Dan

Very well said. (Except for the last sentence. I think his surgery went wrong, he got a staff infection in his leg, they had to amputate, that left him hobbled and disillusioned, he got a fake leg and a walking cane and went hiking, stumbled off a cliff, fell into the ravine below where he lived on berries and dirt for nearly 2 weeks, then a mountain lion came by and ate his other leg, of course while eating his leg, Peters beat him over the head with his fake leg, that saved his life, but now he's legless and scurring around the forest looking for berries and a good pair of gloves because the ground his hurting his hands as he crawls about, his cell phone broke during the fall, so no one's heard from him since. On the bright side, Sasquatch has a new friend. )

Are you seriously asking that question? Because that is exactly what happens quite frequently. Half the stuff spewed and reiterated on this board is based on something some guy just made up and now its out there in the intrawebs and people read it and take it for fact. I spend a great deal of my professional life defending claims from people that have no knowledge whatsoever but readily claim I'm killing them.

I would think this guy is brought in as camp fodder and has next to no chance of making the final roster. But, I was wondering, anyone have any idea how much someone like that makes for a few weeks or so of work? Just curious.

Perhaps they could they put in one of those "poison pill" statements? For example, they trade Favre to the Jets and a if Favre doesn't play at least XX% of the Jets snaps, then the Jets owe the Pack another 1st rounder or a case of brew. That wouldn't necessarily rule out a quick trade, but might deter one. Possibly?

I told ya... put a hot blonde that's slightly dressed on the banner and everyone would love the site.

Fess up... you just wanted to use that word in a sentence. Didn't you.

Forgot the... "Doesn't really matter, this site rocks!" option. BTW, great new design.

I disagree.

I'm sure this was not your intent, but several posters have mentioned Bruce Smith and his penchant for not attending camp. Can we all just agree to stop that? Peters is in no way whatsoever in Bruce Smith's class. Period. There is no comparison to Peters and Smith. One is a once in a lifetime, HOF player. The other is someone that might be if he decided to play a few years. The next paragraph relates exactly to a point I've tried to call attention to on a few occasions. The Bills are primed to have several young stars emerge. How they handle Peters will likely dictate how others approach contract renegotiations. Imagine if they cave to Peters and immediately give him top 5 money. Regardless of whether he's worth it or not; you've shown every young player on this team that thinks they deserve a raise that they should hold out. Yes Peters deserves a raise. Yes, he's the best player on the line. Yes, we need him to be a legitimate playoff team. However, you can't let a player dictate to the team. Once you open that door, you allow all the other players to walk through it. My suspicion is the Bills FO knows that and they're making an example out of Peters. If so... it's risky, to say the least.

Hamdan has to be the #3 QB on the roster. It's the only way I can see it. JP has too much experience in Buffalo to not be the #2, otherwise Hamdan would be #2.

My thoughts as well. I'd imagine the overly conservative Jauron is going to be really, really over conservative with regard to possible injuries in camp. Good idea or not, I don't know. But, he rested guys because they were sore - not injured. What does that tell you?

That's my take on this whole mess. His agent probably called back around Feb. requesting a new deal. The Bills responded with a helping of.. he's under contract, we have other priorities now, we'll talk after the 2008 season. They hung up and haven't really spoken since. I still say the best way to handle this for Peters would be to state openly that he wants a new deal. Let the club know, let the press know. Show up and have your agent begin talks - knowing full well nothing will get done till Feb 09. But, still begin the talks and play another stellar season. After proving for 2 straight years you're the best tackle in football, the Bills would almost certainly put him in that $8mill/yr range. As eball has suggested, this is just really bad timing on Peters/Parkers part. The Bills needed to pay money for Stroud, they needed to re-sign Evans, they re-signed several of the roll players; Peters was coming off injury, he's only had one solid year at LT. IMO, they just picked the wrong time to draw their line in the sand. The deal he does or doesn't get next year depends on 2 things: (1) how well does he play when he comes back? and (2) how is his attitude when he comes back? He's certainly burned alot of good will with the franchise. But, if he comes back and shuts down the opposing DEs all season and has a great attitude (i.e. the holdout was all my agents idea, but I love the Bills) I think all is washed away. The bigger question is if the Bills don't blink - which I don't think they will because as another poster pointed out it's not in Ralph's history to give in to player demands - will Peters be humble enough to return in enough time to get into playing shape and learn the new offense? If he's dumb enough to sit out all season or all preseason, well... screw him. I firmly attest, however, that the Bills should not cave and pay him now. As much as I want Peters on the team and realize how good he is and deserves the money, we have too many players that are about to be (or potentially about to be) in his exact same position. If you show them that you'll pay whoever holds out, then we're likely to have 2 or 3 holdouts a year. And that.. would kill the Bills in the long term.

Not picking on you Buftex.... but I've seen this statement by several posters. Why does Favre have a right to play football? Do I have this same right? Can any person that wants just show up and expect to compete for a starters job? Now I know if I call a team, they wouldn't even answer the phone let alone consider bringing me in for a tryout. OTOH, Favre's call would get answered and many teams might want him. However, if team says no we don't want you, you can't force them to let you play. So, how does Favre have this right to play? He retired. But ultimately he still has a contract with the Pack. So if re-instated, they'd have to make a decision - bring him in to camp (but that's zero guarantee he gets to play), release him, or trade him. From the sounds of it, all of those are bad for the Packers. They don't seem excited at all about releasing him or trading him. And no way could you have Favre on the bench with a clipboard. So their hope is for Favre to stay retired either through choice (see $25mill) or through the league not re-instating him.

A really bad football game is still way better than anything else on TV. I watch all I can.

Interesting I hadn't tried the submenus, but you are correct. Does it for me as well in Netscape and Firefox. I could still select the submenues, but unable to read them. I tried IE as well (hate opening that); but I had the same issue - all menues opened behind the tickets banner.

Just 2 words... . Sa Weet. Great improvement again.

And thank you for the complements as well. Post more often.... its the only way to diminish the negative impact of the trolls. Once again, I completely agree with you on this topic. Peters IS good and we do need him. But no one player is greater than the team. And, right now, that's how he's acting - as though he's better than the team. And this is precisely the big picture that some posters seem to be neglecting.

I would offer that if Peters does that... with or without the current hold out... the FO would willingly make him one of the top paid OL in the league. There would be little forcing involved.

I would say its more that just that. Yes, he's a remarkably consistent punter and great athlete. But, it's also his attitude. He does whatever it takes to help, whether it be continually pushing himself, making tackles, running for first downs on fakes, throwing during practice to give the QBs a break, participating in all the Probowl competitions that punters never do, opening himself up to the fanbase to sign autographs and such. The guy is just exactly what you want to cheer for.

No. Apparently, you're the challenged one. What I suggested was.... you post a topic stating "The Problem with this Franchise... ...is that there's not much continuity." Then in your initial post you suggest a litany of changes that have occurred, most of which prior to the current management. Then follow that up with continued suggestions that we need a new FO and HC with experience. So, you state we need continuity; but then you suggest we should bring in new personnel to fix the problems on the team. Can you not see the confusion there? The fact is... we currently have and are building considerable continuity on this team. Brandon has been here for quite a few years and was essentially Marv's right hand man (supposedly learning the job) for 2 years. Jauron has been the HC for 3 years now. Turk was promoted to OC, why? To provide continuity on the offense. Yes, we changed QBs but that was (arguably) the best decision for the team to be a winner. Many of the other positions (OL, CB, S, DE) have the same guys now for 2 or more years. So how is that not building continuity? So no, I'm not suggesting we hire anyone. I'm suggesting that you don't build continuity and stability by changing your FO and HC every 2 years because they haven't made it to the playoffs.

I'm not a big blog reader, but Moorman has a good sense of humor and seems to really enjoy his time with the fans. Gotta love this guy! Never thought I'd say a punter is one of my favorite football players. Brian Moorman Blog "Let's just say the Apple TV will be hard to beat, but Gibran Hamdan and Rian Lindell are multi-talented." Even Moorman recognizes the Chroise!

No need to read further. This post is spot on, IMO (especially the bolded part). We see it all the time - rookies signed to enormous contracts, FAs signed to big contracts, and the current guys being underpaid. However, they get paid when their turn comes. Peters is no exception. Yes, he's grossly underpaid. However, another great year and the Bills would have almost certainly made him one of the highest paid Linemen in the game. Everything in the FOs recent history suggests that. The holdout and complete lack of communication is puzzling to say the least.

Yes, and Schobel was in camp, in the OTAs, singing the team's praises the whole time negotiations were going on. He wasn't a no show for an entire off season. Not to mention, he was the big contract this year. My guess, and that's all it is, is that the Bills FO were planning for Evans to be the big contract this year and Peters to be next.

Bill, myself, and probably every poster on this board (certainly the majority) agree with you that Peters is the best or one of the best players on the team AND that he's a key to our success this season. However, you can't just let a player do whatever he wants, disregard all organized team activities, and then open the bank vault for him. I assure you if they do, what would stop Evans from saying the same thing and sitting out? Evans is just as critical to our success this year and he's in the final year of his contract. Should he just go home and refuse to talk to anyone until he gets a new contract? What about Trent after he has a great year behind Peters? Should he too sit at home and just expect to be paid? Peters is good. Everyone knows it. But, he's not in any position yet to not show up to any OTA or Camp and expect the FO to pay him. I'll go so far as to say no FO in the league would do that. Look no further than the Hester situation or the Jackson situation. So this isn't a case of the FO mishandling Peters. It's a case of Peters thinking of himself first and the team last. For that, he has alot of ground to make up in this fan's opinion. I know it's the new thing to re-sign players before their contract expires, but do we really have to rework contracts every 2 years? I'd imagine that's what the FO is thinking - its certainly what I'm thinking.

I'm not sure I would agree with this. In today's era, you build a team through the draft and through free agency. The Bills have drafted some and signed more FA linemen the last few years. Whether they overpaid for these free agents or not is inconsequential to the point. And the point is... the Bills needed to address the lines and in the last couple of off seasons they have. Now, as some may suggest... So obviously, the FO has had mixed results. You could argue that they've brought in some poor choices. And, yes, that they paid some too much. However, again, the point is... they needed to address the lines. And they have each off season. The additions of Stroud and Johnson, for example, are yet a continuance of attempting to solidify the lines. It appears many posters just disagree with the manner in which the FO has addressed the lines. But that should be a different debate... is it better to draft linemen or sign FA linemen? I would suggest the Bills think FAs are the better option. Of course, many disagree with the personnel they've brought in as well. And that's certainly understandable in some instances. However, once again, I say you have to at least acknowledge the effort. Without taking the time to do the research (because its late and I'm tired), I would guess we've brought in more linemen (Draftees and FAs) over they last 3 off seasons, then TD brought in, in 5 years. Hence, I'd suggest that bashing the FO for not building the lines is inappropriate. Certainly there's something else we could bash them about... being sexists? racists? encouraging the mowing down of Canadians? something.