2020 Our Year For Sure

Dibs FTW [/spam]

Are we no longer calling them PeePee?

If he walks then he walks. Life goes on. If he's willing to walk away, his heart couldn't have been in it anyway.

Yes, I want the Bills to develop a rep as harda** negotiators...regarding holdouts. This team is willing to spend coin, and it will take care of it's players when its deserved. We all know that, and its at least as true here as it is anywhere else. There's no problem with the lucrative extensions continuing for players who have outperformed their deal. It helps morale, it gives other players a goal to work for, and most importantly its flat-out necessary to build a good roster. What I (and I daresay a few others) would like to see is exactly what we've seen to date: management drawing a line in the sand when it comes to holdouts. Paint a picture for players that there's only one way to get the money you want out of this team: by working your tail off for it. If you want to pout in the corner, you can sit and pout your livelihood away as far as we're concerned. We own your rights until WE decide otherwise, so you can either show up and play football or retire. In a holdout situation, the team is the one with all the leverage. I wouldn't want to see the Bills give up that advantageous position. Players can look at what has happened for guys like Schobel and soon-to-be Evans, and they can look at Peters, who either a) ultimately ended his holdout by reporting to the team with his tail between his legs, having gained nothing from holding out except hurting his own performance (and therefore his earning potential) by missing practice and/or game time, or b) ultimately did not end his holdout, and eventually retired. They can compare the outcome that Peters achieved to the outcome Evans/Schobel achieved, and from that hopefully take the course of action we all want them to take. Other than holdouts, we're completely in agreement. Nobody wants to root for a team thats percieved as "cheap." But ask Derrick Dockery, Langston Walker, Ryan Denney, Chris Kelsay, Aaron Schobel and others: this team is perfectly willing to pay players who deserve it.

Too true.

Funny how there's this big change in the offensive gameplan just as there's a change in the offensive coordinator. It couldn't be that Jauron hires his coordinator, and then trusts his guy and allows him to do what he thinks is best...could it? Nawwwww, couldn't be. The timing of the overhaul in gameplan coinciding perfectly with a new offensive coordinator is 100% coincidence. Let's see what they do in the regular season. I think the offense will be a good deal more "open" than it was last year...but it won't be because Jauron suddenly changed his philosophy. It'll be the difference between Steve Fairchild and Turk Schonert.

Would he do push-ups on his driveway?

Ending the practice of holding out leaguewide isn't my goal. But this hardball stance in this administration's first dealings with a true holdout, paired with the numerous lucrative extensions they've given to players who used opposite tacts, can cause a reputation to spread around the league. He's clearly worth more than he's due to make now, no question. But my guess is he's asking to be paid as the top LT in the league, and very possibly one of the top overall players in the league. Is he worth that now, after a year and a half of high calibre play? I think that is the crux of the debate. If he had come in and worked his tail off, had a season similar to last year and made another Pro Bowl, I'd be open to giving him the mega deal he's likely asking for. Some of us feel he needs another year of quality play under his belt to be given one of the richest deals leaguewide. Keep in mind, he's likely not just asking for a raise, he's probably asking for a landmark, blockbuster-type deal. My guess is top-5 in the league in annual salary, and one of the biggest 'guaranteed' figures the league has ever seen.

If it were this fan's call (and thank god it isn't, cause what do I know), I'd absolutely let him sit out and ruin his career. If he doesn't play for the Bills, we shouldn't give him what he wants and let him play elsewhere. You don't reward this kind of behavior because it sets a poor precedent. Make it seem to other players that there's only one avenue to getting the money you want: working for it. If Peters continues to sit out (which I doubt he will) he should be made an example of. "This is what happens when you sit out: you either ultimately end your holdout without accomplishing anything other than hurting your own performance- and therefore your earning potential- by missing practice time, or you ultimately don't end your holdout, and your career is over. And you all saw what happened to Jason Peters, so you know it doesn't even matter how good you are." The Bills own Peters' rights until he plays three seasons for us. The team holds all the cards. He can play football for the Buffalo Bills, or he can retire. Once Jason understands that reality, there's really only one choice he can make...

