PDA

View Full Version : Whats wrong with Peek?


TexansNeedRBin05
04-27-2005, 04:04 PM
I have watched alot of Texans game since they became a franchise in 2002 and I got to say I have watched Peak and I have been impressed with him. We need to get to the QB and he and Babin are both going to do that so whats the big beef with him? Pass Protection? I mean when we played the Jags didnt he get an Int/Fumb for a TD?

http://www.houstontexans.com/team/roster_detail.php?PRKey=54 heres what the site says about him 6'3 250 is good size!

Dime
04-27-2005, 04:06 PM
First thing,... its Peek, not Peak... How much have you watched him... :woot

Grid
04-27-2005, 04:12 PM
no one really knows whats wrong with him.. I mean.. there are rumors that he has only been a situational pass rusher for us because the coaches are not satisified with his ability to read the offense and make the play where he needs to be.

Some have said that he is a loose cannon and will blitz when he is supposed to cover.

others say that he is weak against the run.

*shrug* I dunno.. all i know is that the coaches have not yet trusted him enough to make him the starter.. but chances are hes gonna get the nod this year so we will see how it goes :)

TEXANS84
04-27-2005, 04:13 PM
Peek was a DE in college, and switched to OLB much like Babin has. Why it has taken so long for him to get on the field is probably due to the fundamentals of his new position.

F-minus67
04-27-2005, 04:31 PM
He doesn't have the best coverage ability, he is a lot like Joey Porter when he came out of college.

El Tejano
04-27-2005, 04:36 PM
Because he leaves the playbook in his car in the open for it to get stolen.

SESupergenius
04-27-2005, 04:39 PM
There was nothing wrong with the selection of Peek on to this team. You expect us to draft a LB every year. Peek has all the tools be a Porter type player, he's very aggressive and creates plays. If he stays healthy and has learned his position then we should be set there. The question is, can he keep healthy and has have we groomed him enough to be an every down player. He had a couple of seasons now and this is typically when a rookie starts to push for the starting spot. Now it's his. Let's see what he can do post to post. Once of my biggest concerns is if he goes down, who replaces him?

Grid
04-27-2005, 04:42 PM
Wong probably.. with Polk stepping into the vacant ILB spot.

El Tejano
04-27-2005, 04:43 PM
I will replace him and finish the season with at least 5 sacks.

keyfro
04-27-2005, 04:46 PM
peek is projected to be the starter at ROLB...there is nothing wrong with him...we just had a lot of linebackers last year...this year is the year that peek will earn a long term contract...if he finishes this season with something like the 10 sacks i'm projecting him to get he'll end up with a huge deal at the end of the season...babin was a first round pick and with all they gave up for him we had to start him

infantrycak
04-27-2005, 05:04 PM
I'd say with the off-season moves, the coaching staff are comfortable with Peek getting promoted from situational guy to starting ROLB. DE converts often take a while to hit starting status. Strikes me that there is nothing wrong with Peek and more wrong with fan impatience and perceptions--i.e. if he hasn't hit the field yet something must be wrong with him and one of the Texans' top draft needs is OLB. Obviously the GM/coaching staff disagreed.

Meloy
04-27-2005, 05:23 PM
I will replace him and finish the season with at least 5 sacks.

Yeah and then you will head off to Buffalo for more $.

THEFUTURE
04-27-2005, 06:01 PM
there are probably some also thinking well babin was a DE and he started as a rookie OLB, so why isnt peek, or whatever... peek wasnt even 1st round talent as a DE, so if a first rounder took almost a complete year to finally get comfortable like babin did... think about the problems the non first round DE, peek had... get what im saying?

SESupergenius
04-27-2005, 06:08 PM
The biggest thing about Peek is his durability. He hasn't show that he can last more than a few games before getting significantly injured. It's no wonder we are stockpiling up on linebackers. I hope the best for Peek this year and that he stays healthy, otherwise it's going to be a tough one.

TexansNeedRBin05
04-27-2005, 06:16 PM
The biggest thing about Peek is his durability. He hasn't show that he can last more than a few games before getting significantly injured. It's no wonder we are stockpiling up on linebackers. I hope the best for Peek this year and that he stays healthy, otherwise it's going to be a tough one.

I think at 6'3 250 he should be fine as far as injury's go! :thumbup

SESupergenius
04-27-2005, 06:18 PM
So anyone that weighs 250 has no injuries? Boselli should have been another Lou Gehrig.

Tulip
04-27-2005, 06:23 PM
The moves the Texans have made in the offseason are going to allow for Peek to start at OLB. I was frustrated last year with his lack of playing time, so now I'm excited about Peek being a probable starter.

infantrycak
04-27-2005, 06:34 PM
The biggest thing about Peek is his durability. He hasn't show that he can last more than a few games before getting significantly injured. It's no wonder we are stockpiling up on linebackers. I hope the best for Peek this year and that he stays healthy, otherwise it's going to be a tough one.

The guy had some sort of minor injury in 2003 and then a freak shoulder injury late in 2004. Geez, some folks want to call anyone who has ever had an injury, injury prone.

SESupergenius
04-27-2005, 06:43 PM
The guy had some sort of minor injury in 2003 and then a freak shoulder injury late in 2004. Geez, some folks want to call anyone who has ever had an injury, injury prone.And some guys try to sugarcoat these things.

Grid
04-27-2005, 06:49 PM
and some people look for the negative in everything.. no matter how stupid it may make them look.


a minor injury in 2003, and we all saw the freak shoulder injury.. he dislocated it diving into the endzone, remember?

There is injury prone.. and then there is just "has been injured before".. Peek has been injured before.. Fred Taylor is injury prone :P.

THEFUTURE
04-27-2005, 07:38 PM
yeah the injury prone statement was a little odd to me, some people just like casting any player with an injury as prone... if he hadnt took that dive into the endzone for us, and landed on his shoulder, he would never have been injured

Cincinnatikid
04-27-2005, 09:56 PM
Injury wise, he did hurt his foot against Cincinnati two seasons ago. Last year he dislocated his shoulder diving for a touchdown, and that only happened because when you land on your armpit with your arm stretched out with all your weight and someone elses there is not enough muscle strength on any person in the world to hold the head of the arm in the shoulder socket.
Enough with the playbook thing. Do you honestly think there has never been another person that has put their playbook in their car? It may not be the best thing to do, but it is no reason to discredit someone.
Either Cass. or Capers have said that Peek was the best LB in coverage last year, shown by his interception in Indy. I dont have the quote but it was said.
As some one else said before, he may have missed a screen or pitch outside by missing contain but the guy is not stupid enough to blitz instead of dropping into coverage.
I will say this though, it is good to see that most poeple are supporting the defense for this upcoming season because there are way to many negative people around here. Peek will come through this season, and the defense will be able to open it up a bit more to give a little more excitment that in the past. Everyone should be happy.

TexanExile
04-27-2005, 10:16 PM
There is injury prone.. and then there is just "has been injured before".. Peek has been injured before.. Fred Taylor is injury prone :P.

*cough* *cough* Hollings *cough* *cough*

Heh...no need to look east for examples. :)

infantrycak
04-27-2005, 10:52 PM
And some guys try to sugarcoat these things.

Yeah, thinking two unrelated injuries in two years--neither of which required surgery--is sugarcoating. Sure it is polyanna. This is football, not table tennnis--something close to 20% of the players go on IR every year. I have a simple rule for likelihood of future injury--is a player constantly nagged by niggling injuries (something I am concerned about with DD for example) or does he have the same injury repeatedly (Jevon Kearse's ankles for example)--if not (regardless of the team they are on) it doesn't concern me.

DocBar
04-27-2005, 11:16 PM
"injury prone" seems to be defined by the person offering the opinion. I noticed during the draft craze that some players with multiple injuries were never mentioned as a durabilty concern while others, with one minor injuries all the sudden had major baggage. Seems to be an effect of the players projected draft spot(and talent) and the author's opinion. I like Peek and think he will be a major pain for offenses this year.

infantrycak
04-27-2005, 11:39 PM
"injury prone" seems to be defined by the person offering the opinion. I noticed during the draft craze that some players with multiple injuries were never mentioned as a durabilty concern while others, with one minor injuries all the sudden had major baggage. Seems to be an effect of the players projected draft spot(and talent) and the author's opinion. I like Peek and think he will be a major pain for offenses this year.

During draft season you have to pass everything through a very fine strainer. You will see one guy at 220 lbs described as an undersized RB and then another guy at 205 lbs described as a good sized RB. Injury prone is just an overused phrase like shutdown corner--good god I wish we could ban that phrase.

TexansTrueFan
04-28-2005, 12:08 AM
i'm excited about peek getting more PT time next season, i think he can be a star OLB in this league, it will help him if he turns that fire he has on the field into something more like ray lewis does, and then he become unstoppable.

gr8slayer
04-28-2005, 01:01 AM
I like Peek myself

michaelm
04-28-2005, 01:30 AM
The biggest thing about Peek is his durability. He hasn't show that he can last more than a few games before getting significantly injured. It's no wonder we are stockpiling up on linebackers. I hope the best for Peek this year and that he stays healthy, otherwise it's going to be a tough one.

One thing I enjoy about visiting these boards is the opportunity to give my opinion, and yes, sometimes even my advice.
I would like to take this time to attempt to explain one easy way for the layman (or layperson for you ladies out there) to recognize an injury prone player.

Here goes;

When you can go through countless newspaper articles, magazine articles, sports programs, message board posts and/or descriptions from people who know what they are talking about and not a single one of those sources describes a player as injury prone... you probably shouldn't take it upon yourself to create that label or you may end up lmaking yourself look silly.
Please, I don't want you to look foolish... follow these guidelines, it may serve you well in the end...

ATX
04-28-2005, 03:13 AM
i doubt many real injury prone players last long in the league. if you mean real injury prone like missing 12 games a season because you're hurt. so if there are any injury prone players, they're not playing football. i agree that injury prone and shutdown corner are way overused. i'm also tired of the patriots already being called a dynasty. don't we all have to wait until this decade is over. we still have 5 years to win 4 and become the dynasty of the 2000's. :rolleyes:

Davis37
04-28-2005, 09:22 AM
During draft season you have to pass everything through a very fine strainer. You will see one guy at 220 lbs described as an undersized RB and then another guy at 205 lbs described as a good sized RB. Injury prone is just an overused phrase like shutdown corner--good god I wish we could ban that phrase.

We should ban the phrase "shut down corner", because there is no such thing. With the new rules in the secondary, "shut down corners" are a thing of the past.

jacquescas
04-28-2005, 10:34 AM
peek was injured, Joppru is injury prone.

Txnpride
04-28-2005, 11:10 AM
I think it because he cant control his emotions.If you get a 10 yard sack,then get a 15 yard penalty on the same play......its a negative. :thumbdown If he can get his emotions under control..........look out!!!!!I am a HUGE PEEK fan.If the other D-lineman played with his intensity.......we would be a bad ***** defense. :twocents:

TheOgre
04-28-2005, 12:27 PM
So was Matt Stephens a "shutdown corner", Infantrycak? Sorry I just had to use the phrase again. :heh:







(Note: For those a little slow, I realize he didn't play corner plus he sucked. This was meant as a joke.)

Cincinnatikid
04-28-2005, 12:28 PM
Babin under persues - nobody runs to the right

Peek over persues - RBs run to the left

Thats why you have middle linebackers. Either way the RB is funneled. Peek usually has a speed rush up field which means the RB is between the tackle and Guard, seems like it should be easy for a fast ILB to get to that spot. With Babin he moves up 2 steps and out a step so the funnel is once again inside. Peek tends to be moving more verticle so the DE or LB should be able to get many tackles. Also, if the DE would do their job of taking up the tackle and making him move inside then Peek would be free to the QB or RB in the backfield. Or if they OT stays with peek then the DE should be able to beat the guard to the outside to fill the lane. From what I have seen the DE's need to step it up and help the LBs. Sure Peek overpursues some plays and Babin underpersues, but if the Dline would do their job the problem would not be so evident. This would also allow the ILBs time to move up so their tackles arent 5 yards down field.

SESupergenius
04-28-2005, 12:31 PM
One thing I enjoy about visiting these boards is the opportunity to give my opinion, and yes, sometimes even my advice.
I would like to take this time to attempt to explain one easy way for the layman (or layperson for you ladies out there) to recognize an injury prone player.

Here goes;

When you can go through countless newspaper articles, magazine articles, sports programs, message board posts and/or descriptions from people who know what they are talking about and not a single one of those sources describes a player as injury prone... you probably shouldn't take it upon yourself to create that label or you may end up making yourself look silly.
Please, I don't want you to look foolish... follow these guidelines, it may serve you well in the end...

I never used the term "injury prone", I just said he has some durability problems, this is a fact, if you don't like facts, no one can help you.

Here are Peeks Injuries according to official NFL injury reports.
Sep. 12, 2003 - OLB Antwan Peek (knee) - Doubtful
Sep. 17, 2003 - OLB Antwan Peej (knee) - Questionable
Sep. 26, 2003 - OLB Antwan Peek (Knee) - Probable
Nov. 12, 2003 - OLB Antwan Peek (foot) - Out
Nov. 21, 2003 - OLB Antwan Peek (foot) - Out
Nov. 28, 2003 - OLB Antwan Peek (foot) - Probable
Dec 6, 2003 - OLB Antwan Peek (foot) - Questionable
Dec. 12, 2003 - OLB Antwan Peek (foot) - Probable

2004
----
Nov. 11, 2004 - OLB Antwan Peek (ankle) - Probable
Nov. 17, 2004 - OLB Antwan Peek (ankle) - Probable
Nov. 26, 2004 - OLB Antwan Peek (ankle) - Probable
Dec. 29, 2004 - OLB Antwan Peek (shoulder) - Out

Now that's 4 officially reported injuries, (knee, foot, ankle, and shoulder) All this and he was the backup. Now It may change for the 2005 season when he get's a full season under his belt, but I can comfortably use this as a measuring stick. I did the same for Hollings when I was debated about his durability problems when we draft him.

Keep in mind, I like Peek, a lot. I was one of the ones that loved the pick when we drafted him in the 3rd round. To me he was a classic tweener and fit the role of the ROLB spot to a T. But let's evaluate the player like he is and what he has done so far. Like I said, Peek is a playmaker and has a high motor, but tends to get dinged a bit. Don't go overboard with that. I'm not calling him injury prone, but I aint exactly putting my head in the sand that there isn't durability concerns.

wiley2002
04-28-2005, 12:32 PM
Enough of this! Peek has been a playmaker every time he gets out on that football field. My favorite memory is when he was getting to Tarrik (sp) Glenn's head. I know Manning was showing fear. How can anyone forget his defensive TD. Yes he misses some tackles here and there but he will only improve with increased playing time. I can't wait to see who he derails this year.

ATX
04-28-2005, 01:23 PM
there's no durability concerns with peek. sept 12- sept 26, 2003. see how his status went from doubtful to probable in 2 weeks. the injury reports aren't accurate enough to say a player is injury prone. the teams have to report any type of injury even if its not a big deal. don't let the probable and questionable status fool you. many players play when they're questionable or probable, it's the nature of the nfl.

4 reported injuries isn't a big deal. look how fast the knee healed, a real serious knee injury and he would have been out a lot longer. the shoulder injury was a freak injury diving into the endzone. also, look at the ankle injury, he's still probable, which shows it's not that serious. the only 2 real injuries he had were his foot and shoulder. this is the nfl and guys get hurt. it's the nature of the game. with your reasoning carr is injury prone because he hurt his shoulder and missed a few games and his ankle nagged him last year.

Porky
04-28-2005, 02:59 PM
I like Peek, but he in injury prone. What we really need is a shut down corner. lol:

michaelm
04-28-2005, 09:38 PM
I never used the term "injury prone", I just said he has some durability problems, this is a fact, if you don't like facts, no one can help you.


[Edit--Infantrycak--the original exchange (posts from both sides) was edited so all of this may not make sense to non-participants. The parties, can follow along. For those now viewing, please remember, attack the post (well you don't have to attack anything, you can discuss it but you get the point) rather than the poster]

I will start this post by saying that I was a little caustic in my earlier response. I will apologize for my tone in that post, there were contributing factors (not related to this board) last night that had me feeling mean spirited.
Technically, you did not use the term 'injury prone'; just as technically, I never called anyone a jack***, but that is really just semantics.
As far as i have seen, Peek has never been known as a 'duribilty issues' kind of player, and that is specifically what you said.
I said (and I quote) "you probably shouldn't take it upon yourself to create that label(injury prone) or you may end up looking like a complete jack*ss".
I didn't call you a jack*** but again, it's semantics, basically I was alluding to you, and again, I retract and apologize.
Still, I disagree with your premise. I can't recall a single analysis where Peek is described as having durability issues. I definately wouldn't hang that tag on him. Comparatively speaking I would guess that he is about avarage in the injury department, certainly not an injury concern great enough to be considered an issue. You accuse me of having weak takes, but in my mind your take was anything but a strong one. As far as name calling, I think you may have me beat in that department. This is not the first post where you've accused people of being on crack when they have a differing opinion...

On the homer issue; I can't argue about that label too strongly, because it is true to an extent. But I think optimist is a more accurate description. Admittedly, I may be overly optimistic at times. Fortunately there are pessimists like yourself to counter balance my occasional over optimism...

You may have seen people come and go on these boards, and I may or may not be here for as long as you have been. It is all academic... my opinion counts no less than your or anybody's as long as I remain... and don't break forum rules. So, I invite you to go back and review any of my 'weak takes' and debate them as you see fit.

I say to you again, I still don't think Peek has durability issues.

Now watch him go and get injured... :hmmm:

DocBar
04-28-2005, 10:34 PM
So was Matt Stephens a "shutdown corner", Infantrycak? Sorry I just had to use the phrase again. :heh:






(Note: For those a little slow, I realize he didn't play corner plus he sucked. This was meant as a joke.)If you mean "shutdown corner(or safety)" as in "not playing anymore", then yes!!! LOL
And "shutdown" none too soon.

infantrycak
04-28-2005, 11:19 PM
I like Peek, but he in injury prone. What we really need is a shut down corner. lol:

OK, now you are getting on my bad side.


:cool:

Semi-inside joke.

Hervoyel
04-28-2005, 11:45 PM
I like Peek, but he in injury prone. What we really need is a shut down corner. lol:

Yep, and FIRE PALMER!

sax_49
04-29-2005, 06:34 AM
IMO the first mistake and the worst mistake Texans made was to hire Palmer in the first place. The man has been a loser everywhere he has been.

Vinny
04-29-2005, 11:09 AM
Actually, Bledsoe and Brunell had their best years under Palmer. So did Couch for that matter. When Palmer ran the Jags offense they were the best in the NFL.

gr8slayer
04-30-2005, 02:38 AM
Actually, Bledsoe and Brunell had their best years under Palmer. So did Couch for that matter. When Palmer ran the Jags offense they were the best in the NFL.
I dont think there has ever been a time when the Jags Offense was the best in the NFL.

Vinny
04-30-2005, 12:01 PM
The Jaguars scored 786 points in the two years he was their offensive coordinator in 97 and 98 and was one of the leagues most dynamic offensive units. Brunell's career has slowly gotten worse since then.

sax_49
04-30-2005, 01:47 PM
Since their offense was so good should have kept Palmer.

Wolf
04-30-2005, 01:54 PM
Palmer left the Jags and took the reigns of the Cleveland Browns..

And he had two weeks of prep time before the Browns did their draft.. I don't recall if he got all his staff hired before the draft or not.. all I can say is bash Palmer about the Browns but they still picked 3rd in the draft this season :heh:

DocBar
05-01-2005, 12:07 AM
Yeah, thinking two unrelated injuries in two years--neither of which required surgery--is sugarcoating. Sure it is polyanna. This is football, not table tennnis--something close to 20% of the players go on IR every year. I have a simple rule for likelihood of future injury--is a player constantly nagged by niggling injuries (something I am concerned about with DD for example) or does he have the same injury repeatedly (Jevon Kearse's ankles for example)--if not (regardless of the team they are on) it doesn't concern me.
The "niggling" injuries of DD make me wonder about his desire to be the best. That doesn't seem like an "injury prone" person, but one who lacks the heart to play in spite of pain. The "same injury repeated" scenario for Kearse seems like a much more likely candidate for "injury prone" to me. Kearse has weak ankes. It happens and it is painful and debilitating. IMHO, DD kacks the heart of a champion. DD and most of the top 10 rushers in NFL history share common physical dimensions. Emmitt Smith, Walter Payton, etc.. would NEVER miss a game(much less multiple games) over the type of injuries DD has had.

infantrycak
05-01-2005, 12:39 AM
The "niggling" injuries of DD make me wonder about his desire to be the best.

That honestly concerns me as well, but all indications (coach and teammate statements and just they way he finishes his runs, etc.) are he is a very hard worker and dedicated to being the best he can. I guess it would just surprise me if a guy like that was a wuss about pain.

disaacks3
05-01-2005, 02:03 AM
My take on Peek -

Physical - Definitely has the physical tools (size strength & speed) to not only be a starter, but a true gamebreaker and someone the opposition has to actively plan against.

Mental - Has consistent lapses in judgment that happen on a regular basis. Lets his high motor and 'spirit' get away from him in ways that are detrimental (penalties / overpursuit/ blown assignments) to the defense.

Verdict - He's earned his "shot" at being a starter this year and his physical gifts are truly remarkable. The Texans are hoping that more regular playing time will 'tame the beast' and allow him to pace himself more evenly throughout an entire game. If he can straighten out the mental lapses, he'll be headed to the Pro Bowl within 2 years.

infantrycak
05-01-2005, 02:23 AM
My take on Peek -

Mental - Has consistent lapses in judgment that happen on a regular basis. Lets his high motor and 'spirit' get away from him in ways that are detrimental (penalties / overpursuit/ blown assignments) to the defense.

Spot on post. JMO, but the Texans may have been too conservative on this one and the mental part will work out fine. My theory is Peek is an emotional player anxious to get on the field. Like a good bird dog, if you keep him caged up watching the action, they get more and more agitated and when you finally do release them, they are overexcited, forget their training and do dumb things. Let Peek start the game and he will relax, just like the bird dog will remember his training after he is allowed to work off his extra energy. I think that dog will hunt.

Carr Bombed
05-01-2005, 02:31 AM
:thumbup That'll do Peek, That'll do

Texan Dave
05-01-2005, 06:44 AM
Hi guys, I've been reading this forum for a few weeks now, and finaly decided to join due to seeing this thread. I would have to say that Peak reminds of of an Oiler that had verry simular physical and mental traits, that was considered a bust here in Houston, but later went to Carolina to become a prowl bowler. Lamar Lathon

TopTexanFan16
05-01-2005, 10:48 AM
yea im to young to know hwo he is but peek isnt considered a bust here in houston he just merley hasnt been givin the chance to play. so i think not only will he stay in houston but he'll have a very succesful career here too IMO

Texan Dave
05-01-2005, 10:59 AM
I didn't mean to say that Peak is a bust by any means, I'm a huge Texans fan. Infact, my whole openion of the Lamar Lathon deal was that the Oilers were nuts for letting him go. But with the Oilers switching from a 3-4 to a 4-3 that year (when they brought Buddy Ryan in), he just wasn't a 4-3 outside linebacker. They tried to put him at defensive end opposite of Sean Jones, but he was a little under sized to play as a defensive end, Buddy Ryan didn't like him all that well either, refered to him as a "big fast kid". But he was awsome pass rusher, and extreemly fast, one of the faster linebackers in the game at the time.