Hey all you Jason Peters haters

[thebandit27]

Hey, Bandit, don't put him on ignore. It's obvious that he doesn't know when he's beaten, whether he's blinded by his emotions or whether he has simply stuck his fingers in his ears.

 

But who cares. The point isn't what he thinks. The point is what others think. And when they see him doing the 6 year-old stuff, the only thing left to him at this point, it helps people see what is left of his arguments.

 

It's just me, but don't put him on ignore just when he hands you a huge victory.

 

What's really funny is that I see from others' posts that he's still responding to me as though I could/would read it.

 

What can I say, the Senaturd is one of a kind.

[firemedic]

Yeah, I am serious....but oh I know I know...he has 1 bad season....that means you are trash on Bills fans eyes!!

We knew he would have a crap 2009 season based on his attitude, we just prevented it from happening to us by dumping him.

[Conch]

Nobody here really challenged his talent...we challenged the way he went about his "business". Show up for work and prove you deserve your extension. He held out and sucked last year....threatened to hold out again and the Bills were supposed to pay him?!?!?!

 

However, I still think the Bills should have paid him....I believe they would have had he handled his situation more like Lee Evans....

 

what's the friggin difference? Lee showed up, sucks big time and gets paid. Peters didn't show up, sucked, gets traded and gets paid.

[Doc]

Butler's been injured each year he's been in the league. I don't think it was a stretch to believe he'd get hurt in 2009, especially when he's facing better athletes at DE and/or OLB. It's like making plans not to have a decent backup QB with Edwards as the starter.

 

Bell was not ready when they pressed him into duty. He's struggled, but the idea we're depending mightily on a guy who hadn't played organized football previous to 2005 is weird

Butler missed his rookie season (2006) recovering from a college shoulder injury, played all 16 games in 2007, and missed 3 games last year. And this year he got rolled-up on, which no one can predict. The O-line situation is bad because they lost Butler early and then Bell got injured. Any team missing its starting OT's will struggle, but Edwards' play just compounds it.

[The Senator]

 

 

What's really funny is that EVEN THOUGH I HAVE HIM ON 'IGNORE', I'M STILL READING EVERY SINGLE ONE OF HIS POSTS - AND EVEN RESPONDING TO THEM (WHILE PRETENDING I'M NOT!!!!)

 

I'm an idiot.

 

fixed.

[Thurman#1]

Son, you and bandit are both mental midgets - together, you share the intellect of a wax moth.

 

I really couldn't care less if I'm on your or anyone else's 'ignore' list - in fact, I hope you both ignore me. Just be ready for the biggest 'haircut' of your life if you think you're going to 'dress me down' - you just don't have the tools, or the indefatigability.

 

 

 

 

As I said, of course you hope we ignore you. He whipped you to the point where your only response was putting your fingers in your ears and saying "Nyah Nyah Nyah. I'm not listening." It was pathetic. And what's even more pathetic is that I really don't think that you recognize it.

 

But again, I'm not here for you. I'm here for the other readers. And you couldn't possibly have helped convince people how right we are in a better way than you did by holding your skirt up and saying you weren't listening. It was perfect.

 

 

You STILL haven't admitted that you were wrong when you said that Peters was responsible for 4 sacks in Philly, and you still haven't even addressed the issue. The only thing you've said is that you now realize that the team has three, but haven't addressed at all that you said that Peters was responsible for all of them.

 

And I love it. Not only does it show you up for the mental child that you are, but the other posters see it, and your stock plummets. And that is really funny because it has reached the point where people are looking at you and saying "THAT GUY thinks Peters is bad. THAT GUY? Hmmmm. I've thought so too, but maybe it's time I did some re-evaluating."

 

Oh, and I do agree about your indefatigability. It's impressive. But indefatigability is so much less convincing than, say, logic, willingness to admit obvious mistakes, rhetorical effectiveness, you know, the stuff that most of the other posters here have. But you go, boy, with your indefatigability.

[The Senator]

As I said, of course you hope we ignore you. He whipped you to the point where your only response was putting your fingers in your ears and saying "Nyah Nyah Nyah. I'm not listening." It was pathetic. And what's even more pathetic is that I really don't think that you recognize it.

 

But again, I'm not here for you. I'm here for the other readers. And you couldn't possibly have helped convince people how right we are in a better way than you did by holding your skirt up and saying you weren't listening. It was perfect.

Yes, whatever would the other readers do without you, you narcissistic imbecile???

 

Guess what??? The other readers already know you're an idiot. But please go on quoting (er, I mean mis-quoting) Santayana, and thinking it makes you look intelligent!

 

Go buy yourself a clue, will ya???

[Thurman#1]

What's really funny is that I see from others' posts that he's still responding to me as though I could/would read it.

 

What can I say, the Senaturd is one of a kind.

 

 

 

Yup. He's thrilled you put him on ignore. He doesn't want to see more humiliations coming his way.

 

I really enjoyed what you did with him earlier, by the way. That's the reason I tracked your whole conversation on P. 5 of this thread, here: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?...97960&st=80 . It was a textbook example of logic, and ended with him putting his hands in his ears and jumping up and down till his face turned red. It was really funny.

[Thurman#1]

what's the friggin difference? Lee showed up, sucks big time and gets paid. Peters didn't show up, sucked, gets traded and gets paid.

 

 

 

One difference would be that Peters is having a very good season, at least so far.

 

http://profootballfocus.com/by_position.ph...&numgames=1

 

It's early, but so far so very very good. Both this site and footballoutsiders.com have the stats to say that Peters is having another very good season.

 

Which shouldn't surprise us. So far in his career, whenever Peters has come to training camp, he has been sensational. This year, he came to training camp, like he would have if the Bills had paid him.

 

And I really don't blame Lee Evans for his bad season.

[Thurman#1]

Butler missed his rookie season (2006) recovering from a college shoulder injury, played all 16 games in 2007, and missed 3 games last year. And this year he got rolled-up on, which no one can predict. The O-line situation is bad because they lost Butler early and then Bell got injured. Any team missing its starting OT's will struggle, but Edwards' play just compounds it.

 

 

We'll have to disagree. I didn't think Butler was doing so badly, but Bell looked to me as if he was absolutely being abused. Consistently. Again, he's very young and inexperienced, and had lots of room to grow. But IMHO the changes at tackle have pretty much thrown away our chances of having a good season this year. If Bell develops into an upper echelon guy, and if either Butler comes back or we pick up another RT, someone good, then long-term things might look pretty decent.

 

But right now, the line is an absolute mess.

[Thurman#1]

 

 

 

 

fixed.

 

 

 

Perfect. You're continuing to successfully drive away anyone who might potentially support you with your adolescent tactics. Keep it up. I'm loving it.

[Thurman#1]

Yes, whatever would the other readers do without you, you narcissistic imbecile???

 

Guess what??? The other readers already know you're an idiot. But please go on quoting (er, I mean mis-quoting) Santayana, and thinking it makes you look intelligent!

 

Go buy yourself a clue, will ya???

 

 

 

Ha ha ha. Excellent. Keep it up.

 

Don't address your factual mistakes that are out in the open, or the logical arguments made. Just keep up the pathetic personal stuff. Keep it up.

[Thurman#1]

Hi

 

First post, stumbled across this in looking for feedback for our site. I work for Pro Football Focus (so am happy to answer any questions or queries) but this is exactly the point I was going to raise in relation to the rankings now. Its very early so great performances carry more weight than consistent production ... I'd look at the example of someone like Mario Williams who hasn't been that good until he had an incredible, out of this world game against the Raiders that jumped him up big time.

 

Schouman didn't really have a chance to suck almost after a great week 2, while Reed is benefiting from exactly the point Thurman makes so we'll see how it plays out over the season.

