Malazan Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 Really I'm just trying to look on the bright side because I think the team mishandled the Peters situation from the start, and all they can do now is try to gain some benefit. I'm curious about this opinion. Peters was under contract. They redid his contract for a significant pay raise. Then Peters wanted the contract re-done *again*. How is this reasonable? It's not like he was even saying, "Hey, give me a moderate increase and we'll tack on a couple years at 6-8 million so I get an immediate raise and the team gets a couple years." He wanted 10 million a year. He's got it. We'll see how it ends up for the Eagles, but for the Bills it was a much worse move. Also, Pro Bowls have nothing to do with performance.
MRW Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 I'm curious about this opinion. Peters was under contract. They redid his contract for a significant pay raise. Then Peters wanted the contract re-done *again*. How is this reasonable? It's not like he was even saying, "Hey, give me a moderate increase and we'll tack on a couple years at 6-8 million so I get an immediate raise and the team gets a couple years." He wanted 10 million a year. He's got it. We'll see how it ends up for the Eagles, but for the Bills it was a much worse move. Also, Pro Bowls have nothing to do with performance. Reasonable - Peters came in as an undrafted free agent, worked his way onto the line at RT, and got paid like a good RT. When he was switched over to LT and hailed as already a great player and one of the most promising young players at that position, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect to be paid like one. I think people are lying to themselves if they think they'd just accept a situation where they were not paid the going rate for the job they're doing. You can dislike how Peters conducted himself, but the truth is that's the only leverage he had. And he got every damn thing he wanted out of it - I guess the only question is was it the Bills or the Eagles who were played for suckers? Personally I think it's the Bills. They had an opportunity to earn his goodwill but instead chose to play hardball and burn their bridges. As far as Pro Bowls? They're not perfectly tied to performance, but I think it's more wrong to say they have nothing to do with performance than that they are solely based on performance.
ChasBB Posted November 19, 2009 Posted November 19, 2009 The guy does not want to play in Buffalo -- this is a stupid question -- it's irrelevant.
Malazan Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 I think people are lying to themselves if they think they'd just accept a situation where they were not paid the going rate for the job they're doing. You seem to have missed/ignore the point. We'll bypass the argument hat because the Bills drafted him as a tight end, paid him, converted him to the right tackle, groomed him at it and put him in a position to make more money that they should expect that he'd play out a contract. I don't mean two contracts...just one. As it stands, Jason Peters has not played out (completed) *one* contract in the NFL. As it stands, Jason Peters has not played out (completed) *one* contract in the NFL. In case you missed it, Jason Peters has not completed any contract he has ever signed in the NFL (cell phone contract for his phone information is still pending). However, back to my point. He wasn't demanding a raise which was in order. He wasn't demanded to be the highest paid lineman / player on the team. He was demanding to be the highest paid Left Tackle in the entire league. He got it, good for him. His contract is now nearly three million more per year than a five time pro bowler at the same position who's the next highest paid. That's five pro-bowls. Jason Peters makes 11 million a season. The next highest paid person at his position is makes 7.1 million (last I knew, it may have changed this season). He's a good tackle, but hardly a game changer. Three million more would get you Peyton Manning. Peters makes more than Tom Brady. He's a once in a lifetime talent that's not all too interested in using it. Yes, he's a big upgrade over what the Bills have, but one of the things they have going for them is that they're not saddled with a lot of dead money from ridiculous contracts. Peters contract was not worth his production on a team not going anywhere. The Eagles felt he was worth it. The Eagles feel they're close to being a contender. They're wrong, but they felt strongly enough about it tp get him. He's there's for another six years. Maybe it will work out for them, but there's a lot you can do with 11 million dollars a year. I'd get a journeyman LT and Tom Brady for that price. The Bills have a horrible situation on their line. Peter's can't get motivated in Philly and you think Dick Jauron was gonna get him going? Seriously? You thought Dick Jauron was going to motivate someone not taking massive amount of speed?
The Senator Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 If the trade deadline hadn't passed yet and Philly called Russ and offered Peters for Eric Wood and Shawn Nelson would you want Russ to Get'r done? Even though the Bills desperately need a tackle I'd still say no. The two players the Bills got are worth more than Peters to me. Wood is a stud and Nelson shows a lot of promise. JMO Two future o-line studs for an overpaid, fat, lazy, injury-prone, washed-up LT with no heart and a big attitude problem? Are you freaking crazy??? I'll bet the Eagles would jump at that trade!
The Senator Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 The trade isn't finished yet. Most likely it will go like this: Bills get: 1) Wood 2) Nelson 3) a 6th rounder next draft Bills give up: 1) Peters 2) a first-round draft pick in the next two years which they use to get a decent LT to replace Peters Or, the Bills might find a talented LT that no thought highly enough about to use even a 7th-round pick, like they did with Peters. Nice reach, BTW, but using your own first round pick to draft a player is not "giving up a first-round pick". So, with that minor correction, I think you just described a fantastic trade for the Bills - a 3-for-1 deal where we get 3 promising young players, and the Eagles got an aging, overpaid, fat, lazy, injury-prone, washed-up LT with no heart and a big attitude problem - whom they already seem unhappy with.
MRW Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 You seem to have missed/ignore the point. We'll bypass the argument hat because the Bills drafted him as a tight end, paid him, converted him to the right tackle, groomed him at it and put him in a position to make more money that they should expect that he'd play out a contract. I don't mean two contracts...just one. As it stands, Jason Peters has not played out (completed) *one* contract in the NFL. As it stands, Jason Peters has not played out (completed) *one* contract in the NFL. In case you missed it, Jason Peters has not completed any contract he has ever signed in the NFL (cell phone contract for his phone information is still pending). I find this completely unremarkable. Good players get their contracts renegotiated. It's the way things work in the NFL. And if someone goes from UDFA TE, to starting RT, to starting LT, to Pro Bowl LT, I think several renegotiations are in order. However, back to my point. He wasn't demanding a raise which was in order. He wasn't demanded to be the highest paid lineman / player on the team. He was demanding to be the highest paid Left Tackle in the entire league. He got it, good for him. His contract is now nearly three million more per year than a five time pro bowler at the same position who's the next highest paid. That's five pro-bowls. Jason Peters makes 11 million a season. The next highest paid person at his position is makes 7.1 million (last I knew, it may have changed this season). Peters is not the highest paid tackle in the NFL. Jake Long, before playing an NFL snap, got a contract worth $11.5 million a year. Also, the only numbers I saw for Peters' new contract were 6 years, $60 million. That's just off Wikipedia, though, because I'm not interested in digging for any kind of authoritative source. If you have other information I'd be interested to see it. At any rate, I expect that over the next couple of years you will see several LT contracts which are comparable or surpass Peters'. He's a good tackle, but hardly a game changer. Three million more would get you Peyton Manning. Peters makes more than Tom Brady. He's a once in a lifetime talent that's not all too interested in using it. Yes, he's a big upgrade over what the Bills have, but one of the things they have going for them is that they're not saddled with a lot of dead money from ridiculous contracts. Peters contract was not worth his production on a team not going anywhere. The Eagles felt he was worth it. The Eagles feel they're close to being a contender. They're wrong, but they felt strongly enough about it tp get him. He's there's for another six years. Maybe it will work out for them, but there's a lot you can do with 11 million dollars a year. I'd get a journeyman LT and Tom Brady for that price. So, you'd go down to the Tom Brady store and get one? I think it's pretty optimistic to send Peters packing and make an assumption that you can use the money you save to get a HOF QB. By the way, I wouldn't be all that disgruntled if the Bills had taken that money and gotten a journeyman LT. Instead they chose not to make a move to replace Peters with... well, anyone, as far as I could tell. The Bills have a horrible situation on their line. Peter's can't get motivated in Philly and you think Dick Jauron was gonna get him going? Seriously? You thought Dick Jauron was going to motivate someone not taking massive amount of speed? Jason Peters at 50% motivation is so much better than what the Bills have put out there at OT this year it's not even funny. Not sure what Jauron has to do with it. I hope to hell the Bills haven't been making their personnel decisions based on finding guys who can overcome his crappy coaching.
Orton's Arm Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 Two future o-line studs for an overpaid, fat, lazy, injury-prone, washed-up LT with no heart and a big attitude problem? Are you freaking crazy??? I'll bet the Eagles would jump at that trade! There's some truth to what you're saying here (though Nelson is a TE, not an o-line stud). Peters has the talent to be among the very best LTs in the league. But I'm concerned about his motivation, his desire, his "how much have you paid me lately?" attitude. A guy like that seems like he might stop trying, or not try as hard, once he'd managed to cash in big time. Wood and Nelson are young, promising players who ought to be solid parts of this franchise for many long years to come. As football players, each stands a very good chance of being as good as Peters. Not because they have his level of talent, but because they get the most out of the talent they do have. There are two things that bug me though. One is that the LT position is a lot harder to fill than either an offensive guard slot or the TE position. The other is that there isn't even a backup-level LT on the roster. I realize that Edwards has very little, and Fitzpatrick no, chance of being the long-term answer at QB. But that doesn't mean I want to see either guy in a coma! Which is exactly what we will witness unless the LT position is addressed. Once that gaping hole has been plugged, the Bills will seem a little less like the Titanic. And I'll probably end up feeling more positive about the Peters trade than I do now.
Thurman#1 Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 Or, the Bills might find a talented LT that no thought highly enough about to use even a 7th-round pick, like they did with Peters. Nice reach, BTW, but using your own first round pick to draft a player is not "giving up a first-round pick". So, with that minor correction, I think you just described a fantastic trade for the Bills - a 3-for-1 deal where we get 3 promising young players, and the Eagles got an aging, overpaid, fat, lazy, injury-prone, washed-up LT with no heart and a big attitude problem - whom they already seem unhappy with. Nice reach yourself, dude. If you live in a place where you really need a car to get around (like teams need an LT), and you sell your car for a good price without bothering to think about the cost of buying a new car which you will absolutely need, that makes you a bonehead, a serious bonehead. We will almost certainly have to draft an LT with our first round pick in the next two years. That will be a pick which we could have used to pick up a player at another position which we have huge needs at. Replacing Peters is absolutely going to be a part of the price of this trade. If Bell had worked out, this might have been a pretty good trade. Bell is one of the worst OLs in the league right now. So picking up a replacement should absolutely be included in the pluses and minuses. And Philly is thrilled with Peters. Still. It cracks me up, because there are about ten haters - and you're one, Senny - on the Buffalo Bills boards running around saying how Philly is unhappy, but none of them can produce any proof from Philly sources. But the fact that a few Bills haters hate Peters is enough proof for you and yours that everyone else hates him too. Good deal for Philly. Very bad one for the Bills when you throw in replacement cost.
phillyrich Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 A comment was made by "benderbender" and I am adding on. Although Jason Peters is an awesome talent, he proved in Buffalo and now here in Philly that he is doesn't give a crap about accountability to his team mates. Two cases come to mind that really, really hurt the Eagles this year: Oakland. Peters get carted off the field, taken in to the XRay room. The announcers obviously feel the knee injury is something way serious. The game goes on, the Eagles line is getting whipped pretty badly by Rich Seymour and his boys. 4th quarter, low and behold, look who is STANDING on the sideline. Jason Peters. Someone help me understand how an $11M player gets carted off the field then is physically fit to stand on the sideline and watch his team mates almost put Donovan McNabb in his grave. San Diego. Peters inactive. Although the Eagles pass protected well, c'mon, a player I want to pay $11M to will find a way to work through injuries and pay against the best of the best, like Rich Seymour and Shawn Merriman. There is no doubting his talent level. However, i like ot think that if a player is not drafted, there is a reason for it. it would appear that jason Peters only wants to play when he feels like playing.
Red Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 Not in my opinion! Don't forget they also got a draft pick from Philly that they used to select Shawn Nelson. That makes it even sweeter. Nelson looks like he may be the real deal for a change.
The Senator Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 There's some truth to what you're saying here (though Nelson is a TE, not an o-line stud). Peters has the talent to be among the very best LTs in the league. But I'm concerned about his motivation, his desire, his "how much have you paid me lately?" attitude. A guy like that seems like he might stop trying, or not try as hard, once he'd managed to cash in big time. Wood and Nelson are young, promising players who ought to be solid parts of this franchise for many long years to come. As football players, each stands a very good chance of being as good as Peters. Not because they have his level of talent, but because they get the most out of the talent they do have. There are two things that bug me though. One is that the LT position is a lot harder to fill than either an offensive guard slot or the TE position. The other is that there isn't even a backup-level LT on the roster. I realize that Edwards has very little, and Fitzpatrick no, chance of being the long-term answer at QB. But that doesn't mean I want to see either guy in a coma! Which is exactly what we will witness unless the LT position is addressed. Once that gaping hole has been plugged, the Bills will seem a little less like the Titanic. And I'll probably end up feeling more positive about the Peters trade than I do now. I don't disagree at all that the Bills should have taken Oher with their #1 pick last April - but that WOULD NOT have been giving up a 1st-round pick, it would have been using our 1st round pick to draft a player. If we draft a QB in April, are we 'giving up' a first round pick for that QB? By your way of explanation, we're 'giving up' all of our draft picks on the players we select! Are you really that dense, or do you just have an overwhelming need to be right about your inexplicable love for Peters?
