Dan Posted July 26, 2008 Posted July 26, 2008 maybe they signed the deal in 2006 because the Bills (Marv Levy) asked them to since they did not want Peters to become a free agent the next year as a LT, with the understanding he would be taken care of if he was successful as a LT. The Bills gave them a limited $1 mil escalator for the switch to left tackle to show their good faith but also to support the re-do since the $1mil would not be enough to support real LT money. In January 2008, the Bills (Brandon) informed Peters they would not honor Marv's (he was senile at the time) Levy's commitement to redo the contract even though Peters is a pro-bowl LT who is the 3th highest paid OL on the team. Can you link to any proof of this notion you keep posting? Or is it complete fabrication to justify an point you're hoping to make?
John from Riverside Posted July 26, 2008 Posted July 26, 2008 Can you link to any proof of this notion you keep posting? Or is it complete fabrication to justify an point you're hoping to make? Agreed.....I want to see proof that this "Marv deal" took place or stop posting that @hit.
John from Riverside Posted July 26, 2008 Posted July 26, 2008 maybe they signed the deal in 2006 because the Bills (Marv Levy) asked them to since they did not want Peters to become a free agent the next year as a LT, with the understanding he would be taken care of if he was successful as a LT. The Bills gave them a limited $1 mil escalator for the switch to left tackle to show their good faith but also to support the re-do since the $1mil would not be enough to support real LT money. In January 2008, the Bills (Brandon) informed Peters they would not honor Marv's (he was senile at the time) Levy's commitement to redo the contract even though Peters is a pro-bowl LT who is the 3th highest paid OL on the team. Obie, Could you please provide the link to where they made that offer you are talking about?
BLZFAN4LIFE Posted July 26, 2008 Posted July 26, 2008 Obie, Could you please provide the link to where they made that offer you are talking about? My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who heard Marv and Peters discussing the deal at 31 flavors.
SectionC3 Posted July 26, 2008 Posted July 26, 2008 what if there are more facts which the Bills or Peters have not disclosed. what if 2 years ago the Bills (under Marv Levy) wanted to lock up Peters to something longer than the 1 year tender. They knew they were going to move him to LT. Parker and Peters presumed this as well. So to protect themselves, they asked for an escalator which would increase the base salary if Peters started at LT. Parker wanted the increase to reflect what real LTs make. The Bills, insisting that Peters was only a RT, capped the escalator at $1 million, but promised they would re-do the contract if Peters did indeed move to LT successfully. This escalator is in Peters contract and did get triggered. Well low and behold, in 2007 Peters becomes a Pro Bowl LT. In january 2008, Parker approaches the Bills about the promised increase. However, the new sheriff in town is flexing his muscles and reneges on the offer with promises to pay next year - since he has 3 years left. Flabbergasted with this turn of events and the total lack of respect for the Bills best player, Peters and Parker weigh their options and decide to skip the OTA to see how events unfold. Instead of any discussions with Parker, the Bills extend marginal starters and backups to more money than Peters is making. After reviewing the Bills options at LT and the total disregard for Peters skills - they make the tough decision to hold out from camp. far fetched - maybe even more far fetched is the story the Bills are spinning that they have no idea why Peters is not at camp. If this is true, and it may well be, one of two things happened: (1) Parker dropped the ball on behalf of Peters and should be fired; or (2) Peters knowingly signed a contract that he knew any move to left tackle would render unfavorable. If Peters is unhappy with the escalator and either he or his agent "knew" Peters would be moved to left tackle during the life of that agreement, one of only Peters or Parker is to blame. The reality of the situation is that Peters traded additional years on a contract (this one) for a greater immediate payment than his prior agreement would have provided. Had he "played out" his original contract, he'd be much closer to earning the extraordinary contract he desires. This was part of the risk in taking the additional "up front" money in this contract, and now he has to take his medicine. Too bad.
eball Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 maybe they signed the deal in 2006 because the Bills (Marv Levy) asked them to since they did not want Peters to become a free agent the next year as a LT, with the understanding he would be taken care of if he was successful as a LT. The Bills gave them a limited $1 mil escalator for the switch to left tackle to show their good faith but also to support the re-do since the $1mil would not be enough to support real LT money. In January 2008, the Bills (Brandon) informed Peters they would not honor Marv's (he was senile at the time) Levy's commitement to redo the contract even though Peters is a pro-bowl LT who is the 3th highest paid OL on the team. I'm to the point now that I believe you're merely a troll. The conspiracy theories you've dreamt up rival discussion of the Kennedy assassination.
H2o Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 I'm to the point now that I believe you're merely a troll. The conspiracy theories you've dreamt up rival discussion of the Kennedy assassination. Hey look, I think it's Peters agent over on the grassy noll.
BillsVet Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 Both Peters and the Bills have some sort of leverage. I do think he'll eventually report, and Buffalo will feign interest (at least this year) in re-upping him at some point. Obviously they're working toward extending Evans, but I'm confident they know that having a LT who can neutralize opposing pass rushers is imperative. I'm not certain it'll happen this year, but Peters must be patient. Either way, he's the difference in OL play and there's no doubt that Edwards has a lot of trust for someone like Peters. As much as some have heralded Chambers as being capable of handling the job, he's not nearly the answer. With success comes the paychecks commensurate with it. Players like Peters, Evans, et al will inevitably become commonplace and ultimately lead the Bills to pay their players. The NFL is increasingly becoming a players league, and paychecks are following in short order. For the Bills to be successful long term, they'll need to extend their stars and draft well year after year. There is no question that Buffalo needs Jason Peters. I'm hopeful the team realizes they need him for long term success because the position he plays is so essential.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 While in general I think that players should live up tot he contracts they signed, in THIS case, i think the Bills need to pay this guy and pay him well. He's the best LT they've had (IMO) since OJ was in town. Git 'er done, Russ.
VOR Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 After thinking about it, the only logical conclusion I can come to is that the Bills want to see if Peters is recovered from his injury before giving him the big bucks, as one poster mentioned. If that's the case, then I agree with them. They haven't seen, or heard from, him since January, so they don't know how he's doing. The troubling thing is that Peters chooses to stay away, which could mean the injury isn't healed, robbed him of some mobility +/- gives him chronic pain. I hope not.
Kelly the Dog Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 After thinking about it, the only logical conclusion I can come to is that the Bills want to see if Peters is recovered from his injury before giving him the big bucks, as one poster mentioned. If that's the case, then I agree with them. They haven't seen, or heard from, him since January, so they don't know how he's doing. The troubling thing is that Peters chooses to stay away, which could mean the injury isn't healed, robbed him of some mobility +/- gives him chronic pain. I hope not. That's just impossible, IMO. If Peters was hurt, no chance Eugene Parker is trying to get him a huge contract to cover it up. It would be immediately recognized day one, and Parker would probably be expelled from the union as an agent. Sure, players and agents cover up injuries at times. But not in this kind of case, where the guy is trying to become one of the top paid OL in the league. It just doesn't make any logical sense. And if I'm not mistaken, as soon as players sign, or before they take the field, I think they have to take physicals.
colin Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 After thinking about it, the only logical conclusion I can come to is that the Bills want to see if Peters is recovered from his injury before giving him the big bucks, as one poster mentioned. If that's the case, then I agree with them. They haven't seen, or heard from, him since January, so they don't know how he's doing. The troubling thing is that Peters chooses to stay away, which could mean the injury isn't healed, robbed him of some mobility +/- gives him chronic pain. I hope not. i think peters and the bills both know they are gonna extend him. the issue comes down to the type of contract (rest assured it will be in the top 5 OL contracts in all catagories) and when he extends. because he got hurt i think peters and his agent are now scared of getting hurt again before the big payday. i think he is prolly healthy, but just has the fear that if he gets hurt again, he might not get his super money. i think the bills FO wll play ball, but they want to see him healthy and in camp first.