 

Peters is an interesting one. I think for the past two years he was nothing special (certainly not bad, but not Pro Bowl good) but he has started this season pretty well. The opposition he faces may have something to do with it, or he may be on his best behaviour and playing to his potential rather than his attitude.

 

The Bills need a good offensive line to succeed in the East, unfortunately they have one of the weakest in the league right now.

 

Anyways, happy to answer any questions regarding the site and hoping to get involved in some good discussion over here.

 

 

 

I've gone back to your site a few times and stumbled across your grading page.

 

http://profootballfocus.com/about.php?tab=about

 

Really interesting stuff. I'll be coming back regularly.

[mrags]

Because "Those who cannot remember their past are condemned to repeat it." Santayana said that, and he was dead on.

 

If you forget this, either way, whether it turns out in the long run to have been a good or a bad move, you let Russ and the FO off the hook. MAKE THEM ACCOUNTABLE!!! Never forget.

 

And as for Bell being better than Peters, yeah, right. The question is whether he will become an upper-echelon LT. He might, and let's continue hoping that he does.

 

I do make them accountable. The owner, GM, coach, coordinators, and QB. I find them all guilty of putting crap on the field every week. Im sick of this team losing and its never going to get any better as long as the above mentioned are still involved in the decision making at OBD.

 

I never said Bell was better than Peters, all I said was after 4 games its pretty hard to come to that answer.

 

Of course Bandit wrote this long post that tried to deny everything I had to say about Peters and the way he acted and played when he left Buffalo. He continues to ask for links for proof. And time and time again someone if not myself provides links to that facts that Peters even admitted in his interview with the Eagles that the contract dispute effected his play. So I decided to link that again for everyone just so Bandit can shut the F^$K about it until his next ball stroking Peters thread.

 

Bandit also didnt comment about how the link he provided doesnt mean anything when your talking about how a player is rated. Yes, its true that JP has only given up 1 sack. At no point did I ever say 4. I never argued that. But at one point Bandit did say that JP was rated as the #1LT on the very same site. At that point I stated what everyone else on this board will believe is absolute crap. If you look up QB's you will see that Trent Edwards is rated as the #8 QB in the league. Its pretty obvious someone at that site doesnt know what the F*&K they are talking about. Then I also commented on how there are LT's that have 0 sacks but are rated below Peters. Why is it that Peters is rated at #1 (which Bandit pointed out) when there are LT's that have given up less sacks? Of course the response will be that you cannot rate sacks given up, and at that point I will state that it goes both ways. If they cannot be rated then whos to say that someone like Peters that has only 1 sack didnt actually give up all 3 that the Eagles have this year?

 

Ive seen multiple sites that credit Peters with 11.5 sacks last year and all rated him 31 or 32 out of starting LT's last year. That may be the case, he may have given up that many sacks, or he may have given up 0. Either way we all watched him play and most of us (except the major JP strokers like Bandit) agree that he did not deserve to make the pro-bowl. He was traded because (all speculation on my part) the FO felt that they couldnt sign him and he would be another hold-out after a year he regressed from 07 after holding out all camp then too. They got what they could for him at the time. I dont remember this exactly but didnt we offer him somewhere around the 10/yr range and didnt he sign for that with Philly? I could be wrong and if I am I will eat my words, but it made it look at the time like he didnt want to be here all along.

 

Judging JP and the Eagles vs the Bills and our rookie and backup led offensive line is just rediculous to argue in the first place. Anyone in the world would take the Eagles line over ours any day of the week. That doesnt mean that JP is the next coming of Christ.

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/...eters-interview

 

"And then I was trying to get a contract done. If you're human, that's going to affect you. Sometimes I'd be thinking about it too much."

[Thurman#1]

Because "Those who cannot remember their past are condemned to repeat it." Santayana said that, and he was dead on.

 

If you forget this, either way, whether it turns out in the long run to have been a good or a bad move, you let Russ and the FO off the hook. MAKE THEM ACCOUNTABLE!!! Never forget.

 

And as for Bell being better than Peters, yeah, right. The question is whether he will become an upper-echelon LT. He might, and let's continue hoping that he does.

 

 

 

 

But please go on quoting (er, I mean mis-quoting) Santayana, and thinking it makes you look intelligent!

 

 

 

Hey, you're right. This is a red-letter day for you, you got something dead right.

 

I was going to paraphrase Santayana in a sentence, so I said "Because those who cannot remember their past are condemned to repeat it." But then I changed my mind and used it as a quote and forgot to change "their" back to "the."

 

So the actual quotation is: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

 

Whereas I said "Because 'Those who cannot remember their past are remembered to repeat it.'" Thanks for pointing out that mistake. Not what I would consider a large mistake, but nonetheless, a mistake.

 

----------

 

 

By the way, Senny, that thing you just saw me do up there is called "admitting I made a mistake." You ought to try it out sometime. You still haven't admitted the factual mistake you made when you said that Peters was responsible for all the Eagles sacks.

 

Still waiting. It's been, what, 8 pages? And I've prompted you, what, two or three times.

 

Heh heh.

[thebandit27]

I do make them accountable. The owner, GM, coach, coordinators, and QB. I find them all guilty of putting crap on the field every week. Im sick of this team losing and its never going to get any better as long as the above mentioned are still involved in the decision making at OBD.

 

I never said Bell was better than Peters, all I said was after 4 games its pretty hard to come to that answer.

 

Of course Bandit wrote this long post that tried to deny everything I had to say about Peters and the way he acted and played when he left Buffalo. He continues to ask for links for proof. And time and time again someone if not myself provides links to that facts that Peters even admitted in his interview with the Eagles that the contract dispute effected his play. So I decided to link that again for everyone just so Bandit can shut the F^$K about it until his next ball stroking Peters thread.

 

Bandit also didnt comment about how the link he provided doesnt mean anything when your talking about how a player is rated. Yes, its true that JP has only given up 1 sack. At no point did I ever say 4. I never argued that. But at one point Bandit did say that JP was rated as the #1LT on the very same site. At that point I stated what everyone else on this board will believe is absolute crap. If you look up QB's you will see that Trent Edwards is rated as the #8 QB in the league. Its pretty obvious someone at that site doesnt know what the F*&K they are talking about. Then I also commented on how there are LT's that have 0 sacks but are rated below Peters. Why is it that Peters is rated at #1 (which Bandit pointed out) when there are LT's that have given up less sacks? Of course the response will be that you cannot rate sacks given up, and at that point I will state that it goes both ways. If they cannot be rated then whos to say that someone like Peters that has only 1 sack didnt actually give up all 3 that the Eagles have this year?

 

Ive seen multiple sites that credit Peters with 11.5 sacks last year and all rated him 31 or 32 out of starting LT's last year. That may be the case, he may have given up that many sacks, or he may have given up 0. Either way we all watched him play and most of us (except the major JP strokers like Bandit) agree that he did not deserve to make the pro-bowl. He was traded because (all speculation on my part) the FO felt that they couldnt sign him and he would be another hold-out after a year he regressed from 07 after holding out all camp then too. They got what they could for him at the time. I dont remember this exactly but didnt we offer him somewhere around the 10/yr range and didnt he sign for that with Philly? I could be wrong and if I am I will eat my words, but it made it look at the time like he didnt want to be here all along.

 

Judging JP and the Eagles vs the Bills and our rookie and backup led offensive line is just rediculous to argue in the first place. Anyone in the world would take the Eagles line over ours any day of the week. That doesnt mean that JP is the next coming of Christ.

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/...eters-interview

 

"And then I was trying to get a contract done. If you're human, that's going to affect you. Sometimes I'd be thinking about it too much."

 

You're a funny guy, mrags. Again, you might try reading the thread before making ignorrant statements like:

 

Bandit also didnt comment about how the link he provided doesnt mean anything when your talking about how a player is rated.

 

Umm, mragsy, what would you call this bit, from post #59: I'm not really interested in the ratings, the sack stats were mentioned by Senator (Peters giving up 4), and I used this site to refute them.

 

Or this one, from post #115, which was in DIRECT RESPONSE to one of your posts: We've been through this already. I could give a darn about their rankings, the stats are accurate.

 

What I asked for is not a link to Peters saying that he thought about his contract, or that it affected his play. You didn't say that, so why would I need a link to that. We all know that quote exists, my point (since you are--in direct contradiction to my initial impression of you--unable to read and process what I've written to you time and again) is that it's pretty pathetic fodder for you (and Senaturd, and others) to make blanket statements like:

 

he didn't want to be here (based on what? the fact that he cares about his salary--gasp)

he has a bad work ethic (based on what? the fact that he cares about his salary--gasp)

he badmouthed the team (still waiting on this one...the closest I've got is Peters saying that the team didn't give him a new contract worth $10M/year...ummm, isn't that a concrete, incontravertible fact? or are we ignoring those now too?)

 

thus, I asked you to show me where he said/did those things, and the best you can come up with is him saying that he thought about his contract, even during games. Wow...compelling stuff.

 

As for my response to the PFF rankings, which I already stated (at least twice in this very thread--which you somehow managed to skip over or ignore in your rush to call me a ball-washer/ball-stroker...very eloquent, by the way) I don't put a lot of stock into, you can find the reasoning right on the site with very, very little effort. But since that's apparently beneath you (or you simply lack the ability to click a mouse--which I highly doubt), I'll provide the link:

 

http://profootballfocus.com/about.php?tab=about#grad3

 

As for my next point of rebuttal: I respectfully ask you to not put words in my mouth (could also be referred to as "Senaturdial tactics"--although yours are at least more articulate than the uber-intelligent Senaturdial vernacular of "blah"), since I don't remember ever saying that Peters deserved to be in the pro bowl. I do remember, however, saying that obviously someone felt that way, since he made it there (or is that up for debate as well? Perhaps the fact that he was voted in was my imagination, that at least would make sense given your argument). I also don't remember claiming that I can predict the future, which you claimed in your last post. Perhaps for your next feat you'd like to tell me what I'll be eating for dinner tonight? No? Well, allow me to do that for you: you'll be eating...your words, as you said you'd do in this post (above) if you were wrong about the Peters offer. The only article I ever saw regarding Buffalo's offer to Peters was in the $8.5M/year range, and he signed for $10M+/year in Philadelphia, so eat up (don't worry, I'll come back and post a link once I find it--EDIT: here, it can easily be inferred from the attached: http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/story/606369.html# Obviously, since Peters was looking for $10M+, and eventually signed for $10M+, and the two sides were about $3M apart, well, hopefully ou can do the math from there).

 

I also don't recall saying that Peters was the second coming of Christ, but hey, misquoting me has never bothered you before, so go ahead and sling some other BS while you're at it.

 

Wrapping things up--no matter how you slice it, this discussion comes down to this (and I bet this will sound familiar, since I've already pointed it out twice--but then again, we already know you didn't read through the thread):

 

Senaturd made up a stat, and I corrected him by providing a link. When the integrity of that link was questioned (by you and others) I provided links to NFL.com game logs that confirmed Senaturd's statement as BS. You (and others) obviously didn't like that, since it took away part of the platform on which you grind your Peters-spurned axe, and so you responded with the typical insulting vitriole.

 

I like you, mrags, and at one point I considered you a good poster. But when you feel like you have to launch a profane, personally-insulting tirade to prove a point that doesn't exist, I tend to lose a little of that respect (I don't think calling someone a "ball-stroker" is a really good way to debate intelligently). You might try, next time, basing your arguments on facts, it'll work a whole lot better than this garbage.

 

Peace.

[John from Riverside]

John, I have written this in response to your posts about eight times. Like, absorb it, dude.

 

Yes, Peters said he was going to play out his contract. He said that the same day that he was traded. Two possible reasons he said it:

 

1) His newest bargaining position.

2) He actually thought that the Bills had finally shown that they really were not going to pay him market value.

 

He and the Bills were about $2 million apart. Splitting the difference (and the evidence shows that this was what Peters was targeting, since the Bills made an official offer and Peters's first official offer was high enough that if you split the diff it came out to about $10 mill. Then the Bills raised their offer to somewhere in the vague neighborhood of Lee Evans's contract and again Peters lowered his offer so that if you split the diff, it came out to about $10 mill. In other words, he wanted about one extra mill. When the Eagles swooped in, surprise, surprise they agreed to a contract right at $10 mill in two hours.

 

Peters wanted to play in Buffalo, but only if the Bills paid market value. They got rid of him in a refusal to improve their offer by about 11 - 12 %.

 

You also say that Peters "even flat out said he was going to play out his contract (after holding out as long as he could in preseason) ..." LINK, PLEASE!!! Where exactly did Peters say he would hold out again. That has been assumed by posters, particularly those who hate Peters, but never did Peters say that.

 

But prove me wrong about that and show a LINK where Peters says he will hold out.

 

Thurman,

 

Sorry a little late in reading this.

 

The quote was not that he was going to hold out....but that he had planned to play out his contract and definately leave when it was up (however this was after he had held out the previous two offseasons)

 

My point wasn't really so much the hold out even though doing that two years in a row was hurting him and the bills in my opinion it was that according to him he simply was not going to play in Buffalo after his contract was up. This means that the bills needed to make plans for life after Jason Peters (I dont have the link to this but I know I read it)

 

Anyways.....I really dont want to debate over who was right Jason Peters or the bills because we really dont know what went on in negotiations. Would stronger mgt have been able to get this done? Maybe.

 

One more thing on this that takes us off the Peters debate......while unfortunate that things could not have been worked out with Jason Peters I wonder if in the end this doesn't end up causing the firings that actually improves the team. Look at the mistakes this team has made regarding how they stocked their roster....not so much Jason Peters not being here but what did they do AFTER that decision was made. I like Bell....fine he is the starter......but canning L. Walker and making plan B guys that would not be on other NFL rosters? This to me is the mistake that is really going break the camels back here. I think changes are coming in Buffalo.

[Thurman#1]

MRAGS, I totally agree with some of your points, but disagree strongly with others, so let me go at this in pieces.

 

 

I do make them accountable. The owner, GM, coach, coordinators, and QB. I find them all guilty of putting crap on the field every week. Im sick of this team losing and its never going to get any better as long as the above mentioned are still involved in the decision making at OBD.

 

Great. As long as you're blaming all these folks, we're pretty close to being on the same page. I think that some of these folks, AVP in particular, possibly Trent, and absolutely definitely Mr. Wilson could have a great deal of success in this league. But in terms of the team's problems right now, I agree that they all deserve their share of the blame.

 

But I was referring to the Peters trade. I don't think AVP or Trent or the coordinators had much to do with it. I want the ones who did, largely Russ and the FO, held accountable.

 

 

I never said Bell was better than Peters, all I said was after 4 games its pretty hard to come to that answer.

 

Here's what you said, exactly:

 

 

And to say that JP is better than Bell after just 4 games, and only 2-3 with Bell starting/playing we dont really know jack at this point.

 

 

And if this is what you think, that we don't know jack, well, I have to respectfully disagree. We know that at his best, Peters is one of the two or so best LTs in the game, as he was in 2007. It is certainly a matter of opinion, but do you really think Bell looks like he's going to reach that level? I just don't. I do hold out hopes that he might reach, say the top 10, but if you look at pure athleticism, Peters is stronger, jumps much higher, runs faster, and it just goes on and on. Look at how they each did at athletic tests coming out of college. It was NOT even slightly close.

 

 

 

Of course Bandit wrote this long post that tried to deny everything I had to say about Peters and the way he acted and played when he left Buffalo. He continues to ask for links for proof. And time and time again someone if not myself provides links to that facts that Peters even admitted in his interview with the Eagles that the contract dispute effected his play. So I decided to link that again for everyone just so Bandit can shut the F^$K about it until his next ball stroking Peters thread.

 

Bandit also didnt comment about how the link he provided doesnt mean anything when your talking about how a player is rated. Yes, its true that JP has only given up 1 sack. At no point did I ever say 4. I never argued that. But at one point Bandit did say that JP was rated as the #1LT on the very same site. At that point I stated what everyone else on this board will believe is absolute crap. If you look up QB's you will see that Trent Edwards is rated as the #8 QB in the league. Its pretty obvious someone at that site doesnt know what the F*&K they are talking about. Then I also commented on how there are LT's that have 0 sacks but are rated below Peters. Why is it that Peters is rated at #1 (which Bandit pointed out) when there are LT's that have given up less sacks? Of course the response will be that you cannot rate sacks given up, and at that point I will state that it goes both ways. If they cannot be rated then whos to say that someone like Peters that has only 1 sack didnt actually give up all 3 that the Eagles have this year?

 

 

 

That site says that Trent is the #8 QB in the league, so far, based on their parameters. I don't think that he is close to that either, but because somebody says one thing that you disagree with, therefore everything else they say is nonsense? That's a ridiculous argument.

 

As has been pointed out many times, not least on the site, profootballfocus.com, QB is extremely hard to rank, because it's such a complicated position, with so much to do. If you value risk-taking behavior, Trent would be much farther down on the list. If you value conservatism and game management, he's much higher. Look at his QB rating. It's very high.

 

Obviously, the site values conservatism in QBs, which is not such a bad thing to do. But as the season goes on and things fall into place as they have more games to evaluate, I suspect things will look different.

 

LT play and line play generally is easier to figure, though they don't claim to be perfect.

 

Who's to say that it wasn't Peters who gave up all three of those sacks, you ask? Well, how about the fact that Justice is credited with the other two. Now, if they were playing next to each other, you might have an argument, but Justice is the RT. It's not too difficult to differentiate between sacks that happen near RT and sacks that happen near LT.

 

Why is Peters rated high when he gave up a sack and there are guys who have given up none? Well, I didn't evaluate the data, but just looking at the site, tackles are rated not just on sacks, but also on QB pressures and QB hits, and you will notice that Peters has almost none. I would guess that that is the reason that he is rated pretty high. But he is not rated as the best pass blocker, just tied for second. The reason that he's number one overall is because he is rated very high both at pass blocking and run blocking. The site says that an average ranking is zero. Peters is over seven when you add up his run block rating and pass block rating (and subtract penalty rating and ...).

 

Am I declaring this site the bible and saying that anyone who disagrees is crazed and wrong? No. But I can see that they put in an awful lot of time and trouble into this, and I think it's pretty reflective of what has happened in the first four games.

 

 

Ive seen multiple sites that credit Peters with 11.5 sacks last year and all rated him 31 or 32 out of starting LT's last year.

 

 

That came from one site. Other sites just printed what the first one said. And again, an awful lot of those sacks came after the QB had held onto the ball for more than 5 seconds, or when it was very questionable as to who was supposed to block the guy who made the sack.

 

Check out DKTURTLE's video analysis of the sacks. Most reasonable observers put the responsibility for between 5 and 8 sacks on Peters.

 

http://boards.buffalobills.com/showthread.php?t=127203

 

It's terrific.

 

 

I dont remember this exactly but didnt we offer him somewhere around the 10/yr range and didnt he sign for that with Philly? I could be wrong and if I am I will eat my words, but it made it look at the time like he didnt want to be here all along.

