X-Era
01-31-2006, 07:05 AM
Anyone who watched a roving Jason Taylor or Julius Peppers one on one versus Jason Peters knows that Peters can absolutely play LT and probably should.
Like Eric Winston, Peters was a TE. But Peters was the best o-lineman this year bar none. He has the strength, footwork, and speed to play against the top DE's. AND HE PROVED IT.
Thats the biggest difference between Peters and ANY of the draft prospects. None of those guys have played against Taylor or Peppers. We have a guy who faced them did an outstanding job against them. So why in the world would we want to replace Peters with a rookie?
Many will say they dont, that they want to simply get another Peters or better. Fine, but its an un proven guy and more importantly, we have a PROVEN guy to play against the top DE's at LT.
So you must be arguing for a RT, which I agree with but at 8? If Brick falls, OK fine, you just cant pass up a guy thats that good. But after him, I wouldnt take ANY other OT in the 1st at 8.
Top of the 2nd? Whitworth? TrueBlood? pray for Justice? Sure. But not at 8.
The best RT is Justice bar none. But I could argue you can get a very good one on the 3rd.
Id rather stick with a proven young vet, who knows the DE's in our division than a rookie at our most important OL position, LT. Thats Peters. Furthermore, a big difference between RT and LT is the LT tend to be slimmer and faster. Guys like Eric Winston arent really cut out for RT. So the top OT's may or may not be worthy to play RT if Peters plays L.
I just dont see LT as a need. I overall feel the INSIDE line positions are a bigger need that OT at all.
Like Eric Winston, Peters was a TE. But Peters was the best o-lineman this year bar none. He has the strength, footwork, and speed to play against the top DE's. AND HE PROVED IT.
Thats the biggest difference between Peters and ANY of the draft prospects. None of those guys have played against Taylor or Peppers. We have a guy who faced them did an outstanding job against them. So why in the world would we want to replace Peters with a rookie?
Many will say they dont, that they want to simply get another Peters or better. Fine, but its an un proven guy and more importantly, we have a PROVEN guy to play against the top DE's at LT.
So you must be arguing for a RT, which I agree with but at 8? If Brick falls, OK fine, you just cant pass up a guy thats that good. But after him, I wouldnt take ANY other OT in the 1st at 8.
Top of the 2nd? Whitworth? TrueBlood? pray for Justice? Sure. But not at 8.
The best RT is Justice bar none. But I could argue you can get a very good one on the 3rd.
Id rather stick with a proven young vet, who knows the DE's in our division than a rookie at our most important OL position, LT. Thats Peters. Furthermore, a big difference between RT and LT is the LT tend to be slimmer and faster. Guys like Eric Winston arent really cut out for RT. So the top OT's may or may not be worthy to play RT if Peters plays L.
I just dont see LT as a need. I overall feel the INSIDE line positions are a bigger need that OT at all.