toddgurley Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Spencer in Ellicottville, N.Y., can't "understand why every sports writer in the nation is on the Bills' case for shipping off Jason Peters." Spencer reasons that the Bills will be better off without Peters because they went 2-0 without him last year and 5-9 with him and he was "getting burned by rookie defensive ends almost every week." Tim Graham's Response: You can be upset with Peters' contract demands and the way he forced his way off the team, but I will never understand why fans channel their anger into rationalizing that he's no good. That's the definition of sour grapes (one of the most misused phrases, by the way). Peters was Buffalo's best offensive lineman last year. He led the Bills in point-of-attack blocking, according to analyst KC Joyner. Peters went to his second straight Pro Bowl because opposing coaches and players consider him one of the league's best. Yes, Peters gave up too many sacks last year and took a big step back from his sublime season in 2007. But he was better than most. You're flat-out lying when you state he was abused by rookie defensive ends. Peters lines up against elite pass-rushers every game. That's what left tackles do. As for your suggestion the Bills were better without Peters on the field, the records you gave are not only misleading, but also wrong. The Bills went 2-1 in games Peters didn't play. Their victories came over the Seattle Seahawks and Denver Broncos, teams that went a combined 12-20. They also lost to the Patriots in the season finale minus Peters. My Take I know we talked about this before and my thread will probably get merged, but I totally got to disagree with Tim. I think you will also agree that the Bills should have been 3-0 with Peters not in the lineup (should have beat N.E. just once again got out coached by Bellicheat) First, I think that the POINT OF ATTACK statistic by KC joyner to be a mis-leading STAT. In fact I hate the P-O-A statistic, I believe it an irrelevant and somewhat doctored stat, you may disagree and that s fine. 2nd, I am POSITIVE that Jason Peters was NOT our best o-lineman last year. (just look how the line did when he did not play) I would say that award would have went to Brad Butler, with Langston Walker finishing a close 2nd. I mean, remember how Peters got abused by Joey Porter? Two Years ago Peters was the man, but not this past year. And then there is always that SACK stat. Like it or not, Peters yielded 11.5 sacks last year. That was the most of any Tackle in the league, weather you believe in that stat or not. There is no doubt Jason Peters should NOT HAVE MADE THE PRO BOWL? Thats my take guys, let me know if you agree or think that I am way off? GO BILLS- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIE HARD 1967 Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 I believe we will all need to reserve judgement till after the 2009 season. Wasn't it Tim Graham that made the statement that buffalo screwed up releasing Mike Gandy right before the Superbowl? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 I think that if you think the Walker/Butler combo at tackle will be better than Peters/Walker ... well, I just hope you're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 I pretty much agree with Tim's take. Close to 100%, actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toddgurley Posted June 27, 2009 Author Share Posted June 27, 2009 I think that if you think the Walker/Butler combo at tackle will be better than Peters/Walker ... well, I just hope you're right. I hope that Butler/Walker do a good job a tackle, but I NEVER said Walker/Butler will be better than Peters/Walker. But lets all hope that they are- I just said that I thought our best o-lineman last year were brad bulter (who played RG last year) and that Langston Walker was our 2nd best( who played RT, except for 3 games in which he played LT) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Peters has talent--I don't think there's a question of that. He just didn't seem to play that well last year, probably in large part due to his lack of TC and conditioning issues early in the year. I also thought that he really didn't play (or at least start) in the first two or three games of the year--i.e., the wins against Oakland and Jacksonville, for ex.--but could be wrong about that. Anyone have that info handy? To me, if he didn't play in those games (i.e., wins, albeit against weaker opponents) that also bolsters the argument that he wasn't as vital a cog as some national media folks think..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwight Drane Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Peters doesn't fit the system the Bills are installing on offense. You need to be able to think on your feet. Peters is lucky he can tie his shoes. Peters became a Pro Bowler with Dockery next to him. While Dockery underplayed his huge contract, he probably also covered up many mistakes by Peters. On raw talent, Peters is top 5. Considering what the Bills want to do with Edwards and their skill set, the trade was a sound decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 To this point in his career, Peters is one of the most overrated players in the league. He has had one good season. He is basically living off of his potential as a young athletic player who has a high up-side. Everyone is imagining how great he will become when he re-commits himself and has a few more years of experience. He is not great yet. He may become a consistent pro-bowler, but there have been a lot of young players on the brink of greatness before they got derailed. In fact, it's more the norm than them making it. Either way, Peters basically forced the Bills to trade him. At least Graham got that part right. The Bills got good value for him, so it is what it is. Maybe both teams will benefit or maybe neither, we'll see how the next two of three seasons pan out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Peters has talent--I don't think there's a question of that. He just didn't seem to play that well last year, probably in large part due to his lack of TC and conditioning issues early in the year. I also thought that he really didn't play (or at least start) in the first two or three games of the year--i.e., the wins against Oakland and Jacksonville, for ex.--but could be wrong about that. Anyone have that info handy? To me, if he didn't play in those games (i.e., wins, albeit against weaker opponents) that also bolsters the argument that he wasn't as vital a cog as some national media folks think..... You are. The Seattle game was the only one he missed until the two at the end of the season. And to respond to an earlier question, searching both the AFC East blog and Tim's posts on this site for Mike Gandy returns no results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nostradamus Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Spencer in Ellicottville, N.Y., can't "understand why every sports writer in the nation is on the Bills' case for shipping off Jason Peters." Spencer reasons that the Bills will be better off without Peters because they went 2-0 without him last year and 5-9 with him and he was "getting burned by rookie defensive ends almost every week." Tim Graham's Response: You can be upset with Peters' contract demands and the way he forced his way off the team, but I will never understand why fans channel their anger into rationalizing that he's no good. That's the definition of sour grapes (one of the most misused phrases, by the way). Peters was Buffalo's best offensive lineman last year. He led the Bills in point-of-attack blocking, according to analyst KC Joyner. Peters went to his second straight Pro Bowl because opposing coaches and players consider him one of the league's best. Yes, Peters gave up too many sacks last year and took a big step back from his sublime season in 2007. But he was better than most. You're flat-out lying when you state he was abused by rookie defensive ends. Peters lines up against elite pass-rushers every game. That's what left tackles do. As for your suggestion the Bills were better without Peters on the field, the records you gave are not only misleading, but also wrong. The Bills went 2-1 in games Peters didn't play. Their victories came over the Seattle Seahawks and Denver Broncos, teams that went a combined 12-20. They also lost to the Patriots in the season finale minus Peters. My Take I know we talked about this before and my thread will probably get merged, but I totally got to disagree with Tim. I think you will also agree that the Bills should have been 3-0 with Peters not in the lineup (should have beat N.E. just once again got out coached by Bellicheat) First, I think that the POINT OF ATTACK statistic by KC joyner to be a mis-leading STAT. In fact I hate the P-O-A statistic, I believe it an irrelevant and somewhat doctored stat, you may disagree and that s fine. 2nd, I am POSITIVE that Jason Peters was NOT our best o-lineman last year. (just look how the line did when he did not play) I would say that award would have went to Brad Butler, with Langston Walker finishing a close 2nd. I mean, remember how Peters got abused by Joey Porter? Two Years ago Peters was the man, but not this past year. And then there is always that SACK stat. Like it or not, Peters yielded 11.5 sacks last year. That was the most of any Tackle in the league, weather you believe in that stat or not. There is no doubt Jason Peters should NOT HAVE MADE THE PRO BOWL? Thats my take guys, let me know if you agree or think that I am way off? GO BILLS- I can remember, without doing any research, at least two rookies who beat Peters clean for sacks last year. Groves from Jacksonville and Anderson from Miami beat him clean. So, in this instance for Graham to assert that the original poster is 'lying' is certainly irresponsible journalism on his part. Peters was being beaten regularly for sacks last year; it just so happened that occasionally, he was lined up against rookies when it happened. That being said, I do agree that Peters is extremely talented and, when he wasn't getting abused last year for sacks, he was playing pretty well. Further, one of the reasons he gave up so many sacks was that the Bills offensive scheme was designed to not give him any help, and he probably was matched up single-teamed against defensive ends more than any other left tackle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Peters was a great run blocker, but a piss poor pass protector. Walker is an average pass protector (for a LT, very good for a RT) and a slightly above average run blocker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Spencer in Ellicottville, N.Y., can't "understand why every sports writer in the nation is on the Bills' case for shipping off Jason Peters." Spencer reasons that the Bills will be better off without Peters because they went 2-0 without him last year and 5-9 with him and he was "getting burned by rookie defensive ends almost every week." Tim Graham's Response: You can be upset with Peters' contract demands and the way he forced his way off the team, but I will never understand why fans channel their anger into rationalizing that he's no good. That's the definition of sour grapes (one of the most misused phrases, by the way). Peters was Buffalo's best offensive lineman last year. He led the Bills in point-of-attack blocking, according to analyst KC Joyner. Peters went to his second straight Pro Bowl because opposing coaches and players consider him one of the league's best. Yes, Peters gave up too many sacks last year and took a big step back from his sublime season in 2007. But he was better than most. You're flat-out lying when you state he was abused by rookie defensive ends. Peters lines up against elite pass-rushers every game. That's what left tackles do. As for your suggestion the Bills were better without Peters on the field, the records you gave are not only misleading, but also wrong. The Bills went 2-1 in games Peters didn't play. Their victories came over the Seattle Seahawks and Denver Broncos, teams that went a combined 12-20. They also lost to the Patriots in the season finale minus Peters. My Take I know we talked about this before and my thread will probably get merged, but I totally got to disagree with Tim. I think you will also agree that the Bills should have been 3-0 with Peters not in the lineup (should have beat N.E. just once again got out coached by Bellicheat) First, I think that the POINT OF ATTACK statistic by KC joyner to be a mis-leading STAT. In fact I hate the P-O-A statistic, I believe it an irrelevant and somewhat doctored stat, you may disagree and that s fine. 2nd, I am POSITIVE that Jason Peters was NOT our best o-lineman last year. (just look how the line did when he did not play) I would say that award would have went to Brad Butler, with Langston Walker finishing a close 2nd. I mean, remember how Peters got abused by Joey Porter? Two Years ago Peters was the man, but not this past year. And then there is always that SACK stat. Like it or not, Peters yielded 11.5 sacks last year. That was the most of any Tackle in the league, weather you believe in that stat or not. There is no doubt Jason Peters should NOT HAVE MADE THE PRO BOWL? Thats my take guys, let me know if you agree or think that I am way off? GO BILLS- Jp was our best O lineman last year eventually..not at the start. Yes he is a great talent when motivated and in shape. Did we make the right move getting rid of him?? YES. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 You are. The Seattle game was the only one he missed until the two at the end of the season. And to respond to an earlier question, searching both the AFC East blog and Tim's posts on this site for Mike Gandy returns no results. Many thanks, Lori. Wasn't Peters replaced at LT in some of those early games by Walker or Chambers, however? I could have sworn that Walker played a good bit of LT early in the year, but maybe I'm getting myself confused with the prior year when Chambers/Walker covered for Peters when he was hurt at year end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 I pretty much agree with Tim's take. Close to 100%, actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GR8PRKN Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 I can remember, without doing any research, at least two rookies who beat Peters clean for sacks last year. Groves from Jacksonville and Anderson from Miami beat him clean. So, in this instance for Graham to assert that the original poster is 'lying' is certainly irresponsible journalism on his part. Peters was being beaten regularly for sacks last year; it just so happened that occasionally, he was lined up against rookies when it happened. That being said, I do agree that Peters is extremely talented and, when he wasn't getting abused last year for sacks, he was playing pretty well. Further, one of the reasons he gave up so many sacks was that the Bills offensive scheme was designed to not give him any help, and he probably was matched up single-teamed against defensive ends more than any other left tackle. Yep! I was at both of thoose games and it was painful to watch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 He has had one good season. Completely false. He was good in every season with the Bills, except for his spottiness last year (when he missed ALL of the offseason workouts, minicamp, training camp and the preseason). How do you think he ended up being a starting LT, when he was an undrafted TE? He did that by playing great, and exceeding expectations at every position, in every season from 2004-2007. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Chris Long abused Jason Peters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valle7878 Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 Jason Peters is very average at best. He may be good but he doesn't deserve big money. What he did to buffalo last year and this year is pitiful and i hope he goes down the 1st game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 27, 2009 Share Posted June 27, 2009 No one can claim, with a straight face that is, that JP deserved to be the highest-paid LT based on last season. And in the NFL, you're only as good as your last season. One good season does not a career make. The Bills were justified in balking at giving a guy who skipped ALL of the off-season last year in a contract dispute (I can't recall a player missing training camp even, outside of Sean Gilbert's year-long holdout 12 years ago) and who had a sub-par season for even an average starting LT, the biggest contract for a LT in league history. I couldn't care less about the Pro Bowl bid because the Pro Bowl is a joke, something to which the players readily admit. A true "Pro Bowl" and "franchise LT" shouldn't be allowing a sack to a rookie DE period, much less a safety late in the season. So he's now someone else's problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 Completely false. He was good in every season with the Bills, except for his spottiness last year (when he missed ALL of the offseason workouts, minicamp, training camp and the preseason). How do you think he ended up being a starting LT, when he was an undrafted TE? He did that by playing great, and exceeding expectations at every position, in every season from 2004-2007. No, he did that because the players starting ahead of him, like Mike Gandy and Mike Williams, were playing very poorly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts