truth on hold Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 There are still three players starting that have never played in an NFL game. Giants won a Super Bowl with a very young offensive line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8-8 Forever? Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Who cares whether it was a plan or a knee jerk reaction when the plan sucks? Go ahead and credit the FO for coming of with this glorious plan if it makes you feel better, but it doesn't make the end result any more palatable or capable of competing against the pantywaists on MNF in six days!!! More embarrasment on national TV for our bills. This will be ugly. Is there another league we can play in? the losers league or something like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 There are still three players starting that have never played in an NFL game. Which differs from Fowler, Walker and Dockery; who played dozens of NFL games and still sucked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Hate to bring up the facts and spoil everyone's panic attack but 4 of 5 OL starters have been together since the start of camp... And they were so very successful in pass protection and run blocking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Hate to bring up the facts and spoil everyone's panic attack, but 4 of 5 OL starters have been together since the start of camp... WOW. This statement is just.....WOW. I guess all you need is a few weeks in pads, and a bunch of rookies and projects to create a well oiled finely tuned O-line. I'm not trying to be a jerk here and I apologize for the tone but this just shows an incredible lack of insight into what makes a good veteran OL with continuity. To create a good or sometimes even capable OL takes years of experience in the NFL and years of experience together. Even if you have those things you can still fail. Look at our last OL. Unlike many, I don't think they were quite as bad as everyone thought. Agreed, they DID under perform their contract. They did however open more, not a lot, of holes in the running game that I have yet to see our current line open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I agree! Peters would never be happy in a Bills uniform regardless of how much we overpaid for him. Walker and Dockery had experience, but played overweight, overmatched, overpaid and overthehill. Hopefully young, hungry, athletes will overcome inexperience. Everyone can have any opinion but this one has absolutely no basis in fact. THERE IS NO WAY ANY OF THOSE WHO FEEL LIKE YOU DO CAN SAY PETERS WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN HAPPY TO STAY IF PROPERLY PAID!!! STOP IT!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Giants won a Super Bowl with a very young offensive line. How many guys did they have starting that never started an NFL game for them? How many guys were playing a position they didn't play the year before? How many years had they played together in live NFL conditions? When you answer those questions you'll know why that is a nearly useless comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 The point is that there was a PLAN that was implemented during the offseason -- not some knee-jerk decision a week before the season starts as some are making it out to be. Apparently the PLAN is to be rebuilding every year for the next decade - which also appears to be the PLAN they implemented this past decade. I don't understand why people don't look on the bright side with this franchise given their sterling track record... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayFinkle Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 ...and Bell received a lot of reps with the "ones" as well. There has been no "blowup" of the line "just days before the season starts." Think about it. Congrats. You're grief as a Bills fan runs so deep you now start at stage 3 and then jump to stage 5. Must be nice...I hope to be there some day. 5 stages of Grief 1. Denial 2. Anger 3. Bargaining 4. Depression 5. Acceptance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Hey I heard Kyle Orton beat out Rex Grossman in Chicago a few year ago. Does that mean Kyle Orton is a good starting QB that you want running your offense? It;s even worse with Walker-Bell. Just because Bell beat out Walker doesn't mean he will be good at his job. ALL IT MEANS IS HE WAS BETTER THAN WALKER!!!! PERIOD! I hope Bell blossoms into the next Jason Peters. I really do. I'll also be pissed when he wants to get paid what he's worth and we let him walk to. What are you talking about? Why do you keep bringing up Peters about the Walker-Bell situation? Bell beat out Walker, so they got rid of Walker who was a high priced baby who doesnt want to sit on the bench and was going to sulk all season... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Keep telling yourself that! Maybe one of us will believe it. He just wanted to be paid what a two time pro bowl LT at what 26? years of age was worth. Kid, its literally FACTS not what I am telling myself...you are the one with opinnion... FACT: Peters signed for less money (in a heartbeat I might add too) in Philly than he was demanding in Buffalo. He didnt want to be here, showed up fat, was the worst rated LT in the game last year in terms of sacks...what more do you want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rstencel Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Not if we had given him a market value contract. Yet another quick reminder, Peters was the lowest-paid starting LT in the league, he had a right to be pissed. Who had just finished signing a contract extension, that wasn't even at halfway point of. He should have been pissed at his representation for signing him to that contract, if anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Have you ever heard the saying something is worth EXACTLY what you pay for it? Peters got paid what he was worth and Philly footed the bill. Peters was worth that much because other teams, unlike the Bills, were willing to pay it. If Trent makes it through 16 weeks without needing crutches I'm sure he will agree with you on all of the "help" he has gotten on OL!!!! Thats may be true in Real Estate, but not in football. If you pay JP Losman a $100,000,000 contract he is still worth only a buck fifty...so your something is worth exactly whay you pay for it theory has NO place in football... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 What he said. ^^^^^^^^ Nobody disagrees that we needed help in the middle. But did we have to weaken ourselves at the most important position to get it. Peters wanted market value, which is what he got. You say "I said this all offseason, he will sign with the team he is traded to for LESS than he was asking the Bills for, and thats exactly what he did..." and this shows where you are wrong. OF COURSE he signed for less than he asked for. That's how negotiations work, for God's sake. A quick review. Peters asked for more money than Long got, $13+ mill. Then the Bills raised their offer and Peters lowered his. This is how negotiations work. If you took the two original offers, $7 mill and $13 mill and halve the difference, you get what Peters signed for. Then the Bills raised their offer, probably to something in the neighborhood of $9 mil and a bit. And Peters lowered his offer to around $11 mill. Split the difference and you again get what Peters signed for. This is how negotiations work. Any idiot knew that he was going to sign for less than he was demanding. THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE DO WHEN THEY NEGOTIATE. Peters didn't want out of Buffalo, he wanted the salary that he got, and there is no evidence whatsoever to the contrary. He wanted market value. He got market value. The Bills were not willing to pay market value. That's what happened. You really don't get it? People aren't angry that Walker was leap-frogged by Bell. We are incredibly frustrated by the timing (how come this wasn't done weeks ago to give Bell lots of first team reps?), and by how the Chambers thing was handled, and the things that surround this move. We're worried, we're deeply worried. If Bell is so good, how come he wasn't promoted weeks ago? Yes, that is how negotiations work, but he wasnt coming down in Buffalo...he wasnt playing the negotiating game, DESPITE seeing how the FO paid everyone else on the team when they just showed up and did their job and went about it professionally. He not only held out, but cut off contact, and didnt back off his demands...and all of that was completely different how he conducted himself in Philly and quickly lowered his demands to take less money. As far as your question about why wasnt Bell promoted weeks ago...well, hello thats the WHOLE reason for preseason and training camp...to let players play it out and fight for starting spots...weeks ago, Bell was the inexperienced backup...then he outplayed the seasoned vet and they made a decision to promote him. He beat the odds... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 The point is that there was a PLAN that was implemented during the offseason -- not some knee-jerk decision a week before the season starts as some are making it out to be. We PLANNED to cut Walker a week before the New England game? Neat idea to wait so long so you didn't give the actual starting left tackle much playing time. I feel so much better given the way the offensive line played all preseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 ...and Bell received a lot of reps with the "ones" as well. There has been no "blowup" of the line "just days before the season starts." Think about it. shhhh you're ruining all the fun for the bipolar TBD headless chickens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Peters wanted market value, which is what he got.He wanted market value. He got market value. The Bills were not willing to pay market value. That's what happened. You really don't get it? People aren't angry that Walker was leap-frogged by Bell. We are incredibly frustrated by the timing (how come this wasn't done weeks ago to give Bell lots of first team reps?), and by how the Chambers thing was handled, and the things that surround this move. We're worried, we're deeply worried. If Bell is so good, how come he wasn't promoted weeks ago? To your first point, what is "market value"? market value is what the market is willing to pay. The only team that stepped up to the plate was Philly, in the rest of the league's eyes, he wasn't worth that value, at least not the teams that had a need for a tackle. What Peters received from Philly and what the Bills were reportedly offering was not that large of a difference. The speculation that was coming out from the negotiations were that they were a long ways apart from getting a deal done. I think it is pretty evident to anyone with a rational thinking mind, that Eugene Parker/Peters were still somewhat bitter about the hold out from the year before and that they wanted out of Buffalo, unless Buffalo caved in to their ridiculous demands. When they realized that no team was going to pay what they thought was their perceived "market value" they accepted Philly's offer, touted it as a success, even though it was much lower then what they were purportedly demanding and they hi tailed out of Buffalo. In regards to your second point. It's funny how some people just don't seem to be able to use logic in what most likely transpired. Is it possible that the Bills wanted to evaluate his performance through out training camp and preseason before they determined that Walker was their man? Do you really think it was the intention of the Bills coaching staff, to purposely cut him at the end of camp, just to piss everyone off? It's pretty obvious to me that they were surprised to see his lack of desire, inept performance and couple that with a hefty salary to make the decision that he wasn't worth it to keep on the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsCelticsAngelsBama Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 ...and Bell received a lot of reps with the "ones" as well. There has been no "blowup" of the line "just days before the season starts." Think about it. And you must admit, they were a very impressive lot shoulda drafted Michael Oher!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 We PLANNED to cut Walker a week before the New England game? Neat idea to wait so long so you didn't give the actual starting left tackle much playing time. I feel so much better given the way the offensive line played all preseason. Don't you see the genius? Feigning staggering amounts of incompetence and not giving Bellicheat any clue as to what is in store for him in 5 days. Brilliant I tell you, brilliant! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Kid, its literally FACTS not what I am telling myself...you are the one with opinnion... FACT: Peters signed for less money (in a heartbeat I might add too) in Philly than he was demanding in Buffalo. He didnt want to be here, showed up fat, was the worst rated LT in the game last year in terms of sacks...what more do you want? When was the last time you heard a guy who signed for the amount he demanded? Seriously. What NFL team do you remember offhand who says "Oh, gee, Mr. Player, you demand $x. Well, gee, we feel intimidated, so we'll just give it to you." OF COURSE HE SIGNED FOR LESS THAN HE DEMANDED. THAT'S HOW NEGOTIATION WORKS!! It shouldn't surprise you, because he had already lowered his demands once for Buffalo. The Bills offered about $7 mill and Peters demanded $13+. Split the difference and what do you get? You get what he signed for. Then the Bills raised their offer to somewhere around $9 mill and Peters lowered his offer to about $11 mill. Split the difference and what do you get? You get what he signed for. He signed for exactly what he and his agent expected to get all along. He signed for market value. The Bills just weren't willing to pay market value for him. I don't know why I bothered posting this. Anyone who uses the "sacks allowed" stat proves himself not worth having a serious conversation with. There is a fact for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts