Mickey

By "most of his teammates" do you mean the 2 unidentified players cited it the ESPN article?

"...appeared to express a willingness..." Well that seals it, Brown giving his opinon based on what? You left out the part where they said "never say never". Yes, they extended other guys, so what? That is not a commitment to negotiate a new deal this year, and if they wanted to do that they could have started negotiating with Peters 6 months before camp as they did with Schobel last year. But we don't really have to guess at what they "appear to express", lets look at all that has been said. Here is a round up of what we have in the public record on these issues: From the ESPN article everyone was raving about: "They also have made it known to Peters' agent, Eugene Parker, they're not willing to renegotiate 2008, insisting any additional money will be paid next year forward." ESPN Okay, so much for that. There is much more but this is the article the Peters haters have been drooling over as having bee so wonderfully reseached and well written. They just ignore the part of it that shows the team insists on Peters being the most underpaid OT in the league for another year. Brandon on Peters: "...we made a commitment to Jason two years ago and we expect him to honor that commitment..." "...its difficult to have discussions with someone that is not here..." "...again, we expect Jason to be here and to honor his commitment as the organization made a substantial commitment to him two years ago..." "...Jason was in I believe to have a quick check up coming off his surgery..." WGR Tape of interview with Brandon on Peters From that tape, it is clear they want him to honor his deal from two years ago, ie, no new deal, he even said it twice and pointed out that the commitment the team made was "substantial". It also puts the lie to so many posts hereabouts that the team has no idea how the surgery went because there has been zero contact with the team. The guy came in for a check up with the team doctors after the surgery. Lastly, the comment about it being difficult to have "discussions with someone not here" is patent BS. Parker has a cell phone, I am sure Brandon and the team can reach him anytime they want. Peters isn't returning calls because his agent is the guy to speak to, not him. That is why they hired him. The notion that physical absence from camp is some sort of logistical bar to negotiating a deal is Bozo level foolishness. More from Brandon on Peters: "Brandon said Peters’ absence from all offseason activities at Ralph Wilson Stadium has been puzzling because he has been unable to get a read on the situation, primarily because he hasn’t spoken to Peters and has had only brief discussions with the player’s agent, Eugene Parker." "Brandon said the bulk of the discussions with Parker have centered on Hardy’s deal and not Peters’ impending holdout." D&C Article From the above, all those posts about there being no contact with the team are total BS. There has been contact, in fact, there has been more than one discussion with Parker (it says discussions). Also note that "bulk of" is not the same as "all of" thus, they did speak about Peters. Have they been brief? Sure but "brief" is not the same as "none". It also doesn't take long for the team to tell them no new deal this year and for Parker to tell them to call if they change their minds. Then there was this from Chirs Brown, note that the assertion is Brown's opinion, not a quote from the team: It appears the Bills are not opposed to discussing a new deal, but Brandon would like to see Peters in person to begin such talks. "It's difficult to have discussions with someone that's not here and has not elected to participate in what we're trying to do," said Brandon. Brown on Peters This is just a repeat of the line quoted in the D&C from which Brown reaches his own opinion as to what it means. It is the same BS line about it being somehow "difficult" to have a discussion with someone not in the room with you. I'll personally chip in a few tin cans and really long string from Brandon's office to Parker's. From the Buffalo News: Brandon said the two sides barely have discussed Peters' deal. "Very briefly with Eugene," Brandon said. And this: Brandon did not rule out considering a new deal for Peters, but made it clear nothing is happening anytime soon. "You never say never," Brandon said. "We have conversations with our guys all the time, and I think we have a proven track record of trying to get guys done and extend guys out. We've done it already this offseason with Kyle Williams and Brad Butler. We've done it with [Aaron] Schobel in the past and Terrence McGee. It's a long line of guys that we've done it with. But it's very difficult to have those conversations when the individual is not participating in your work." Buffalo News take on Brandon and Peters The first quote is yet another example of Brandon admitting that despite his "road map of silence" meme, he has spoken with Parker about Peters. Was it brief, I'll take his word on that but I do note that the guy who came up with "road map of silence" has in fact had a number of discussions with Parker. Again, how long does it take to say "Jason wants a new deal" and "No new deal this year"??? The second quote, the "never say never" line is apparently the line you are relying upon to assert that the team is willing to give him a new deal for millions of dollars more but only if he comes to camp. "did not rule out" and "Never say never" is not exactly a committment to give him a new deal now is it? Sounds like what my wife would say if I asked her to go to a hockey game or for a certain special present on my birthday. Besides, he finishes that line with the same lame justification that it is just so gosh durn difficult to negotiate with Jason not here. Presumably, Brandon has maxed out his minutes this month talking to Evans' agent so cell phones are out. It also ignores the many deals the team has made with hold outs who actually held out. McCargo, Whitner and Lynch are just a few that I can recall off the top of my head. The team has never committed to giving him a new deal if he simply comes in to camp. They have done nothing more than say the equivalent of "maybe, who knows, you never can tell, stranger things have happened, etc." The stumbling block is the financial reality that Peters is worth way more than his current contract but that the Bills could conceivably get another year out of him at a bargain basement price because he has so many years left on his deal. Peters isn't going to easily accept getting paid so much less than he is worth and the team isn't going to easily part with more money for a player already under contract.

Not exactly, I have posted the links many, many, many times and I am not going to do it again Mr. Lazy. The articles have said that the team insists that he play this year under his existing contract. The quotes from Brandon state flatly that they want him to "honor the committment" he made to the team 2 years ago. All they have ever said with regard to negotiating a new deal is that they would "never say never". The team went to Schobel themselves in February 2007 and started negotiating a new deal. Not so with Peters. On top of all the articles and quotes to the contrary, when challenged, not one person has produced a quote from Brandon that the team would in fact give him a new deal this year if, gosh durn it, he would only come to camp. Not one. Query: As often as people have posted the meme that the team would negotiate a new deal this year if he only came to camp has been posted, how many times have you challenged the poster to produce proof? How many times have you accused them of inventing facts? Just thought I'd ask.

Has anyone ever said anyting remotely like that? All I have ever heard is that he is the best lineman on the team and one of the best in the league. Do you agree or disagree? If you agree, you might want to stop mocking a position you hold yourself.

Ummm....if they did what they did the year before for Schobel and paid him what he is worth, or at least started negotating with him back in February, he would be pancaking linebackers for Marshawn and Trent next week. Now if you think a guy should play for less than half of what he is worth, if you think a guy who almost made the pro bowl in his first year as a starter and made it last year shouldn't be rewarded for superior performance, if you think its okay to make Jason Peters the most underpaid pro bowler in the league, then I am sure you're tickled pink that our best lineman isn't here. Me, I think that in a job where you are never more than a play away from Kevin Everett's fate, you need to do what you have to do to get paid what you are worth. Radical concept isn't it? "Getting paid for what your performance indicates you are worth". You are right, I must be on crack to think performance and pay should have anything to do with one another. Pay based on merit? Perish the thought.

When he comes back, whenever in god's name that happens, I have no reason to think he won't give his all. That is how he became what he is from where he started.

Ralph was there when they followed a much different path with Schobel and he is there now. The difference is Brandon and Marv. No way to know for sure where every one in the organization stands but for now, unless you have an explanation for why Ralph would treat the two situations so differently when they are so similar, I think the better guess is that Levy is not Brandon and vice versa.

I go with Marv, by a long shot. That might be why Schobel is in uniform and ready to go and why Peters is not. To be fair to Brandon, he hasn't had time in the job to develop a record of trusworthiness. Mouthing off about Peters and that "track record of silence" crap wasn't the way to build that record but I think he learned from it as he has been quiet since then. Must be hard, first year in the big job and has to deal with a difficult situation.

Getting flamed, as I am sure you anticipated. As long as I have been on this board, I don't think I have ever seen the majority side with a player against the front office in a contract dispute. It is axiomatic that any player looking for more money is a crybaby, greedy, selfish bastard. Guaranteed, if Evans doesn't get a deal signed, around here it will be because he was asking for too much, the team was smart not to give in, the team had no choice because the demand was over the top, he isn't really that good, he had a weak year last year, we need that money for other positions, etc, etc.

Negotiations started before, continued while he skipped and afterwards, culminating in a deal that was done in time to get him in to camp. The team hasn't negotiated with Peter at all, not before he held out, not in between OTAs and not now, a week before the opener. With a magnifying glass big enough you can find some differences between the two, no two situations are ever exactly alike but these two are certainly close enough for a fair comparison to be made. The subtle differences, imho, don't justify the vastly different treatment. What accounts for it, in my opinion, is Brandon thinking that Levy made a mistake with Schobel that he isn't going to make with Peters.

I heard that when they operated on that sports hernia, they found that he was carrying the alien baby of Andy Dick. Seriously, contracts have these things called "contingency clauses" some of which might read along the lines of "Player will, prior to _________, undergo any and all physical examinations and/or diagnostic procedures requested by the Team Doctors and if, in the opinion of said Team Doctors, the player is physically unable to perform herein, the contract and all compensation due to player hereunder is revoked, void, a nullity as set forth in and pursuant to paragraph________." That would pretty much cover that and render pointless about 1,800 posts or so hereabouts over the last 3 weeks using the mysterious and unknown effects of a sports hernia as reason enough for the team to have screwed itslef out of an all pro left tackle for, who knows? 2 games? 3 games? Only time will tell.

The "no extension without showing up to camp" meme has been debunked, the team's position is and has been: no extension this year, period. That is why they didn't negotiate with him in February, long before camp or in any of the months since and before camp started. If they were willing to give him a new deal this year, I see no reason why they wouldn't have started those negotiations in February of this year as they did with Schobel in February of 2007. In that case, they actually approached Schobel first even though he had 3 years left on his then current contract. Despite that good faith on the part of the team, Schobel skipped out of the first 4 practices in March of 2007 to send the team a message of what was to come if they didn't get the deal done. It was (save for a few details), and before camp so holding out never became an issue for him. As for the injury, Peters was checked out by the team doctors after the surgery. This was confirmed by Brandon himself so whatever the results of the surgery were, they are well known to the team. I have yet to see anyone post a single example of a sport's hernia ending a career.

