Lori Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Ruh-roh. Peters Not At Mandatory Minicamp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Ruh-roh. Peters Not At Mandatory Minicamp Uh oh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGimp Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 ooooo....shocker! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Not sure how smart this is. Those fines add up quickly. Not sure but I think it is a few grand for each practice missed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBaumer Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 I say cut him - left tackles are a dime a dozen. Heck, even Peters was transformed from TE to LT. Just grab one of our extra TEs and do the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 I say cut him - left tackles are a dime a dozen. Heck, even Peters was transformed from TE to LT. Just grab one of our extra TEs and do the same thing. They planned ahead and switched Matt Murphy from TE to LT ast month. The Bills are all set (at least their minds) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 I know we are all scared of losing him and that he is underpayed at his position compared to others, but I don't agree with just giving him his money, cause it then shows the other players they can get what they want when they want. I'm sorry, Peters signed a deal, early and long term for what he thought was fair, nowing he was going to be playing RT and probably moving to LT. If the move didn't work out, would he be willing to re-negotiate and lower his deal, and give back that money that he was overpaid? Highly unlikely, so why should the Bills do the same because he feels he is underpayed? You signed a contract, play it out for the terms you agreed to, and next time, if you think you are going to be worth more in the future, don't sign a long term deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Ruh-roh. Peters Not At Mandatory Minicamp fine him.......and fine him some more if he misses time in training camp......he'll show up eventually and make less in '08 then he was scheduled to make Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berndogg Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 I know we are all scared of losing him and that he is underpayed at his position compared to others, but I don't agree with just giving him his money, cause it then shows the other players they can get what they want when they want. I'm sorry, Peters signed a deal, early and long term for what he thought was fair, nowing he was going to be playing RT and probably moving to LT. If the move didn't work out, would he be willing to re-negotiate and lower his deal, and give back that money that he was overpaid? Highly unlikely, so why should the Bills do the same because he feels he is underpayed? You signed a contract, play it out for the terms you agreed to, and next time, if you think you are going to be worth more in the future, don't sign a long term deal. It's true. I understand why players, especially without guaranteed contracts in the NFL, want to cash in after a big year, but they can't have it both ways. He wanted a long term deal, he got it, now he's got to play with it. If he thought he was going to be worth more in the near future he could have either had a more incentive heavy contract or signed a 1 or 2 year deal like Bryant Johnson did. If you renogitiate with everyone whenever they hold out even if they have multiple years left on their contract, then basically management has to continue to pay players who aren't quite living up to their contract if they want to keep them around and at the same time re-pay everyone who out preforms their contract. It's hard to build a team that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Thank God! Now we have something new to B word-n-moan about....this place was getting stale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 If the move didn't work out, would he be willing to re-negotiate and lower his deal, and give back that money that he was overpaid? Highly unlikely, so why should the Bills do the same because he feels he is underpayed? You signed a contract, play it out for the terms you agreed to, and next time, if you think you are going to be worth more in the future, don't sign a long term deal. The NFL doesn't translate to normal work contracts. In the NFL, the owner can cancel the contract at any time by cutting the player and the player only gets guaranteed money. Thus, the player's only recourse for these somewhat one-sided contracts is to try to renegotiate them. So I have some sympathy for the NFL player in these situations--it's not easy to say "just show up and play--you have a contract" when the owners aren't held to the same standard. It's a situation unique in pro sports to the NFL because injuries can stop a career on a dime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 The NFL doesn't translate to normal work contracts. In the NFL, the owner can cancel the contract at any time by cutting the player and the player only gets guaranteed money. Thus, the player's only recourse for these somewhat one-sided contracts is to try to renegotiate them. So I have some sympathy for the NFL player in these situations--it's not easy to say "just show up and play--you have a contract" when the owners aren't held to the same standard. It's a situation unique in pro sports to the NFL because injuries can stop a career on a dime. I understand that too, and I'm not for the Owners being allowed to cut players just because they don't want to pay them what they agreed too. It goes both ways, which is why I prefer the NHL's system where the contract is pretty much guaranteed with no renegotiations and a buyout required to end it early. The problem that this breads is that it no longer makes sense to lock up a player early because once they start to perform up to their contract, they will hold out for more money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 The NFL doesn't translate to normal work contracts. In the NFL, the owner can cancel the contract at any time by cutting the player and the player only gets guaranteed money. Thus, the player's only recourse for these somewhat one-sided contracts is to try to renegotiate them. So I have some sympathy for the NFL player in these situations--it's not easy to say "just show up and play--you have a contract" when the owners aren't held to the same standard. It's a situation unique in pro sports to the NFL because injuries can stop a career on a dime. This a good point, but the guarantees are usually in the $10M-$20M range so I do not feel that bad for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 The NFL doesn't translate to normal work contracts. In the NFL, the owner can cancel the contract at any time by cutting the player and the player only gets guaranteed money. Thus, the player's only recourse for these somewhat one-sided contracts is to try to renegotiate them. So I have some sympathy for the NFL player in these situations--it's not easy to say "just show up and play--you have a contract" when the owners aren't held to the same standard. It's a situation unique in pro sports to the NFL because injuries can stop a career on a dime. Agreed, but where does it end? He wanted and received a long term extension deal. Now he wants another deal as befits a Pro Bowl LT. So what happens next year when he's named best LT in the business? Another holdout?? I disagree with the topic. Let's see if he can duplicate his performance from last year -which is made more difficult by NOT being in camp with a new OC- beofre 'rewarding' him again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
***PetrinoInAlbany*** Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 The problem that this breads is that it no longer makes sense to lock up a player early because once they start to perform up to their contract, they will hold out for more money. That's not entirely true... One of the main reasons for long term contracts is to allow the team to "back load" the salary structure. It eases the cap impact in the first year or two (or three) and then gives you something to "restructure" later. Also, it lets you pro-rate the signing bonuses. (*sigh*) I may be old, but I can actually remember the days when - to be an NFL fan - you didn't have to understand this stuff ... You just had to understand the game itself. Now, everyone has to be a capologist or half the personnel moves don't even make sense ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 This a good point, but the guarantees are usually in the $10M-$20M range so I do not feel that bad for them. The high number guarantees are for the relatively few. There isn't a player on the Bills with 20 million guaranteed (waiting for the contract geeks to correct this). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBillsFan Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 interesting.... Per Bucky Brooks on SI.com • After earning his first Pro Bowl nomination at the end of 2007, Bills left tackle Jason Peters is currently boycotting all team activities to express his dissatisfaction with his contract situation. Peters, a former undrafted college tight end who successfully transitioned to offensive tackle, is currently ranked third on the Bills' offensive line in compensation, and he contends that he has outperformed his current deal, given the market for top tackles. While Peters has a legitimate gripe regarding his stature on the team, the Bills run the risk of setting a bad precedent by renegotiating his deal at this time. "There is a growing trend by players of wanting to return to the table, if their team signs a free agent at their position to a big contract," said a NFC personnel executive. "Players fail to recognize that the respective player went through the free agent process and several factors could've contributed to the size of the deal." In this case, the Bills proactively identified Peters as a budding star at the position and rewarded him with a five-year, $15.5 contract in 2006. Thus, heading back to the table only two years into the deal would encourage several of his teammates to voice their displeasure about their contracts. The Bills must handle the Peters' situation correctly to prevent an onslaught of holdouts from their promising young players. The best scenario for the Bills would be for Peters to play this season under his current deal with the notion of renegotiating the contract at the end of the year. This would allow the Bills to accurately assess the market and offer a deal commensurate with Peters' stature as one of the top tackles in the league. Can you say Aaron Schobel... (following Kelsay, sorry if this was mentioned) Don't think it wont happen either. It is fair to say that he should finish his year with incentives to renegotiate. He is an elite player at an important position so if others try to follow they wont have quite the leverage Peters has, but if the Bills give in and send him a bigger check this will happen every year a player has a good year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted June 11, 2008 Share Posted June 11, 2008 Can you say Aaron Schobel... (following Kelsay, sorry if this was mentioned) Don't think it wont happen either. It is fair to say that he should finish his year with incentives to renegotiate. He is an elite player at an important position so if others try to follow they wont have quite the leverage Peters has, but if the Bills give in and send him a bigger check this will happen every year a player has a good year. See also CIN and Ocho Dinko. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts