SouthernMan Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 There was a thread a month or so ago, concerning Jason Peter's prowess, value, etc. Many have argued that the Bills got a bad deal in the trade, only getting a #28 pick. Of course, Peters was touted by some as being one of the best LTs in the league. In the earlier thread, I deduced that if Peters had that much value, one of the 6 teams that drafted a tackle in the 1st round would have been willing to trade for proven vet, still in his prime. Conclusion - he's not all that great. Just a pretty decent tackle when he's in the mood. Joe D, a guy who knows the offensive line, was on WGR55 and reinforced my belief that Peters was way overrated, and possibly the beneficiery of the media's and the Bill's hype. It was obvious from Joe Ds comments that he doesn't think Peters is anywhere near being a great tackle, and doesn't think the Bills will miss him. OK, the Peters story is old news....onward. The other interesting comment by DeLamielleure is that he's believed for several years the Bills O-line is the big problem (surprise, surprise), and he doesn't seem concerned about having the 2 rookie guards. He intimated that the guard position doesn't have near the learning curve of the O-tackle, and that the transition from college shouldn't be too big a leap. He even cited the example that it was his rookie year and Reggie McKenzie in his second, the year that OJ ran for 2003 yds. Is the same ease into the pros still relevant to today's game? - I don't know, but I'll take Joe's word for it over some jock wanna-be pundit's. I have to think the Bills are gambling that Woods and Levitre's intelligence and toughness will finally get the Bill's offense in gear. I think the big thinkers at One Bills Drive finally realized the importance of synchronicity on the O-line, and I believe they've assembled a group who's personalities mesh well and have the (potential) talent to make an impact. Maybe just wishful thinking and eternal hope as training camp approaches, but I have a good feeling about the ability of the O-line. Side note: I'm eager to get more looks at 2nd year tackle Demetrius Bell, who I thought looked great in preseason last year, and for my money, has as much or more potential than the overrated Peters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwight Drane Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Nice to hear.... The Pats are the Pats because of high football IQ first and foremost. While some of our front office and coaching staff may not be oozing with it, at least they have come around to understanding it is important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIE HARD 1967 Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 I think Peters is top 8 in the NFL but not worth the money he got in Philly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrFishfinder Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Joe D echoes the sentiments of a lot of people in that Peters was overrated. The Bills may miss him some, but not to the extent that the OL will collapse without him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Only time will answer the questions brough out in the post. No doubt the Bills have gambled - let's hope it pays off. we will begin to see the answers unfold over the upcoming weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Only time will answer the questions brough out in the post. No doubt the Bills have gambled - let's hope it pays off. we will begin to see the answers unfold over the upcoming weeks. I think it's a better bet than the gamble on Bledsoe, the gamble on McGahee, the gamble on JP Losman, the gamble on Mike Williams, the gamble on Darwin Walker... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Instead of praising the front office for getting it correct this year by taking two guards high, it should be highlighted that for three drafts the Bills did not take a first day OL, and used in total only a 5th, and two 7ths on the offensive line. If guard is truly one of the easier positions to transition to, the Bills could have saved themselves a ton of money and cap room by taking young guards and not having to pay Dockery. Granted Butler played at G and may become a full time OT, but interior OL was a problem before Levy got there and we're only hoping it isn't now. Why did it take so long for them to realize this? I disagree on Peters. Many people, including Peter King, had him as an All Pro (not to be confused with Pro Bowl) OT in 2007. He also fared quite well in the latter half of the 2006 season. When it comes to Peters, it's a case of was he worth the money. Only he can prove that, but it won't be in a Bills uniform. Time to move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Instead of praising the front office for getting it correct this year by taking two guards high, it should be highlighted that for three drafts the Bills did not take a first day OL, and used in total only a 5th, and two 7ths on the offensive line. If guard is truly one of the easier positions to transition to, the Bills could have saved themselves a ton of money and cap room by taking young guards and not having to pay Dockery. Granted Butler played at G and may become a full time OT, but interior OL was a problem before Levy got there and we're only hoping it isn't now. Why did it take so long for them to realize this? I disagree on Peters. Many people, including Peter King, had him as an All Pro (not to be confused with Pro Bowl) OT in 2007. He also fared quite well in the latter half of the 2006 season. When it comes to Peters, it's a case of was he worth the money. Only he can prove that, but it won't be in a Bills uniform. Time to move on. OH MY F-CKING GOD! "Instead of praising them this year, I'd rather b-tch about the last three years...waa waaa waaaaaah!!" Also, it's been well established now that 2007 Jason Peters > (x500) 2008 Jason Peters. I mean, what? Do you just glue yourself to your keyboard looking for any excuse (as ludicrous as it might be) to squash any bit of optimism expressed about The Bills? Pathetic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Mickey will miss Jason Peters. The Bills will not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offde-fence Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 I believe it's best to forget about Peters altogether, and to move forward. Even if he does great in Philly, or opposite, it doesn't mean he would've had the same results here. More importantly, I think, is that he showed he was willing to put his ego and personal goals ahead of the teams, to the point where he acknowledged not showing up a hundred percent, and justified it by saying he wasn't getting paid enough to play at an elite level. Any guy talking that way would be booted off a lot of good teams, and rightfully so. If the Bills paid him, it would have sent the wrong message, and imagine the cancer a guy like that would be to a team. So, I think we're better off moving on without him, and, now is all we have. I'm glad the Bills picked up the makings of a really solid interior line for the next four years, and we might have on the roster, right now, guys good enough for the tackle positions. Let's hope put it together this year, and surprise some teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Mickey will miss Jason Peters. The Bills will not. Oh, yes they will. They will try to tell themselves they don't, but unless they get an actual LT, and soon, and if Peters looks all-World in Philly for the next ten years, which is what the entire rest of the football world expects to happen, not only will they, but deep in your hearts, so will you. Especially when next year three or four more LTs get contracts as high as Peters's "astronomical" one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted July 21, 2009 Share Posted July 21, 2009 Oh, yes they will. They will try to tell themselves they don't, but unless they get an actual LT, and soon, and if Peters looks all-World in Philly for the next ten years, which is what the entire rest of the football world expects to happen, not only will they, but deep in your hearts, so will you. Especially when next year three or four more LTs get contracts as high as Peters's "astronomical" one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Oh, yes they will. They will try to tell themselves they don't, but unless they get an actual LT, and soon, and if Peters looks all-World in Philly for the next ten years, which is what the entire rest of the football world expects to happen, not only will they, but deep in your hearts, so will you. Especially when next year three or four more LTs get contracts as high as Peters's "astronomical" one. I can pretty much guarantee you that even if Peters plays well for a year or 2, by year 3 he will want a new contract & will pull the same Crap he pulled in Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Joe D echoes the sentiments of a lot of people in that Peters was overrated. The Bills may miss him some, but not to the extent that the OL will collapse without him. Let's face it, the OL collapsed last year with him. I will be surprised if the OL does not play much better this year than last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 The only thing I wounder is if the Bills could have gotten a pick a little higher than 28th like the Eagles 21st or another teams pick that was a little higher. I think most teams viewed Peters as a LT who was slightly better than Oher and slightly worse than the top 3 LTs drafted. But unlike Oher you would have to pay Peters (Who is older than all 3 guys coming into the draft although he is more certain of a product.) like a top 10 pick. To me the Bills got around market value I hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 OH MY F-CKING GOD! "Instead of praising them this year, I'd rather b-tch about the last three years...waa waaa waaaaaah!!" Also, it's been well established now that 2007 Jason Peters > (x500) 2008 Jason Peters. I mean, what? Do you just glue yourself to your keyboard looking for any excuse (as ludicrous as it might be) to squash any bit of optimism expressed about The Bills? Pathetic! Yes, that is exactly what he does. He calls it "Realism." Ask him, he'll tell you. EDIT: As he did below. Isn't he just delightfully predictable! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 The only thing I wounder is if the Bills could have gotten a pick a little higher than 28th like the Eagles 21st or another teams pick that was a little higher. I think most teams viewed Peters as a LT who was slightly better than Oher and slightly worse than the top 3 LTs drafted. But unlike Oher you would have to pay Peters (Who is older than all 3 guys coming into the draft although he is more certain of a product.) like a top 10 pick. To me the Bills got around market value I hope. I understand why people have asked this question, but I also think that it has answered itself by now. The Eagles did not think Peters was worth the #21 pick; and no one else offered something better than #28. I notice that a lot of people who prefer to hammer on the front office (I am not including you here) want to imply or even assert that the Bills consciously chose 28 over 21, either out of stupidity or a commitment to suckiness or just because. I frankly think that is about the stupidest thing I have ever heard. None of those critics has been able to point to a better deal that the Bills should have taken. The same goes for the speculation that the Bills did not offer Peters market value. We have quotes from Brandon that the Bills offered him the richest contract in team history, but the Peters fans do not believe it. Maybe the bridges were already too burnt. I think that Peters deciding to hold out and have no contact with the team after suffering a serious injury was a sign that he was going to be a problem, but I have no idea whether the situation could have turned out differently. All I can do is wish him what I wish every former Bill: good health, a happy life, and catastrophic failure for his and every other team in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 Instead of praising the front office for getting it correct this year by taking two guards high, it should be highlighted that for three drafts the Bills did not take a first day OL, and used in total only a 5th, and two 7ths on the offensive line. If guard is truly one of the easier positions to transition to, the Bills could have saved themselves a ton of money and cap room by taking young guards and not having to pay Dockery. Granted Butler played at G and may become a full time OT, but interior OL was a problem before Levy got there and we're only hoping it isn't now. Why did it take so long for them to realize this? I disagree on Peters. Many people, including Peter King, had him as an All Pro (not to be confused with Pro Bowl) OT in 2007. He also fared quite well in the latter half of the 2006 season. When it comes to Peters, it's a case of was he worth the money. Only he can prove that, but it won't be in a Bills uniform. Time to move on. Good Christ, get yourself some midol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 It would be more genuine to claim they won't miss Peters at all if they actually had another top 16 LT that was stepping in to replace him. They don't. There is a certain irony in claiming Peters was purely a product of Bills marketing hype and then claiming the Bills 100% revamped OL will be just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted July 22, 2009 Share Posted July 22, 2009 OH MY F-CKING GOD! "Instead of praising them this year, I'd rather b-tch about the last three years...waa waaa waaaaaah!!" Also, it's been well established now that 2007 Jason Peters > (x500) 2008 Jason Peters. I mean, what? Do you just glue yourself to your keyboard looking for any excuse (as ludicrous as it might be) to squash any bit of optimism expressed about The Bills? Pathetic! You do realize the Bills are one of two teams to have missed the playoffs nine straight years, right?. Oh sure, they'll get one personnel move right every now and then, but that ain't enough kitty kat. Frankly, it needs to happen on the field for me before I rubber stamp these moves. You talk about the franchise as if they're a perennial success story but they're not. Hope, change, and optimism don't mean crap to me pal and I know the casual uninformed fans will latch onto anything to make themselves feel good, but not everyone thinks your way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts