or so, but he wouldn't be the most hated Bill since McGahee and he wouldn't have had such a horrible year. But I agree, I don't like the person any more. I was ticked at the player, but from what I've heard since, I'm not sad to see him go at all. It's totally bitter of me, but I hope he crumbles. I hope Stacy Andrews makes this into a huge deal and I hope Sheldon Brown makes the Philly FO miserable like Lito Sheppard did. Hell, while I'm at it, I have a few other things to wish for... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 If he had done something, ANYTHING, to make contact last offseason I would agree. But he literally took the worst approach possible. He should have skipped voluntary workouts, showed up for the preseason, started off strong and negotiated during the season like Evans did. He'd be a Bill right now and we wouldn't have to be looking for a new LT. He'd be only making $8-9M/year or so, but he wouldn't be the most hated Bill since McGahee and he wouldn't have had such a horrible year. But I agree, I don't like the person any more. I was ticked at the player, but from what I've heard since, I'm not sad to see him go at all. It's totally bitter of me, but I hope he crumbles. I hope Stacy Andrews makes this into a huge deal and I hope Sheldon Brown makes the Philly FO miserable like Lito Sheppard did. Hell, while I'm at it, I have a few other things to wish for... None of which helps the Bills win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Day 10 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 i dont know the stats on it, but it seemed like every crucial penalty on the O-Line.... when it wasnt Duke "IQ" Preston, was always Peters. Cant blame that on a 'skittish QB'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 http://boards.buffalobills.com/showthread.php?t=127203 I'm very impressed with what this poster did on the Bills board. People are going to think what they're going to think about Peters, but for those who watch this, they probably won't throw around the 11.5 number any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Kind of interesting that they point out that Dockery consistently gave up the B gap ... on his right was Duke "IQ" Preston. Coincidence? You decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DazedandConfused Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Who cares what the actual number is? He's still an !@#$ that needed to be off the team. The thing I care about most is that the Bills have set a horrible precedent for players who think they deserve more $ (which is probably almost all of them) to pursue given the way the Bills caved on this issue and delivered Peters a tremendous deal. The precedent is that even if you are under contract, if you deal with the FO by holding out on voluntary practices and then even the mandatory ones until your game check in endangered, the Bills FO will cave and trade you to a team that will give you a huge raise in an extension in a new contract. One of the silliest things going is that there are some posters who actually seem to believe the Bills really stood up to Peters by not giving in to his initial negotiating demand of $11.5 mill annual salary. Sure that is true, but it is a cave because the end result of this trade is the Peters has to "settle" for getting a mere $10 million a year in annual salary. The Bills have set a precedent that any of their desirable FAs can choose to pursue in search of big bucks even if they are bound to the Bills by a contract under the CBA. The deal seems to be simply create enough of stink to get the fan base divided between being pissed at the player and pissed at the team, and then the FO will cooperate by trading you to a new team willing to meet exhorbitant salary demands. The Bills did not screw Peters at all they simply delivered him to a team willing to more than double his annual salary. Even worse, all the Bills could get for a player whom the market incorrectly has rewarded with 2 straight Pro Bowls by getting only mere draft picks for him. Sure, maybe in the Mel Kiper world we got 3 true Pro Bowlers for one malcontent, but the factual occurrence is that its about a 50/50 occurrence that any 1st round pick will even turn out to be first on the depth chart as his position after a full year of play. Even worse for the Bills as they are 0 for the millenium so far in making the playoffs, protecting Edwards is a critical need in terms of his development and now we are going to have either a rookie or at best a journeyman as critical parts of our OL, and further we will have this learning pass pro during the one year we are guaranteed to have TO, and we are going to go through this learning year with Ralph's presence being something one would not bet on next year. What coulda,woulda,shoulda the Bills have done differently> Intelligent FO management and smart player assessment would have taken the recognition two years ago when they judged Peters was good enough to play LT to simply have ripped up his contract as they did when they extended this UDFA into a starter's contract to also rip up the Peters deal when he confirmed it by making the Pro Bowl and paying him starting LT $. The FO simply proved to be pennywise and poundfoolish by lavishing in the joy of only paying him $4 million the last two years when they were paying major bucks the worse Dockery and Walker gobs more. While it was true they had every contractual right to force Peters to play at the contract they agreed to, the moral position was not smart management by the team as they almost certainly could have gotten Peters to agree to play for far less and they could better manage the product. The Bills did the morally "correct" thing but a really stupid and unsuccessful thing in how they managed the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Major kudos for that dude's effort in that BB.com post. Just a great effort by a schmoe who loves his team. Gotta dig it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 What's the real number, TSW Nation? about tree-fitty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Agreed he was a cancer in the locker room based on all the stuff I have heard. Got any links, or anything, that supports that? I'm not saying you didn't hear it, just wondering if there is anything you can share that suggests that. I haven't heard a thing about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 As long as the methodology stays the same for everyone it does not really matter. I agree there are many factors that go into giving up sacks. But that was always supposed to be his strength as run blocking he was always labelled as average. Why did we seem so hopeless on 4th and a foot all the time running to the Left side of the line? But Peters gave up 2 sacks in '06, 6.5 in '07 and the 11.5 in '08. That looks like the wrong direction to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 http://boards.buffalobills.com/showthread.php?t=127203 I'm very impressed with what this poster did on the Bills board. People are going to think what they're going to think about Peters, but for those who watch this, they probably won't throw around the 11.5 number any more. Or at least they'll remember to point out that the 11.5 sacks came in only 13 games, versus a full 16 game season - which Peters hasn't played the past two years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kettle Creek Football Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 As long as the methodology stays the same for everyone it does not really matter. I agree there are many factors that go into giving up sacks. But that was always supposed to be his strength as run blocking he was always labelled as average. Why did we seem so hopeless on 4th and a foot all the time running to the Left side of the line? But Peters gave up 2 sacks in '06, 6.5 in '07 and the 11.5 in '08. That looks like the wrong direction to me. On Sirius NFL Radio Sunday night... after Peters' presser, they were talking about how many sacks he gave up. Howard Balzer, I think it was, who lives in St. Louis, said there were more than a couple of years where Orlando Pace gave up ZERO sacks. Bottom line is, a lot less than Peters - no matter how you slice it. Don't forget, most of Pace's years, St. Louis was a passing team with two immobile QBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 ok...i looked at everyone of those sacks.....it was good to see them for yourself.....the author was extremely generous in only tagging Peters with 5.5 sacks.....i would put it at 10. i agree Dockery was terrible. Bottom line, Peters had a bad year anyway you slice it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firemedic Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Sack #20. If you engage a defender, you must keep that engagement throughout play. You don't tap him on the way by. No one came outside of Dockery except the safety whom Peters should have crushed. Many of those beatdowns were straight one on ones where Peters got tossed. Shouldn't be that hard to get out of a stance when you're simply squatting a little. I wasn't impressed with Peters on the vast majority of those clips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Sack #20.If you engage a defender, you must keep that engagement throughout play. You don't tap him on the way by. No one came outside of Dockery except the safety whom Peters should have crushed. Many of those beatdowns were straight one on ones where Peters got tossed. Shouldn't be that hard to get out of a stance when you're simply squatting a little. I wasn't impressed with Peters on the vast majority of those clips. I remember Peters claiming/making excuses that more than a few of his sacks surrendered were "hustle" sacks, i.e. where the opposing player was out-hustling him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts