Mickey

It would seem to make sense which is one of several reasons why I think they won't take him. We have needed a TE for years and they haven't spent anything besides late round fliers to find one. I have to conclude that TE simply isn't a major component of this offense. It certainly seems that way on the field. So my guess is that they aren't going to spend a lot on a TE, not when we have close to the worst pass rush in the league. How many teams have ever made the playoffs without the ability to pressure the passer? I can't think of one, can you? Now, how many teams have been there with an average TE? Lots. So I think that if this team doesn't find a top pass rushing prospect in this draft, most likely with that pick, they will have blown the draft, again. I vote "NO" on Pettigrew.

Again, the myth that had not generous Buffalo given him a chance he'd be flipping burgers. Check the scouting reports from that draft on Peters, he was tops on everyones sleeper list and had his choice of teams to sign with after the draft. He picked us, not the other way around, because given our crappy roster, we offered him the best chance to make the squad. He was a TE in college on a team that ran the ball all the time so mostly he was blocking and was projected to be a tackle in the NFL but as a long term project. I don't get your definition of "classless". Was he critical of the Bills, their FO or any of his prior teamates? NO. As for the hold out he said was he didn't want to but had to do it to support his family. Do you have any idea how many people in his family he is financially supporting? NO. Was it smart to get out of a bad deal 2 years early and become the highest paid LT in NFL history? YES. Was it a good career move to get on a team that is a perennial contender in a major market? YES. Tell me specifically what he said, his actual words, that you found so classless? That classless bufoon and his miscreant agent just outwitted our FO big time. Deal with it.

I think the world of Vic but he has pretty much always backed the team on controversial issues. Heck, it is one of the things I like about him, he is one of the few commentators with a national rep. who pays attention to us.

Gee, can I ride your pretty pink unicorn over rainbows and lollipop forests when its time for your gumdrop break? Since time beyond memory fans have ranted back and forth about what is good, bad and indifferent about their teams. If you can't handle a little salt in your sugar pie once in awhile, perhaps you should consider becoming an Ice Dancing fan, that is, if you aren't already.

Did you not see him play in 2006 and 2007 when he had full camps and practices to prep? We do not have a single player on this roster who would rate in the top 5 at his position in the league. In fact, I am not sure we even have a single player whou would rate in the top ten at his position in the league apart from Owens. The one guy we had who was that good just skipped town. Peters was undeniably the best personnel coup this team has made in at least the last 5 years and they just pissed it away. The only people in all of football questioning Peters' ability are the people on this board, the geniuses who said Parker and Peters were morons and that the Bills had Peters by the balls. Those morons, despite having their balls in an iron vice, somehow managed to get out of a bad deal 2 years early, signed the biggest OT contract in NFL history and are playing for a perennial contender in a major market. The drooling cretins who were so sure Peters and Parker didn't know what they were doing are the same knuckle draggers who think Peters stinks.

I humbly request your permission to love the team but dislike the front office for failing to keep our best players or to even get a sniff of postseason play. Since you are the judge of proper fandom, I thought it appropriate to seek your gracious permission first before offering any crticism of our beloved front office. Will the team gear shop be offering a replica of Brandon's button down oxfords for front office fans?

Great. Another marginal player we broke the bank for being sent on his way. How many Jason Peters' coud we have signed with the money wasted on Dockery, Mike Williams and Kelsay? Good riddance to a money-in, no-sacks out machine. But don't forget, he brought his "lunch pail" to work and had a "high motor". I just hope that the FO finally understands that attitude and character are for crap if you don't have the talent. Are you listening Poz?

Great, send us a card from the land of Angels and Lollipops. Those of us mired in that sticky thing called reality know that the odds of finding a Jason Peters with the first pick, the second, or 30 picks is vanishingly small. It's a lightning strike. Not a bright idea to build your future around it. In my book, two pro bowl worthy seasins (2006 and 2007) and another solid year given the practice time he missed, proved Peter's worth several times over. Philly, who has been to the playoffs a heckuva a lot more frequently than us, knows what he is worth. So, while some fans loose sleep over whether this guy or that guy is under or over paid, the rest of us, those who care most about winning rather than perceived pay equality, are looking at a season where we will be lucky to rise to our usual level of mediocrity. I am still waiting for all those who driveled on and on about Parker being a terrible agent and Peters being a moron for not firing him to stand up and take responsibility for those opinions now that Parker and Peters got out of a bad deal 2 years early (so much for the "bills have him by the balls" theory) and is now the highest paid OT in NFL history and playing for a team that actually wins rather than one whose head coach will be fired by week 5, 6 at the latest.

The better question I think in evaluating the FO's performance in this drama is what price could they have got last year if they had been willing to deal then? Whatever his price was this year, it would have been less last year is my bet. Which means that the team would have been much smarter to have negotiated with him in February of 2008 rather than publicly thrashing him in July of 2008 to get the fans to blame him and not their stinginess. To break even on this deal, not to be ahead but to essentially break even, we need to find a perennial pro bowler with the 28th pick in the draft, about 7-8 hours after the opening bell. I don't like the odds. The one silver lining is that we have lots of money now to overpay another aging, underperfoming vet like Kelsay or Schobel. I am so relieved. Seriously, how can you possibly sit down in a meeting with Ralph and explain that you broke the bank to keep a couple of has-beens or never-wases like Kelsay and Schobel buty you bungled and fumbled away arguably the best LT in the game in his freaking prime? What do you say??? "Um...well...um.....Kirk Chambers looked good.....er...um....." Another good question, exactly how confident should any of us be that the team will use their added picks wisely this year after this 2 year fiasco? Their record and performance on and off the field does not fill me with confidence.

All those who have posted numerous times that Parker is the worst agent ever and that Peters is an idiot who doesn't know how to negotiate please take a bow. That terrible agent and his idiot client just got out of a bad deal 2 years early and became the highest paid OT in NFL history. What fools. I mean you guys, not them. It's sarcasm, see? Good luck Jason and good luck to the Bills finding a two time pro bowler 28 picks or about 7 hours into the draft. Oh well, at least was still have, *gulp* Schobel... Him we paid. Well, he is an awfully nice guy. Can't play for crap anymore but he is one helluva nice guy.

How soon your forget how well Peters played in 2006 and 2007 and, according to the majority of pro bowl voters, 2008. Certainly, an argument can be made that his worst year as starter was in 2008 which means that at his worst, he is still pro bowl caliber. If you truly think that if the team could only keep one, it ought to be Jackson than I have to believe that you are far more interested in having a roster of guys you like rather a roster of guys who win. I don't like or dislike any of them and I wish them all luck in getting paid as high a salary as they can get for themselves. You know, the same thing we all do in our own professions. What I want from them is not moral guidance or case of the warm and fuzzies. I want them to win. Those who would rather lose than have talented jerks on their team should learn to get very used to losing.

Yeah, because that has been such a problem with this team, afterall, it has occurred once. So I guess we should organize the entire scheme around that one goal, rather than say, winning games. And Peters isn't asking for more $ because there is a chance he might make the pro bowl. He actually did, twice. So equating my position that we ought to do what we can to keep a pro bowler on the roster and that failing to do so is just that, a failure, to "...giving every player a billion-dollar contract..." is shows just how irrational you have become on this issue. You tried this same line in a question to Tim G. and got essentially the same answer, that Peters' situation is unique and that it has not and will not set off some sort of domino effect on contract negotiations with other players. A reasonable mind could certainly conclude that all things considered, the team's long term ability to be competetive is an interest best served by trading Peters and looking for an equally gifted but less expensive alternative at LT (good luck with that). But that really isn't the position that you've taken. Instead, you come up with ridiculous retorts like this. You assail the guy on a personal level at every chance as this has somehow become a moral crusade with you as if Peters was dating your daughter or spending your money. My position is quite simple, this is a good player and goodness knows, we don't have an abundance of those hence the long playoff drought we are in. I don't follow the logic in the idea that we would become a better team, not a better girl scout troop mind you, by losing a pro bowler. My sole interest is in watching this team win football games, I don't see that interest being advanced by losing Peters. I recall taping a game, I think it was in 2006 when he was still playing on special teams. We had KR for a TD and when I replayed the tape, I could see Peters blocking one guy and throwing him like a rag doll into a second defender, knocking them both down and creating a hole the wider than Rosie Odonnel's hips. You could have scored a TD on that play. Maybe you would like to see that talent in another team's uniform while we bite our nails watching Kirk Chambers take the field as a 16 game starter. With all due respect to Kirk, I know my preference. But then, I am a practical guy. I don't really care about contracts and promises and who is a nice guy and who isn't. I just want to win games. Good players win games. Bad players don't. Peters might be the biggest jerk on the planet but he is also a good player. A very good player. And apart from the Peters haters on this board like yourself, everyone thinks so, especially the people that matter.

Tim, Apart from personnel changes, what if anything have you heard about the offensive system this year? Is anything different planned or do they think the only problem was not having enough talent on the field? It just seems, to me anyway, that the dismal performance of the offense had more causes than just personnel, problems that dumping Dockery and Fowler and adding T.O. is not going to solve. Last off season we heard a lot of talk about how Turk Schonert was going to go with the same system essentially as Fairchild had put in place but it was going to be a lot more unpredictable and more willing to go downfield. I can recall a number of positive comments from Trent about how it was going to be a good thing that they didn't have to learn a whole new offense. Usually, with offensive performance as bad as we had last year, a team would consider a new OC or at least some radical changes in the offensive scheme. I know that is not as fascinating of topic as how much $ Jason Peters wants but I am desperate for some hope that the offense is going to turn around. But maybe the coaches don't really think there is anything wrong.

Also, the notion that Peters would not have made it in the nfl had it not been for the Bills is ridiculous. Last year I posted all the scout takes on him prior to that draft and the fact is, he was on everyone's list of top project players/sleepers becuase of his combination of size and athleticism. It was no surprise that he wasn't drafte but also no surprise that was quickly signed as an UDFA. He had his choice of teams to sign with after the draft, he chose Buffalo because he had a good chance of making the roster given our depth chart at the time.

How about just the pro bowlers? You should change you tag to "7-9", clearly you are quite satisfied with those awesome numbers. If the job of a front office is to get enough talent on the filed to make the playoffs, then this front office is an abject, unmitigated failure. 10 posts or 10,000 posts, the truth is the truth.

I couldn't wait for Tim's answer Bill so I am gong to speculate that Parker and Peters don't see anything to gain by going to the press to try and get the fans on their side, thereby increasing the pressure on the front office. Personally, I think its more professional to just shut your yaps in public. The critical comments made about Peters at the start of camp last year poisoned many a fan against Peters but certainly was no help in the long run when it came to negotiations. Both sides now are fairly silent and when they do speak, have done so with respect. I am hoping that is a good sign.

I guess at that point they start to wonder if maybe it wasn't a mistake not to get a new deal with him in February of 2008 before the Long and Gross mega deals pushed the market price for top LT's into the stratoshpere. Then I think they have to make a business decsion, what will help us win more games, signing Peters at that high a price or saving the money to use elsewhere? All this junk about teaching peopel a lesson is for infants with hurt feelings, is business Fredo, strictly business.

Brandon at the luncheon on Peters, as per Chris Brown: “Obviously we’ve talked about this ad nauseam, but we value Jason greatly as a player,” said Brandon. “He’s a player that we developed and signed to a contract early in his career. Obviously Jason has done a great job and played very well. At the conclusion of the year we talked to Jason and we’d obviously like to have him on this team and will continue to work with his representatives to get something done.” When asked if he needs to come to a resolution or definitive answer as to where things are headed with Peters in negotiations prior to the draft, he offered the following. “We’re going to see how the situation plays out with Jason,” said Brandon. ”We value him. We want him on this football team. We expect him to be on this football team and we will continue to work with him and his representatives.” Very different from last year when he was publicly critical of Peters. Clearly a well crafted statement that appears to answer the question but pretty much says nothing. I think it pretty much reflects the difficult reality in play here, that this negotiation is tougher than most. You just don't see guys outperforming their contracts by this degree. I can see why the team wants some discount for letting him out of his existing contract and I can see why Peters might feel he isn't being treated fairly, especially in comparison to how they treated Schobel. Isn't it the worst of both worlds for us? We are overpaying a fading vet who, after his huge raise has had the two worst years of his career. On the other hand we are about to lose a young player who has risen to be among the top 5 in the league at his position. Oh how I wish we could move that money from Schobel to Peters.

What evidence do you have that Peters is "on the trade block"? It does not follow that if, as I believe, Ralph's primary goal is a trophy before he dies, that Peters would be singed. You run out of money for the rest of your talent in this league if you spend money you don't have to spend. So you do all you can to get the best deal you can which easily explains the negotiations and how hard they are, between the FO and Peters' agent. Which, by the way, we know are actually going on which is more than I can say about the trade speculation.

Fair enough but the 2007 11th got 16.7 so the increase this year would put the 11th at 22.1 assuming all the deals go the same which they won't. Mayo at 10 got a million less than the RB at 13 last year. That is a lot of money for a guy who has never played a down in the NFL. I'd still take the pro bowler even with the next Mike Williams at half price. Even if that picks turns out ok, it won't be right away. The whole point of scouting and drafting is to get top talent on to the roster, not losing top talent in exchange for a 325 pound sack of "maybe". Just my opinion.

I don't think there has been a confirmed story yet that states that Buffalo and Philly have been involved in trade talks for Peters. Until then, I don't see this as a realistic scenario.

I don't think a team that just singed Terrel Owens is all that worried about locker room cancers. I think they are depsperate to win. Ralph, God bless him, can't live forever and wants a championship a lot more than he wants to secure a price tag of 9.9 gazillion dollars for the franchise when sold after he is gone rather than a measley 9.7 gazillion dollars.

If the alternative is some sort of trade where we end up replacing him with a first round OT, won't we be paying that rookie pretty close to what Peters is asking? Seems to me I would rather pay a little extra for a pro bowler in the hand rather than a rookie in the bush.

Oh c'mon, we have a nonstarter from another team at center and two TBA's on the left side, why would we worry about pass blocking? Get with the program.

You stop it by having an OC and a head coach who call 5 yard outs regardless of down and distance and a QB who checks down on each and every one of the rare occasions the coaches call a play with a deep route as primary. You could have God at TE and still not get a first down with that philosophy.