Prisco on Peppers

[thunderraiden]

Get this guys, we don't need an old DE, Peppers is on his decline of his career anyways, with 1, max 2 good seasons left. We are all worried about getting nothing for peppers, screw that, let him walk and take games off for another team. We drafted him and we cant DRAFT another.

[Happy Panther]

Get this guys, we don't need an old DE, Peppers is on his decline of his career anyways, with 1, max 2 good seasons left. We are all worried about getting nothing for peppers, screw that, let him walk and take games off for another team. We drafted him and we cant DRAFT another.

yeah totally washed up

[Snake]

I think its not so much about him being 30 and more about how much he wants compared to what we get. He will depreciate very fast after 30 but wants to be payed like his stock will rise. Also he only plays when he wants. There is a cheaper guy Named Richard Seymour who could fill his shoes very well. So could some other FAs.

[KillerKat]

I lawl at the uninformed stating he takes plays off.

[PeteRozelle]

Hmmm Lets see....

If he takes as many plays off as many have said, then he should be a really "young 30"....

pete

[SorthNarolina]

I think pepp is that rare case where 30 years of age doesn't mean squat. There aren't many people built like pepp on this planet, so comparing him to other 30 year old DE's is pointless IMHO.

I agree, he's taken chop blocks that would shred other guys knees and just been sore. He's been twisted akwardly and gone down a few times only to take a few plays off and come back in.

He was really a finesse guy when we drafted him, and we've strengthened him up a lot. I feel like he'll have a long career.

I would be very surprised if he just bombed after 30.

[natty]

Prisco is and always will be a douchebag. Sacks sacks sacks sacks sacks...give me a break. It's not the only metric for a DE.

[The Link]

I lawl at the uninformed stating he takes plays off.

What makes you informed to the contrary?

[KillerKat]

What makes you informed to the contrary?

So you're saying you know Peppers role every play? You know if he's supposed to stay home and keep containment or hold off the OT for the OLB? Do you know he's been told to see whether or not he should drop back in coverage? Do you know he's supposed to crash left or right? Do you know that his role might be to keep the QB in the pocket for the pass rush to come? No you don't. You'll be kidding yourself if you say you did. Nobody knows what he is told to do every play. Think it's a coincidence Thomas Davis was starting to have his best year playing on Peppers side? Pep sure does get alot of praise from his teammates as well as other teams teammates and front offices for someone that "takes plays off". And if you count the games where his hand was broken as "taking plays/games off" too, you're stuipid as hell.

[Guild]

I could be wrong KK, but I believe Peppers gets to ad-lib on most plays.

[KillerKat]

I could be wrong KK, but I believe Peppers gets to ad-lib on most plays.

For this year that could be a possibility because Pep was happier this year than he was in 2008 or 2007. After the bye week, Pep was great (and even before the bye week he was great against Philly). The only times where he wasn't was when his hand was broken. But the haters wanna count that as "taking plays/games off" because it supports their agenda. They see a play where he isn't making a sack or tackle in the backfield as "OMGZ HE'S TAKING PLAYS OFF!" without realizing that he could've been told to do something else and that any other time he's been playing really well.

[Cyberjag]

Peppers is good, but he's not 21 million a season good. He's good enough to command a $15 million per year deal though, and he should get one. But financially, nothing makes sense if there's a lockout next year.

The problem is, if you franchise him now you're paying $21 million, and then you go through it again in 2012 but at $25 million. So you're paying him $46 million for two years of play. Or you give him a six year deal now worth $100 million with 45 guaranteed. That means $45 million over the next three years, and one of them is a lockout. What you end up with is $45 million for two years of play.

I think Peppers is good, but not THAT good. I think he'll be very, very good for at least two or three more years. But time and circumstances are working against him. Right now the best he can hope for is that $45 guaranteed. The next best deal for him is if we franchise him. If we don't, who's going to want to give him that kind of money for a couple of seasons worth of high-level play? Don't just think about 2010, look at the next year and the year after that. At 30 he should be capable of double digit sacks. How about at 33?

And what if the Owners win? They want to reduce the salary cap by 20%, which drops his desired $15 mil per year down to $12. Sucks to be in his situation.

He should have taken the deal when it was offered. It took him long enough, but I bet he's finally figured that out.

[Sultan33g]

long time no see cyber

[SCP]

For this year that could be a possibility because Pep was happier this year than he was in 2008 or 2007. After the bye week, Pep was great (and even before the bye week he was great against Philly). The only times where he wasn't was when his hand was broken. But the haters wanna count that as "taking plays/games off" because it supports their agenda. They see a play where he isn't making a sack or tackle in the backfield as "OMGZ HE'S TAKING PLAYS OFF!" without realizing that he could've been told to do something else and that any other time he's been playing really well.

I am with you in thinking that Pepp is a great player, and I think losing him will hurt us more than people think. Alot more than people think actually. As I said earlier, 30 years old doesn't mean crap for a guy with pepper's freakish build and athletic ability.

I don't think he actually takes plays off, but my one and only criticism of him is his lack of a secondary move when he gets engaged with a tackle from time to time. Seems a lot of times once a tackle locks onto him, he is taken out of the play instead of fighting through a block or making a counter move. I can see how people get frustrated when they see this, because I do. This is what allows teams to block him with one man instead of commiting double teams to him all game. If you have a decent tackle that can lock him up on that initial punch, sometimes he seems to hang back and play to block the pass.

Then, you have games like the Vikings where the whole statement I typed is totally blown out of the air and proven false.