I have noticed that many on this board, when talking about Peters, always beg the following argument: 1. Peters was bad last year, 2.Walker can do better this year = we are better off. The logic depends on the assumption that if Walker outperforms Peters last season we will be better off. The fault in the logic is that there is NO value in such a comparison. The Real Question, the valuable question is, will Walker outperform Peters THIS Year. If yes that we are better off [only kind of because we will still miss him at RT] and if not, then we really are not better off [then obviously Peters was the better option]. Using last year as the baseline to determine value for this year is very faulty logic. The best part about all of this is what we Will know by season's end.
Real Question About Peters
Collapse
X
-
Re: Real Question About Peters
You can't really compare this year, either, since Peters will not be in Buffalo, but in Philadelphia. It's impossible to determine how he would have played in Buffalo, especially without knowing his contract status.Should have known, way back in 1960 when we drafted Richie Lucas Number 1, that this would be a long, hard ride. But who could have known it would be THIS bad?
-
👍 1
-
-
Re: Real Question About Peters
Ah yes - someone else who wants to base decisions on information that was UNKNOWN at the time of the move. Maybe they should have contacted the Psychic hotline first."'Clean up your room.', 'Stand up straight.', 'Pick up your feet.', 'Take it like a man.', 'Be nice to your sister.', 'Don't mix beer and wine, ever.'. Oh yeah, 'Don't drive on the railroad track.'"
"Eh, Phil. That's one I happen to agree with."
Comment
-
-
Re: Real Question About Peters
Peters, playing his first year with a new contract, a completely new coaching staff, and an entirely different roster, might be great in Eagles' green. Judging by his attitude and unhappiness here, he may have played closer to his mediocre 2008 level in Buffalo, particularly if he were still pouting about his contract.Last edited by Jan Reimers; 05-25-2009, 07:40 AM.Should have known, way back in 1960 when we drafted Richie Lucas Number 1, that this would be a long, hard ride. But who could have known it would be THIS bad?
-
👍 1
Comment
-
-
Re: Real Question About Peters
I don't care if Peters didn't live up to expectations last season, he was young and clearly the most talented tackle in our o-line.
Maybe the new combo will work though, so we can't argue yet if this was a good move or not.I am the rocker, I am the roller, I am the out-of-controller!
-
👍 2
Comment
-
-
Re: Real Question About Peters
Originally posted by HHURRICANEHere's some logic:
Peters>Walker at LT on any team in the league.
The poster is debating that because Peters didn't play up to his pro-bowl staus that Walker playing well at LT would be an upgrade over last year.
Peters today? We don't know."'Clean up your room.', 'Stand up straight.', 'Pick up your feet.', 'Take it like a man.', 'Be nice to your sister.', 'Don't mix beer and wine, ever.'. Oh yeah, 'Don't drive on the railroad track.'"
"Eh, Phil. That's one I happen to agree with."
-
👍 2
Comment
-
-
Re: Real Question About Peters
Originally posted by MikeInRochPeters the way he played 2 years ago > Walker
Peters today? We don't know.Should have known, way back in 1960 when we drafted Richie Lucas Number 1, that this would be a long, hard ride. But who could have known it would be THIS bad?
-
👍 1
Comment
-
-
Re: Real Question About Peters
I would not be surprised to see Peters struggle at times this year in Philly. Not because he took plays off but because he didn't remember his assignment for a play. Peters is a great athlete but dumb as a rock. Throw him in a new system and I can see him making mental mistakes as a result. Overall I think he will do better than last year but he will get McNabb killed a few times this year.
Comment
-
-
Re: Real Question About Peters
Originally posted by MikeI have noticed that many on this board, when talking about Peters, always beg the following argument: 1. Peters was bad last year, 2.Walker can do better this year = we are better off. The logic depends on the assumption that if Walker outperforms Peters last season we will be better off. The fault in the logic is that there is NO value in such a comparison. The Real Question, the valuable question is, will Walker outperform Peters THIS Year. If yes that we are better off [only kind of because we will still miss him at RT] and if not, then we really are not better off [then obviously Peters was the better option]. Using last year as the baseline to determine value for this year is very faulty logic. The best part about all of this is what we Will know by season's end.
Now that he's paid, he'll probably show up to practice in Philly, and know the playbook. Both of which he didn't last year for us.
The guy had unreasonable demands, and now that whats done is done the only thing any of us or anybody in this organization can do is find positives and build off them.
Right now we have a highly committed, intellegent LT in Langston Walker, who showed me enough last year to have at least a moderate amount of faith in him.
Should Walker get hurt, then we are totally f'd.
-
👍 1
Comment
-
Comment