Happy Days Lois & Clark Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 Peters would be a complete idiot to sit out the season & miss out on $3.5-4.5 million Also he should be gratetful that the Bills took him in & developed him as a OT instead of cutting him where he could be doing something else for a living He should just get into camp & talk to the team about working out a new deal during the season & if he is still performing at a probowl level then he can get a new deal where he is a the highest paid player on the team
VOR Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 That's just impossible, IMO. If Peters was hurt, no chance Eugene Parker is trying to get him a huge contract to cover it up. It would be immediately recognized day one, and Parker would probably be expelled from the union as an agent. Sure, players and agents cover up injuries at times. But not in this kind of case, where the guy is trying to become one of the top paid OL in the league. It just doesn't make any logical sense. And if I'm not mistaken, as soon as players sign, or before they take the field, I think they have to take physicals. You can pass a physical and not the same as you were. Just look at Spikes. Again I hope this isn't the case, but the way Peters and his agent are playing it is odd.
BADOLBILZ Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 Peters would be a complete idiot to sit out the season & miss out on $3.5-4.5 million Also he should be gratetful that the Bills took him in & developed him as a OT instead of cutting him where he could be doing something else for a living He should just get into camp & talk to the team about working out a new deal during the season & if he is still performing at a probowl level then he can get a new deal where he is a the highest paid player on the team Actually, they did cut him. And I remember the day when he was visiting the NY Giants right after. The Bills were very lucky that the Giants didn't sign him or that he didn't end up on a practice squad elsewhere instead of Buffalo. Losing a would-be all pro LT, when they haven't had a good offensive line in better than ten years, would have been the icing on the sh*tcake that has been the past 8 years.
DanInSouthBuffalo Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 If Peters holds out during the regular season he's the dumbest man on the planet. History has shown that Bills players that embrace the team concept and show up in the off-season get rewarded for it. Learn from that lesson. If it comes to that, if I were the Bills I wouldn't do anything until next off-season. I could see him coming in after training camp is over and promptly getting hurt.
Sisyphean Bills Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 Actually, they did cut him. And I remember the day when he was visiting the NY Giants right after. The Bills were very lucky that the Giants didn't sign him or that he didn't end up on a practice squad elsewhere instead of Buffalo. Losing a would-be all pro LT, when they haven't had a good offensive line in better than ten years, would have been the icing on the sh*tcake that has been the past 8 years. Of course, Jim McNally was a sh1tty OL coach and had nothing to do with Peters development whatsoever.
Ramius Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 maybe they signed the deal in 2006 because the Bills (Marv Levy) asked them to since they did not want Peters to become a free agent the next year as a LT, with the understanding he would be taken care of if he was successful as a LT. The Bills gave them a limited $1 mil escalator for the switch to left tackle to show their good faith but also to support the re-do since the $1mil would not be enough to support real LT money. In January 2008, the Bills (Brandon) informed Peters they would not honor Marv's (he was senile at the time) Levy's commitement to redo the contract even though Peters is a pro-bowl LT who is the 3th highest paid OL on the team. link? Or should we file this with the other steaming piles of sh-- you have tried to serve everyone, such as... "if marcus stroud plays in more than 8 games this year, its because he's taking steroids" and "lots of teams have starting quality backup LTs"
AKC Posted July 27, 2008 Posted July 27, 2008 link? Or should we file this with the other steaming piles of sh-- you have tried to serve everyone, such as... "if marcus stroud plays in more than 8 games this year, its because he's taking steroids" and "lots of teams have starting quality backup LTs" How about we set up a steamtable that includes Ramius gems like "There'll be lots of WRs taken in the first round of the 2008 draft" and we can sell the whole thing as a buffet!
Gordio Posted July 28, 2008 Posted July 28, 2008 Not so simple. Peters did take a bonus and re-sign because he was probably playing for the NFL minimum, or close to it. In this instance, the Bills had all the leverage. Now, the tables have turned. You have a probowl LT making less than Dockery, let alone Fowler who is average at best. Any sane person can see the inequity of this equation. Can you? Yes or no? Your wrong Bill. There is a right way to do things & a wrong way. Peters just deciding to holdout with no dialogue or even an attempt to discuss with the bills is wrong. Read Bucky Gleason's article in the news today about the situation. Wilson is not going to blink & he is certainly not going to negotiate with a player that has made himself invisible all offseason. Peter's has no leverage. The simple fact is at $15K a day(already up to 60K) & 3 years left on his contract, Peters can not afford to sit out the whole season. He knows it, his agent knows it, & more importantly the bills know it. He will be in camp in time to play in the 3rd preseason game.
Recommended Posts