Dan

OOORRRRR...... maybe he's dead and that's why no one has heard from him. He probably went hiking and fell off a cliff into a deep ravine and after a few weeks of living off the berries around him as he lay there with 2 broken legs a mountain lion came by and ate him.

Hamdan doesn't need a LT either. His Chroise is his protection.

I think the proper response was.... why was the picks they already have one of the league's best LT's signed for 3 more years who would have guessed that Peters is selfish and has an over inflated view of himself

Exactly! Plus to those railing on the FO.... what did you say 2 years ago when they gave a nice fat raise and extension to a rather unproven guy? You loved them for the move, I'll bet. We had just locked up a future probowler to a very reasonable salary. Now, after 2 years, that player that we were so happy to have has decided he wants even more. And you blame the FO for not giving in? Incredible really. I asked this in another thread, but what do you do if 1 or more of our other young players with multiple years still on his contract has a probowl year? Do you extend them all and give them top 5 pay because they want it?

I think he'd be getting more sympathy if he was in camp.

Brandon appeared to express a willingness to discuss a new contract with Peters provided he reported to camp and was practicing with the rest of his teammates. "I think we have a proven track record of trying to get guys done and extending guys out," said Brandon. "There'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." http://buffalobills.com/news/news.jsp?news_id=6255 That pretty much sums it all up. The Bills will give Peters his money. You can't blame the front office. Its beginning to seem more and more like Peters just doesn't want to be in Buffalo. I know people will use that as another reason to rag Brandon and company, but how can you when he's said quite plainly that he's willing to work on a new contract, if Peters sis willing to work with his teammates?

And that, for me, is the slippery slope here. Is Peters invaluable to the team? Yes. As a Probowl LT, should he get a nice big raise? Yes. However.... he just signed a new contract and has 3 years left on it. He's had one good year as a LT. Now, he wants yet another contract? The problem here is if the Bills renegotiate, they run a big risk of every young player on the team (which there happens to be alot of) screaming for a new contract if they have a good year. What if Whitner, Poz, Lynch and Trent all have great years and become alternates to the Probowl? Do they all deserve big pay raises and new contracts as well? What if Greer really steps it up and shuts down Randy Moss in 2 games? Does he get a new contract? What if Peters gets a new contract and then has 2 more solid, probowl years and he's the unquestioned best LT in the game? Does he get yet another newer, bigger contract? We all know NFL contracts are rewritten every year, but few are renegotiated so quickly. So, to me, it seems Peters is pushing the hard line a year too soon. Another Probowl type year, then with just 2 years remaining and there's no doubt his contract is reworked, ala Schobel and Kelsay. In other words, I'm squarely in the camp of Peters is at fault for seemingly thinking only of himself and not of the team. And if that's his attitude, then maybe we haven't found the great LT we all thought we had.

Brilliant response! Let's just eliminate half of the counter argument because it suits my purposes better. Followed right up with: Because we all know the length and quality of a Wikipedia entry correlates with a person's accomplishments and contribution to the world. Again, excellent response. I believe your work here is done.

That's kinda how I see it. I'm not sure what this "holdout" is supposed to be doing. The recent Bills management have shown with the recent signings and re-signings of players that they will, indeed, show you the money.... if you're good and fit in with the Bills' plans. Peters is obviously good, but all this is doing is showing that he's a me first player and not a team first player. And those are the guys less likely to get paid.

Why do people keep bringing this up. Ralph has kept the franchise in Buffalo for nearly 50 years. Is that not long term? He has said it will not move while he's alive. Is that not enough of a commitment? People are upset because he won't sell the team to someone to ensure they stay here after he dies. The problem with that is there is no guarantee, what so ever, that any new buyer - local or not - will keep the team in Buffalo. The only way to guarantee the team stay in Buffalo is for Ralph to continue to own it and stand his ground about not moving. Which he has done. Lori (I believe) posted an archived SI article a while back referring to the Bills as a potential relocation team back in the early 70's. I can just imagine people complaining then that Ralph should do something to keep the team in Buffalo. Well... he has and continues to. To ask more of him is to be the spoiled rich kid that just got a Benz and complains because it's not a Porsche. I suggest that if anyone wants to ensure the Bills remain in Buffalo after Ralph's death, they should just go buy the team. Because if anyone else buys it, there's no guarantee of anything. Period.

I would suggest that its not so much he likes one player, coach or team more than any other. He just wants to argue. Hence if you read many of those 72 posts today, you'll see a wide variety of opinions all baseless and stated in a manner to elicit confrontational argumentation. Look no further than this thread... it took 4 pages for him to finally admit, "It's not as if JP is gonna take us to the moon and back. We're not making the playoffs this year so who really cares." However, we still have post after post degrading our starting QB in favor of someone he doesn't even think is good. Trollish indeed.

I can live with that. Certainly, I didn't think last year's offense would have been so miserable going into the season. Which is what puzzles me so much about last season. I know that several factors came together for the ineptitude that wreaked on the field. But, certainly a good portion of it was play calling; which was almost solely on the shoulders of Fairchild. In the 2 games (Bengals and Dolphins) that we appeared to have a good game plan, the players responded quite well. But, where was that in the other 14 games? How many times did we all see the run package come out on first down, then the defense move into the box, then we get stuffed for little or no gain ? That's got to be on the OC, not the players, IMO.

In this instance, I would think that replacing Fairchild with the mascot would yield a better offense. Our offense was miserable last year, partly because of the players. However, primarily because Fairchild literally appeared to be standing on the sidelines with a copy of Football for Dummies. When you hear commetnts like, "we practiced plays all week, but never used them in the game" you can only conclude that Fairchild was inept, at best. Couple that with a complete lack of situational awareness, a complete lack of understanding your player's strengths, and what do you have - complete incompetence. So, yes, there are plenty of question marks with regards to the players improving or not. And much of our season will depend upon Edwards continued improvement; the ability of Hardy to contribute, etc. However, there is no doubt that Schonert will be better than Fairchild. Will he be the best OC in the league, perhaps not, but better than Fairchild, yes.

This post pretty well sums up your very biased view that everything the Bills do is bad and everything the the other team does is good. You say... "we weren't really that much better than the Jets and Fins." So, how do you explain us beating both of those teams twice in one season? "They nearly beat us" is your argument; therefore, we're not much better than they were. However you further reinforce this negative stance when you bring up the Ravens and Skins. We beat a playoff team and rather than conclude that was a good thing; you state we almost lost. So, by that logic are the Giants bad because they almost lost to the Bills? What about the Browns, they barely beat the lowly Bills? How could either of those teams be playoff caliber, let alone Superbowl contenders if they almost lose to a team as bad a Buffalo? For that matter the Cowboys, a 13-3 team, almost lost to the Bills and needed a last second miracle to not lose. They must really suck. Why can't you give the Bills credit for anything? Despite the injuries, they were a competitive team that took several playoff teams to the wire and won most of the games they should have won. Those are positives. And I bring up the injury thing, because you so easily want to dismiss it. But, I ask you.. please name the last team that had 17 players (starters or not) on IR and were even competitive let alone in a position to make the playoffs in the last month of the season. Please. Regardless of what you want to say, when nearly 1/3 of your opening day roster does not see the season end, its far more likely that you'll end up with the Dolphins' record than the Bills' record. And that is precisely why so many people give Jauron and the Bills credit for last season and expect good things in the upcoming one. Will we have a good season? I don't know. But, I hope we do. Perhaps I'm not a "realist" as you are? Perhaps I don't see the team for how bad they really are, as you do, but rather for how good they can become? Perhaps I'm just a fan of a team with a dream.

no thanks needed.

Hamdan does indeed still Rock!

... if Hamdan plays, the league shuts down as all QB and scoring records are shattered. The rest of the league realizes there's little to play for now that they've seen the Chroise. We win all Superbowls from now on by default because Haman smites any that would take the field against him.

I couldn't disagree more. Why should kids be praised for anything and everything they do? Just because they're kids and we want to encourage and support them? I say... no. All that does is perpetuate mediocrity and give them a false image of the real world. Hold them to a higher measure and they'll be stronger for it. First of all, any person, big or small, should be held to the same standard by the paper. I don't know if this is an editorial or what, but it should be. He's only writing his thoughts on the matter. And, if I may say so, his thoughts are reflective of a 15 year old that doesn't know much about how the world really works. Perhaps I sound jaded, but that's reality. "Why didn’t he step forward and confess that he was driving the car that hit Kimberly Shpeley if he unknowingly struck her as he claims?" Although this is a nice notion and sounds all rosey and good. The reality is... if any person, Lynch or not, comes out and does that, they would be legally crucified, and cost themselves millions (perhaps) of dollars. My immediate thought is.. does this kid confess all his actions to his parents every day? Does he come home from a party and say wow Mom I got loaded last night jumped into a pool naked or whatever it is he may do. My guess is not. Why? Because no one openly and readily admits all guilt and then awaits punishment to the fullest extent possible. Bottom line: We all have opinions. None are necessarily right or wrong. They're just opinions. I think it important to remember that. I can only assume that this article was printed in an opinions section of the paper. If so, the only problem I would see is that its typically good to print a counter opinion as well.

63 to 37, in favor of Poe. Is that the best we can do?

With a few more posters like this and maybe TBD will go to the message board Superbowl.

Are we talkin about the Pats* now?

I'd disagree.

Well, I'm certainly a punk. But that really has no bearing on the discussion. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that Lynch played the entire incident perfectly. Most certainly, he should have stopped. I could even go further and say he probably shouldn't have even been driving. However, what I was referring to was.... upon realizing he screwed up, he did what he should do. Contact the team, contact his lawyer. Take their advice, i.e. shut up and let them deal with the police/DA. And keep it out of the press as much as possible. As far as the league is concerned, I would guess they'd prefer all players handle their legal issues like this - as opposed to addressing the media and turning the whole thing into a circus.

I would offer that "league-wise" Lynch did exactly what they would want. Upon waking up the next morning, his first contact is presumably to have been with the team, then his lawyer (perhaps the other way around). He took their advice and did exactly as he was told - nothing. Because of that, it's not been blown up in the national media and most people around the country don't know anything about it. If he would have come out the next day, addressed the media and publicly owned up to it, as people have suggested, this thing would have been all over ESPN and NFL Network and would be twice the story that it is. Consequently, the league would look much worse. IMO, Lynch did exactly what he should do. He called a good lawyer. He called the team's security guy. He did exactly as he was advised by these people. Now it's about to be resolved, rather quietly for the league.

So everyone IS drunk at 3:30am on Chppewa? I have a very good friend who routinely hangs at the bar with us all night and never drinks a drop. Assuming he was drunk is just as erroneous and assuming he was sober.