Tweet
Not wanting to spoil what seems to be the collective flood of Bills fans wetting themselves in excitement at Jason Peters being moved to the Left tackle role but there are some issues that do need to be stated ...
1) He's not actually played a full game there I believe yet, so its a little premature to say that we no longer need a stud LT in the draft. Yes it does look less of a priority, but after we beat the Vikings it looked like Losman had started to turn the corner and QB was less of a priority. How fickle we are.
2) As Peters was considered a future LT, I would be surprised if he did not have it in his contract a raise if he moved to the left handside. If he doesn't and does well, I can see it being a problem in the offseason. Or he should shoot his agent. It will also give the impression that the Bills are underpaying and cheap, affecting our credibility with Free Agents. There will be some who say it is clever contract work, but I think we will be perceived as a small city team not paying the going rate
3) A concern about Peters at LT is that while on the right, he often faced the slower of the DEs. Therefore he could use his natural athleticism to overcome any mental lapses against a less agile opponent. He will now be up against the fastest and most agile of opponents where one lapse is unrecoverable and the QB is sacked or chased out the pocket. I do have concerns about the sudden need to demonstrate more than mere athleticism
4) Being an LT requires a different stance and a natural feel for being the blindside protector. Forget all the bull*** about wanting to keep Peters on the right, if Peters was that good, the turnstyle wouldn't have made it out of preseason. I think it is an acceptable risk but still a role of the dice.
5) As has been posted, the coaches had to do something. This tells me more about what they think of Nall, than what they think of Peters.
Because Peters cannot be worse than Gandy its a win-win for the coaches. They've acted and done something so have some breathing space.
The question is, can he be better than the LTs currently grading as Round 1 choices?
A lot of college OTs who have played the blindside in college often have to be switched so someone with no college OT background really has to have a hell of lot between his ears as its not a natural postion. It can be done, Matt Lepsis for one but more often than not its the exception that proves the rule.
If we don't grab a college LT in Round 1 of the draft it will be a decision we will rue
1) He's not actually played a full game there I believe yet, so its a little premature to say that we no longer need a stud LT in the draft. Yes it does look less of a priority, but after we beat the Vikings it looked like Losman had started to turn the corner and QB was less of a priority. How fickle we are.
2) As Peters was considered a future LT, I would be surprised if he did not have it in his contract a raise if he moved to the left handside. If he doesn't and does well, I can see it being a problem in the offseason. Or he should shoot his agent. It will also give the impression that the Bills are underpaying and cheap, affecting our credibility with Free Agents. There will be some who say it is clever contract work, but I think we will be perceived as a small city team not paying the going rate
3) A concern about Peters at LT is that while on the right, he often faced the slower of the DEs. Therefore he could use his natural athleticism to overcome any mental lapses against a less agile opponent. He will now be up against the fastest and most agile of opponents where one lapse is unrecoverable and the QB is sacked or chased out the pocket. I do have concerns about the sudden need to demonstrate more than mere athleticism
4) Being an LT requires a different stance and a natural feel for being the blindside protector. Forget all the bull*** about wanting to keep Peters on the right, if Peters was that good, the turnstyle wouldn't have made it out of preseason. I think it is an acceptable risk but still a role of the dice.
5) As has been posted, the coaches had to do something. This tells me more about what they think of Nall, than what they think of Peters.
Because Peters cannot be worse than Gandy its a win-win for the coaches. They've acted and done something so have some breathing space.
The question is, can he be better than the LTs currently grading as Round 1 choices?
A lot of college OTs who have played the blindside in college often have to be switched so someone with no college OT background really has to have a hell of lot between his ears as its not a natural postion. It can be done, Matt Lepsis for one but more often than not its the exception that proves the rule.
If we don't grab a college LT in Round 1 of the draft it will be a decision we will rue
Comment