thewildrabbit Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 I'm just a football fan and an average schmo who sorta has an idea of how things should work on an NFL team. Stating that, I see real morons running the Buffalo Bills because of the azz backwards way they do things. Dick Jauron stated he wanted to win NOW, and with everything he did he seemed to shoot himself in the foot over and over. Continuity is a major key to building an offensive line and every year Jauron was in Buffalo he would overhaul it and replace a few players, only to see them fail as badly as the players they replaced. Last season he retooled the entire line and installed 3 rookies, to be honest 4 rookies as Bell didn't have much playing time The LT position is usually the hardest to fill because it protects the QB's blind side and requires a player with special talent, hence the higher salary. I think the Bills coaching staff honestly thought Langston Walker could get the job done at LT so they didn't draft a tackle or get one as a FA, kinda odd though considering most of the world knew the guy was overweight and slow footed. So then they cut him because he can't get to the line fast enough to run the no huddle, which the Bills scrapped earlier this year. Makes no sense to me as at least Walker could have held down the RT spot and the Bills would have more bodies to put in at LT. BTW, I think the real problem with Jason Peters is when his Line coach Jim McNally retired and Jauron replaced him with the assistant who had never been a line coach previous to that point. If the Bills had hired an experienced line coach to replace McNally, I think Peters and the entire line would have performed better and Jauron wouldn't have made such stupid decisions about free agents the Bills brought in. Coaching is everything in the NFL! Not for nothing but spending a 1st and 2nd pick on guards is about the lamest thing ever, both might be good players but you can usually find good guards in the 3rd 4th round,You spend 1st -2nd picks on tackles. Jauron knew how to run a defensive secondary and little else about the rest of the team JMO. His biggest failure as head coach was the assistants he hired were usually promoted from within the org and rookies, and it got him fired. Truly, the blind leading the blind.
truth on hold Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 i dont like losing a good LT, especially since our replacements have been busts since butler went down. but truth is peters was never the same after the groin injury against giants. add to that he didnt want to play here and it was the right call letting him go given the money he wanted. and theres no way he should have been in pro bowl last year either. that was a fluke
PromoTheRobot Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 i dont like losing a good LT, especially since our replacements have been busts since butler went down. but truth is peters was never the same after the groin injury against giants. add to that he didnt want to play here and it was the right call letting him go given the money he wanted. and theres no way he should have been in pro bowl last year either. that was a fluke The Bills should have done more to replace Peters. But keeping him and caving into his demands would have been a bigger disaster. Just look at him in Philly. Fans and writers are already starting to think the Bills fleeced the Eagles. PTR
Phlegm Alley Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 Living here in Philly, I hear about the Peters' acquisition all the time, and the Eagles fans haven't been happy with his play at all. I think this team is better off long term with Wood and Nelson anyways partly because I believe Wood is going to be one of the best G/C in the game in a few years while Peters has been plagued with inconsistent play. I do agree with PTR, that even though the Bills may have made the right decision to trade Peters, they didn't have a viable replacement on the roster and they didn't address the vacancy in the draft or free agency. If the talent evaluators on this team really thought that Walker or Bell was going to be an ample replacement, then this organization has larger problems.
Jerry Jabber Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 No one is denying Peters was a very good LT. But, he wanted to be paid over $12 million a year and that wasn't gonna happen. If we get 2 good tackles either draft or via free agency, then will will have a solid offensive line. I like the drafts of Wood, Levitre & Nelson and think they will be good NFL players for a long time. I had no problem with the trade of Peters, I didn't like the boneheaded decisions of switching our RT to LT, then cutting him 10 days before the start of the season. They should have put Walker back at RT. If Levitre pans out at LT, maybe they could give Bell a shot at guard (when he's healthy).
Jerry Jabber Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 Living here in Philly, I hear about the Peters' acquisition all the time, and the Eagles fans haven't been happy with his play at all. I think this team is better off long term with Wood and Nelson anyways partly because I believe Wood is going to be one of the best G/C in the game in a few years while Peters has been plagued with inconsistent play. I do agree with PTR, that even though the Bills may have made the right decision to trade Peters, they didn't have a viable replacement on the roster and they didn't address the vacancy in the draft or free agency. If the talent evaluators on this team really thought that Walker or Bell was going to be an ample replacement, then this organization has larger problems. I agree. Walker should have stayed at RT and we should have either drafted a LT ot picked up one via FA. Right now, Bell is a backup at best.
Malazan Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 Jason Peters at 50% motivation is so much better than what the Bills have put out there at OT this year it's not even funny. Not sure what Jauron has to do with it. I hope to hell the Bills haven't been making their personnel decisions based on finding guys who can overcome his crappy coaching. The fallacy here is that you're argument consists of two separate arguments and ones that seem to concur with my own thoughts. It's a really bad idea not to have a plan in place for left tackle. You need to have a solution there. However, Peters was not that solution for the Bills. If you're paying 11 million, he better be more than "good" at his position.
8-8 Forever? Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 Exactly. Peters is having an average year at best. I heard a report somewhere that he's given up four sacks and has missed what, two games already? I try not to pay attention to it...but it's hard. Look, Langston Walker wasn't up to the task. Fine. Demetrius Bell doesn't appear to be either. In hindsight Oher would have been a good pick at #11 (especially over Maybin who I really think is gonna bust), but paying Peters would not have solved the problem. Ask the Philadelphia faithful. His agent messed him up. Got him the contract, but ruined the player it seems.
Recommended Posts