 

 

Nobody has ever named an exact figure for the Bills offers. Whereas Peters's offers were publicly available, all that Russ said was that the offer was the highest in Bills history.

 

The highest PER YEAR in Bills history is Lee Evans's contract, a 4 year $37.25 mill contract. (see Rotoworld) But did Russ mean the highest per year, or did he mean the highest total value contract. I'm not even sure who that would be ... Schobel? But it isn't all that much. The fact is that Russ never spelled out what he meant. So theoretically the contract they offered Peters could be for, say $70 million over 10 years, and still be considered the biggest in Bills history ($70 million), even though it was only $7 mill per year.

 

But let's assume that Russ meant PER YEAR and was comparing it to Lee's contract (and again, remember that that assumption is being very kind to the Bills). If that is true, all we know is that it was almost certainly just a bit higher than $9.3 mill. So the Philly offer was well above that at $10.1 mill per year. And the Philly contract guaranteed $28 mill in the first two years, a terrific offer. Did Russ guarantee anything? We have no idea.

 

The evidence doesn't even come close to showing that the Bills matched the Philly offer.

 

The most likely explanation that fits the facts is simply that Peters wanted to go to a team that would give him market value, and that the Bills didn't do that.

 

 

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/...eters-interview

 

"And then I was trying to get a contract done. If you're human, that's going to affect you. Sometimes I'd be thinking about it too much."

 

 

 

Are you surprised by the fact that a guy who was involved in a vicious contract dispute was occasionally distracted by it? I'm sorry, I'm not.

[The Senator]

Since you've been begging my to reply all morning, thurman, instead of bumping this thread all day like you've been doing, why don't you and bandit just set up your own "I LOVE JASON PETERS" worship site?

 

(I'm sure someone can even help you two set up an e-storefront to sell your collection of his worn gym socks and used jock straps! )

[Thurman#1]

Thurman,

 

Sorry a little late in reading this.

 

The quote was not that he was going to hold out....but that he had planned to play out his contract and definately leave when it was up (however this was after he had held out the previous two offseasons)

 

My point wasn't really so much the hold out even though doing that two years in a row was hurting him and the bills in my opinion it was that according to him he simply was not going to play in Buffalo after his contract was up. This means that the bills needed to make plans for life after Jason Peters (I dont have the link to this but I know I read it)

 

Anyways.....I really dont want to debate over who was right Jason Peters or the bills because we really dont know what went on in negotiations. Would stronger mgt have been able to get this done? Maybe.

 

One more thing on this that takes us off the Peters debate......while unfortunate that things could not have been worked out with Jason Peters I wonder if in the end this doesn't end up causing the firings that actually improves the team. Look at the mistakes this team has made regarding how they stocked their roster....not so much Jason Peters not being here but what did they do AFTER that decision was made. I like Bell....fine he is the starter......but canning L. Walker and making plan B guys that would not be on other NFL rosters? This to me is the mistake that is really going break the camels back here. I think changes are coming in Buffalo.

 

 

 

Hey, wait a second there, John. Peters didn't hold out two years. That just didn't happen. I admit that sometimes it lasted so long and was so talked about that it seemed like two years, but Peters only held out one year, 2008. In 2007, he was in camp and OTAs. You can look it up.

 

That's an interesting point about the possible results among management. I never thought of that. A good point.

 

And yeah, while I will never love this trade unless Peters flops - and that looks less likely day by day - it would have looked much much better if we had had a good back-up plan

 

And that quote that you're talking about, I have the link, but not on this computer. The background on that quote is that he said it at one of the early press conferences after being traded. And what he said was that THE DAY THAT HE WAS TRADED, he had just called the Bills and told them that he would play out his contract and then leave.

 

The point being that he hadn't wanted to leave until the negotiations finally broke down and he realized that he simply wasn't going to get market value from the Bills. I can't post the link from this computer, but that's what that quote was all about.

 

Nice talking to you.