Gettin' close, fellas!

No. It really isn't. You're the second person in this thread with an inability to count to one...

You're talking about ONE F*CKING PLAYER. Just a friendly reminder, one player (especially someone who most likely isn't hall-of-fame calibre) won't be the difference between a good team and a bad team. Walker isn't Peters, but he's functional. Chambers isn't Walker, but he will get by. Again: you're talking about ONE GOD DAMN PLAYER. I'm surprised you're taking this 'SKY IS FALLING!!!!!11' stance here, Kelly. You're smarter than this.

How so? If Peters never reports, the clock never starts on the 3 years remaining on his deal...meaning if he never comes back to the Bills, his career is over. Finished. All the Bills would do is get by the best they can now, and try to replace him in the offseason. This Bills franchise will go on without Jason Peters. However, Peters' career will end without the Bills. I really don't see how the Bills need Peters more than Peters needs the Bills. Peters' ONLY option is to play for the Buffalo Bills. But when the offseason comes around, the Bills will have a virtually unlimited amount of options to replace him with. Will they all be Pro Bowlers? Of course not. But you don't need a Pro Bowler at every position to win in this league. The Bills should move on as if Peters never existed, and if he reports at some point, think of it as a pleasant surprise. He can come play some football, or he can waste away the prime of his career...either way, the Bills don't have to do ANYTHING. In other words, the Bills have all the leverage.

Really? Thats good news then. Maybe we can get Ellis for McKelvin!

Uh, yeah. Someone else brought that play up, not me. Vet is trying to say Jauron is a bad head coach because he had to call a timeout in order to make the right call. I took issue with that opinion. Thats it. Nobody's trying to say its this ballsy, gung-ho Pattonesque decision...just that its the right one, and it shouldn't matter to a Bills fan whether or not a timeout was used to set up one of the biggest plays of an eventual win.

Do you ACTUALLY think Jauron only went for it because of the fans? A Yale graduate, who has spent 30+ seasons in the NFL, is deferring to a bunch of drunks? Thats your opinion?

Seriously. You said it better than I could have. 'Vet, I just don't know how to answer that. I'm saying Jauron isn't the tentative, conservative coach people claim he is...and you come back saying real-world examples don't support my stance...and then you point to an instance where Jauron made the right call...and better yet, you agree that Jauron made the right call. I'm speechless.

So...whats your complaint? You're right. Good thing our head coach isn't too conservative to go for it.

Ask Mularkey...

On the contrary... Everyone knows the offense was a disgrace. I wouldn't try to change that. But if Jauron was the timid and nervous head coach many claim he is, he wouldn't have the sack to go for it on 4th down more often than 21 other head coaches, despite being 27th in time of possession. He'd settle for field goals. And he wouldn't . Jauron simply isn't the coach his haters dream that he is.

Another thing...where is this conservative, play-not-to-lose label coming from? I remember a team that would forego field goals in order to go for it on 4th down as early as the 1st quarter of games. I remember a team that, in last year's season opener against Denver, attempted a deep ball to Evans on a 3rd and short to try to win the game right there, rather than try to grind out a 1st down and keep the clock moving. The OPINIONS are that Jauron is a conservative, timid, almost nervous and fearful coach, and runs his team accordingly. The FACTS are that last season, his team had the 11th most 4th down attempts despite being 27th in total time of possession. Taking more risks than the majority despite less chances to take them...how does that fit the "58 minutes of 'don't lose' ball" mold that many of his detractors repeatedly tell us he falls into?

Please explain how "firing the guy running the show and making 100% of the decisions" equates to "little to no effort to correct the problem." Thank you.

Doesn't get more unfounded than that...

And the NFL isn't even the only football programming available.