Any way you slice it, it is a tough position for a coach to be in. I just hope that Jauron gets to wrestle with it sooner rather than later. What do you think the odds are of him holding out for any portion of the regular season? I think the national sports media is going to start to give this issue more coverage. They love controversey and they can't make every story about Bret.

I have to believe that he doesn't want to miss a game paycheck. I knew he had a unique situation but I never thought is was so unique so as to potentially lead to a regular season hold out which is a doomsday scenario for all involved, the team, Peters, the front office and the fans. There is still time for it to get resolved before that and as a fan, you just have to hope it does.

This is what the front office has done to Peters, the team and to itself.

Please link to a post where I ever said Peters will demand to be traded. What I have said is that if Peters actually did holdout during the regular season, something I also have said is unlikley, the team would be foolish to just have him sit home forever. If they can't get him on the field, ultimately it would be better to trade him. Other than using the word "trade" in a sentence, that position has nothing to do with what you claim I have said.

They "want to keep him for a long time"??? How have they demonstrated that? By making him one of the lowest paid pro bowlers in the league? Its a little late to worry about damaging their relationship with Peters.

Good point with the exception that JP played last week and missed no practice while Trent is still actually limping and is likely to miss his second game tonight. I think Edwards will start first game even so but its not entirely implausible that he won't be able to answer the bell in week 1. Maybe its a sports hernia and they are just hiding it from us, I hear that's a career ender.

And maybe Peter overthrew Greg in the backyard and whacked jason in the nose which has swollen up so bad that all the makeup in the world won't cover it up enough for Jason to keep his date for the prom. All the published reports have indicated that the Bills flatly refuse to negotiate a new contract this year regardless of whether or not he came to camp. They have made no indication at all of ever renegotiationg his contract other than a line about "never say never". Its simple really. He wants a new deal this year, they said no way and he said call if you change your mind and here we sit. It makes sense and several reports confirm it. We don't have a zapbruder film on it but those are the facts as we know them. Does that make him a jerk for taking a shot at changing their minds with a holdout or is the team being miserly with a proven top performer? You make the call. For my dime, I think the team should have started talking with the agent in February of 2007 like they did with Schobel and in the end, if they got a decent deal, they should have taken it and if not, leave it and see how far he takes the holdout knowing you did all you could to try and resolve the situation.

I can certainly understand those who disagree with the strategy he is using. Reasonable minds can differ on that. What I don't get is the leap you make to labeling him a "petulant child". There is no petulance about it, it is, at heart, a financial strategy. The team told him no new deal in 2008 regardless of whether he reported first day or not. So the holdout itself didn't prevent a deal he otherwise could have had. He is holding out hoping to change their minds and it fails, he reports in time to get his first game check. If that is how it plays out, he loses nothing. Lets ignore this for now and flash forward to next year where you say he would get the big bucks after showing exemplary play for the third year in a row (he nearly made the pro bowl in 2006). Why do you think he would get those big bucks then? Has the team said they would give him a big pile next year? Have they even committed to renegotiating next year? He will still have 2 years left on this deal then, why would the Bills renegotiate when they will be holding the very same cards they are holding now? I have posted this question so many times I have lost count but not one person from the "Peters is a Peckerhead" crowd has answered it. Other than an assumption on your part, is there any evidence at all or logical reason why you think the team will give him the big bucks next year? Would you support a holdout by Peters next year if the team again refuses to give him a new deal assuming he has his 3rd exemplary season in a row? If not, what do you suggest he do next year in that event if you rule out holding out? If the team held him to this contract for 3 years and his level of play remains the same, he would end up being one of the most underpaid players in history. At what point would you start supporting this guy?

We agree! I think I hear angels playing harps, could this just be a dream?

He is a project player with tons of upside. He will be a starter in two years or selling insurance.

I was at the fair the other night and a guy was hawking a bunch of bills jerseys so I checked it out, they were all Spikes and McGahee jerseys. Invest in that Evans jersey after the deal is signed.

Time to make some pancakes Jason

You didn't "just simply point out...." I posted a response to someone else's post that preseason doesn't mean much and if you are going to put stock in it, you might want to note that the offense didn't put up many points. That is when you jumped in attacking me for being critical of the offense, referring to my observation that the offense didn't score a lot of points as being "meaningless". That moved the discussion from debating whether preseason was meaningless to my opinions being meaningless. You personalized it so I don't know why, having taken us down this road, you are upset at where we are. I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that your post came off harsher and more personal than intended and leave it at that. Preseason is like watching a practice, you can see the abilities some players have, like watching Leodis' speed on his returns. But other than that, it just doesn't mean much and using it as proof that we are all set at this or that position is going overboard.