Anyone Agree with Tim Graham on This?

[cåblelady]

I do not hate Peters.

I do.

[Lori]

hey vj91 just so you know, Russ offered Jason Peters the Richest/largest contract in team history this past offseason before we traded him, check post #82 by Lori, better yet here it is.

 

"There's the rub. Remember what Brandon said:

"... we offered Jason an enormous contract – the largest contract in Bills history – and he had no interest in it. None."

 

"We felt very strongly that Jason was not going to come back to camp, was not going to participate, and we were going to be in the same situation (as last year)."

 

I think most of us agree that there was very little chance of a deal getting done".

 

 

just an FYI, we did try

Keep in mind that the "largest contract in Bills history" still might not have equaled "the money he commanded," though.

[toddgurley]

Keep in mind that the "largest contract in Bills history" still might not have equaled "the money he commanded," though.

 

 

i understand-but it still had to be up there.

[TimGraham]

You are getting warm.......it was a UNION play.

 

The Union guys give a few names for everyone to vote in. Peters was key because he ends up looking correct in going against management. The Union sends a message, "you want to play hardball and underpay one of your top guys? Then we'll make sure you look like fools, push him through the Pro Bowl again, and force you to pay the man."

 

It softens up management for the next battle a bit. No matter what team it is, even if they are correct in wanting a player to honor a contract.....union ball don't work that way.

 

Interesting theory, but one major hole.

 

Fans, coaches and players each have an equal, one-third say in Pro Bowl voting. The fans didn't vote him in. The NFL releases only the top five in fan balloting and he didn't make it. They were Jake Long, D'Brickashaw Ferguson, Matt Light, Michael Roos and Joe Thomas.

 

To become a starter, Peters would've needed selection by both the players and the coaches. In your theory, that means the coaches (who are considered management) also were involved in a conspiracy to drive up the contract of one player and, by extension, possibly force their own teams into salary-cap strife because having a player go from a bargain to one who will figure into franchise tenders is bad for teams when it comes to keeping their own players.

[TimGraham]

Yup. STATS, Inc. is the one with the deal with ESPN. And as Tim noted in the story I linked a couple of pages back, "sacks allowed" is NOT an official stat.

 

To revisit VOR's assertion that "... when a guy says that Peters was beaten one-on-one for 5.5 sacks, there's little room to start claiming bias or faulty methodology," it seemed like there was a LOT of room to disagree on whether or not Peters should have gotten out to block Abram Elam on the infamous Losman fumble at the Meadowswamp.

 

ESPN has a contract with Elias Sports Bureau. We're not allowed to quote STATS Inc because it's a subscription service we don't use. But if another outlet quotes STATS, we can say so-and-so reported these numbers ... That's what I did in the "How many sacks did Peters really surrender?" post.

[TimGraham]

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 RESPONSE/QUESTION TO TIM GRAHAM:

 

I am pretty pumped that Tim G is weighing in on this. And for the record, I am a Tim Graham fan, but just simply disagree with him on this topic. Keep up good work Tim.

 

But tim, Did nt Chris Long of STL and Quinton Groves of JAX BOTH BEAT PETERS FOR SACKS? They were rookies last year, right? So the original post was'nt way off. So he did technically get beat by rookies, right? Just not every week like the guy suggested. (and yes i know that the week 2 game vs Jax was Peters 1st start, but once again that is his fault)

Also, we should have beat NE is the last game, if you watch it again, we blew it PRETTY badly. That would have made us 3-0 in games Peters did not play in, but we lost making us 2-1. Also Freddy Jackson also ran for 136 yards on 27 carries (5.0 yards per carry). That is pretty good for not having your "BEST O-LINEMAN" huh? As opposed to the game where Jason Peters did play vs NE (week 10) when the BILLS AS A TEAM RUSHED FOR 60YARDS ON 18 CARRIES= 3.3 YPC. (am tying not to compare apples to oranges)

 

 

 

Go Bills!!

 

Bills vs STL box score: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=280928014

Bills vs Jax box score: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=280914030

Bills vs NE (week 17): http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=281228002

Bills vs NE (week 10): http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=281109017

 

AND THESE STATS ALL CAME OFF ESPN (FOR YOU DEANER)

 

Rookie pass-rushers aren't like rookie cornerbacks. They can produce immediately. Jevon Kearse, Dwight Freeney, Simeon Rice. Check out their rookie numbers.

 

Chris Long came very close to being the No. 1 overall pick last year.

 

Getting beat by a couple rookies doesn't mean the guy sucks. Rookies go to the Pro Bowl all the time, so the logic that a great player shouldn't be beaten by a rookie doesn't wash.

 

And if you want to make the statement about how well the Bills did running the ball against the Patriots in Week 17, why not go ahead and say Fred Jackson is better than Marshawn Lynch, too?

 

For the record, this is what I think:

 

* Peters had an off year.

 

* The Bills had no choice but to trade him because of the contract issues.

 

* Bills fans have every right to hate the guy for the way he handled himself.

 

* That does not mean the Bills offensive line will be better without him or Langston Walker will be better left tackle this year. A HUGE leap too many people are making.

[Guest dog14787]

Funny how much trouble Jason Peters is still stirring up with the fans and he's long gone.

 

 

I concede that the potential for greatness is there for Jason Peters. We all know he's a bull of a man when he wants to be, but that's the problem, he didn't want to be a bull of a man for Buffalo, he didn't want to be a Buffalo Bill.

 

You heard it, we offered him the biggest contract ever and it was scoffed at because it wasn't big enough to match the Eagles or his inflated Ego. In my opinion Buffalo didn't deserve to be treated this way, Jason Peters knew we needed him here and he didn't care.

 

Regardless, it doesn't change how bad he played last season and despite his salary situation you should still do your job, do the job you signed up to do, protect the QB, and he did a sub-par job of protecting our QB last season.

 

Its probably safe to say this is the best thing that could have happened for all concerned.

[Lori]

ESPN has a contract with Elias Sports Bureau. We're not allowed to quote STATS Inc because it's a subscription service we don't use. But if another outlet quotes STATS, we can say so-and-so reported these numbers ... That's what I did in the "How many sacks did Peters really surrender?" post.

Thanks for the correction. And this ...

For the record, this is what I think:

 

* Peters had an off year.

 

* The Bills had no choice but to trade him because of the contract issues.

 

* Bills fans have every right to hate the guy for the way he handled himself.

 

* That does not mean the Bills offensive line will be better without him or Langston Walker will be better left tackle this year. A HUGE leap too many people are making.

... should end the thread. The "cohesion" lauded by Brandon and Jauron can only take you so far, if the guys across the line of scrimmage have more talent.

[Fingon]

Maybe the confusion comes from ESPN using Scouts INC.

[The Dean]

Funny how much trouble Jason Peters is still stirring up with the fans and he's long gone.

 

 

Don't blame Peters if you decide to let his actions upset you. Peters is simply going about his job in another city. If you choose to let that upset you, that's your problem. I haven't heard of Peters "stirring" anything up.

[Guest dog14787]

Don't blame Peters if you decide to let his actions upset you. Peters is simply going about his job in another city. If you choose to let that upset you, that's your problem. I haven't heard of Peters "stirring" anything up.

 

Change trouble to heated debate and you'll get my drift, but I'm sure you knew as much Dean.

 

I don't mind spelling it out for you though because I know you like all the attention.

 

added: and yes, Jason Peters actions do very much upset me, its like taking one step forward and two steps back with our football team and anybody that isn't a little upset by this is not a Bills fan or brainless.

[toddgurley]

Rookie pass-rushers aren't like rookie cornerbacks. They can produce immediately. Jevon Kearse, Dwight Freeney, Simeon Rice. Check out their rookie numbers.

 

Chris Long came very close to being the No. 1 overall pick last year.

 

Getting beat by a couple rookies doesn't mean the guy sucks. Rookies go to the Pro Bowl all the time, so the logic that a great player shouldn't be beaten by a rookie doesn't wash.

 

And if you want to make the statement about how well the Bills did running the ball against the Patriots in Week 17, why not go ahead and say Fred Jackson is better than Marshawn Lynch, too?

 

For the record, this is what I think:

 

* Peters had an off year.

 

* The Bills had no choice but to trade him because of the contract issues.

 

* Bills fans have every right to hate the guy for the way he handled himself.

 

* That does not mean the Bills offensive line will be better without him or Langston Walker will be better left tackle this year. A HUGE leap too many people are making.

 

 

Valid points Tim, lets hope that rookie D Ends can do some damage, because we need Maybin to come through in A BIG WAY. However, I have been told not too expect more than 5 sacks from him because it's rare that DE's produce their rookie year (mario williams , gaines adams, jamal anderson, jarvis moss) I realized you named some very good rookie DE's, but I think you will agree that is not the norm-

 

 

The only thing I did not understand was the Fred Jackson is better than Marshawn Lynch statement. Where did that come from? While I love fast Freddy, I do not think he is better than Marshawn Lynch. I just said he ran the ball very well vs the Pats in week 17. I truly believe the Marshawn can be something very special in the NFL. Providing he can stay out of trouble, and we get our offense line together.

 

* You were right, Peters did have an off year, and we DID have to trade him. However, I dont think we should hate him, just dislike him strongly.

 

*I think our interior O-line will be much improved over last years, and the trio (levitre, hangartner, and wood) could be very good for years to come. Plus I love that nasty demeanor that they all have, they are all known for finsishing blocks, which I Love. However, I am very nervous about our tackles however. Walker did a good job at LT last year, and Butler was arguable our best o-lineman last year (in terms of consistency) but as you know he played guard. With that being said, our o-line was not very good at all last year. So lets really hope that its not worst than last years and that these guys can step it up this year.

 

Thanks for not being too busy to respond Tim-

 

Go BILLS!

[VOR]

For the record, this is what I think:

 

* Peters had an off year.

 

* The Bills had no choice but to trade him because of the contract issues.

 

* Bills fans have every right to hate the guy for the way he handled himself.

 

* That does not mean the Bills offensive line will be better without him or Langston Walker will be better left tackle this year. A HUGE leap too many people are making.

Fair enough. But the O-line is more than just 1 player (the LT) and relies on more than just the 5 players who comprise it. While the LT position may have been downgraded (may have been, again compared to last year), the interior of the O-line looks like it could be much stronger come the midpoint of the season, if not sooner. And the addition of TO is a huge boost to the offense, and will force opposing defenses to stop committing 8 to the box, which takes pressure off the O-line. And it may just be that the Bills have the RB help-out on the left side, if not go for quicker-hitting pass plays.

[TimGraham]

The only thing I did not understand was the Fred Jackson is better than Marshawn Lynch statement. Where did that come from? While I love fast Freddy, I do not think he is better than Marshawn Lynch. I just said he ran the ball very well vs the Pats in week 17. I truly believe the Marshawn can be something very special in the NFL. Providing he can stay out of trouble, and we get our offense line together.

 

You said that the Bills being competitive against the Patriots in the season finale should be used as further proof Peters wasn't that good. You quoted the rushing numbers from that game.

 

The left tackle wasn't the only different starter in that game. You were using selective reasoning. If that proves the left tackle from that game was better than Peters, then why wouldn't the running back be better than Lynch?

 

To which, of course, you would say "That's foolish. Everybody knows Lynch is better than Jackson."

 

And that's when I would say "I know."

[toddgurley]

You said that the Bills being competitive against the Patriots in the season finale should be used as further proof Peters wasn't that good. You quoted the rushing numbers from that game.

 

The left tackle wasn't the only different starter in that game. You were using selective reasoning. If that proves the left tackle from that game was better than Peters, then why wouldn't the running back be better than Lynch?

 

To which, of course, you would say "That's foolish. Everybody knows Lynch is better than Jackson."

 

And that's when I would say "I know."

 

 

Actually, I quoted the numbers to use the reasoning we will be just fine without him, and to try to prove he was not our best o-lineman last year. The effort may have been in vain but that's what I was trying to show-

 

I guess we will see pretty soon

 

One last question: Do you think Peters was a pro bowl caliber LT last year? Honestly-

(and like I said before I know he missed all of Training Camp, but that was his fault)

[Guest dog14787]

Rookie pass-rushers aren't like rookie cornerbacks. They can produce immediately. Jevon Kearse, Dwight Freeney, Simeon Rice. Check out their rookie numbers.

 

Chris Long came very close to being the No. 1 overall pick last year.

 

Getting beat by a couple rookies doesn't mean the guy sucks. Rookies go to the Pro Bowl all the time, so the logic that a great player shouldn't be beaten by a rookie doesn't wash.

 

And if you want to make the statement about how well the Bills did running the ball against the Patriots in Week 17, why not go ahead and say Fred Jackson is better than Marshawn Lynch, too?

 

For the record, this is what I think:

 

* Peters had an off year.

 

* The Bills had no choice but to trade him because of the contract issues.

 

* Bills fans have every right to hate the guy for the way he handled himself.

 

* That does not mean the Bills offensive line will be better without him or Langston Walker will be better left tackle this year. A HUGE leap too many people are making.

 

 

We can go there to, but that could be a whole new thread

[thebandit27]

Interesting theory, but one major hole.

 

Fans, coaches and players each have an equal, one-third say in Pro Bowl voting. The fans didn't vote him in. The NFL releases only the top five in fan balloting and he didn't make it. They were Jake Long, D'Brickashaw Ferguson, Matt Light, Michael Roos and Joe Thomas.

To become a starter, Peters would've needed selection by both the players and the coaches. In your theory, that means the coaches (who are considered management) also were involved in a conspiracy to drive up the contract of one player and, by extension, possibly force their own teams into salary-cap strife because having a player go from a bargain to one who will figure into franchise tenders is bad for teams when it comes to keeping their own players.

 

I would think this puts to rest any notion that Peters got in on name recognition alone, since--in my opinion--the fans would be the folks that vote based on name recognition, not the coaches and players that study the entire league 5 times over on film year 'round.

[The Senator]

I would think this puts to rest any notion that Peters got in on name recognition alone, since--in my opinion--the fans would be the folks that vote based on name recognition, not the coaches and players that study the entire league 5 times over on film year 'round.

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.

[The Dean]

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.

 

 

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.

[The Senator]

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.

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