Whose side are you more on?

[MikeSpeed]

NFL teams can opt out of any contract with any player at any time, the players do not have the same option.

 

This argument will never fly with me. The player gets up front money. The money is his weather he sucks or excells. Its the contract equalizer. Once the player takes that bonus money the teams only obligation to the player is his yearly salary. So if the team wants to opt out of a contract they'll lose the bonus money!

[The Senator]

Whose side are you more on?

Who you callin' a more on?

[LongLiveRalph]

If contracts were guaranteed I'd be on the organization's side. Contracts are not guaranteed and therefore you must strike when the iron is hot, so I'm on Peters' side.

 

The clowns in this thread with the "honor your contract and get to camp" garbage is hysterical, considering EVERY team is looking for your replacement the second you arrive, and they'll "honor" that contract by ripping it up and kicking you to the waiver wire.

 

Peters has franchise potential at a franchise position. If I was him and had to block Kyle Williams in practice, who is now making more money than Peters, I wouldn't show up either.

[AJ1]

No, his last agent screwed him by signing a multi year deal when many analysts thought Peters was on the verge of becoming the player he was last year.

 

His current agent is the same guy who let Devon Hester show up for all the voluntary OTAs but had him skip the involuntary OTAs - to mention one of his other mistakes this year

 

You don't get offered a giant contract for being on the 'verge' or 'potential' unless you're a high draft pick. You get them for production, otherwise.

[DrDawkinstein]

If contracts were guaranteed I'd be on the organization's side. Contracts are not guaranteed and therefore you must strike when the iron is hot, so I'm on Peters' side.

 

The clowns in this thread with the "honor your contract and get to camp" garbage is hysterical, considering EVERY team is looking for your replacement the second you arrive, and they'll "honor" that contract by ripping it up and kicking you to the waiver wire.

 

Peters has franchise potential at a franchise position. If I was him and had to block Kyle Williams in practice, who is now making more money than Peters, I wouldn't show up either.

 

and you wouldnt have your agent contact the team to ask for more money either? isnt that what an agent is for?

 

the Bills gave him a contract extension the last time he asked for one. why wouldnt he bother asking again if he thinks he deserves it?

 

very few employers and NO NFL teams are going to decide to give someone a big raise while they still have 3 years left on a fresh contract. even if he deserves it. thats just bad business and possibly throwing away money.

 

come to camp, have your agent call and start negotiating, keep everything "above the board". is that too much to ask?

[LongLiveRalph]

and you wouldnt have your agent contact the team to ask for more money either? isnt that what an agent is for?

 

the Bills gave him a contract extension the last time he asked for one. why wouldnt he bother asking again if he thinks he deserves it?

 

very few employers and NO NFL teams are going to decide to give someone a big raise while they still have 3 years left on a fresh contract. even if he deserves it. thats just bad business and possibly throwing away money.

 

come to camp, have your agent call and start negotiating, keep everything "above the board". is that too much to ask?

 

I understand what you're saying, fair points all. Certainly, you always wish all players under contract would be in camp. Unfortunately, this is occasionally the way these things work.

 

I'm certain Peters' agent has contacted the Bills on some level. The Bills have a PR machine, Peters doesn't. That's why, often times, media as well as the fans sides to a certain extent with the organization in contract issues. The media, while preaching unbias, also knows where they receive access to their information- from the club. Most times, in holdouts, the company line is the only line. All the fans can hope is that Peters is in the gym, working hard, and that something happens soon.

 

I understand you're point about it being bad business to restructure existing deals. And it's hard to feel bad for millionaire players. But we all know that pie is plenty big, and Peters views himself as being entitled to a bigger piece. I don't disagree. And while in many cases it might be a bad decision in any business to re-do a contract, as a professional football organization trying to win games, it's also bad business to not show the money to your money players.

 

Everyone has seen Peters play. We have seen his freak athleticism block punts, catch TD passes, sprint 60 yards covering a kickoff, and now more recently, play left tackle at a Pro Bowl level, while locking down some of the game's best DE's. I don't listen as much to the ESPN hype as I do to the respect garnered on him by teammates, and especially opponents. Some posts here about Peters "having to prove himself" seem a little strange. He has gone from undrafted tight end to one of the top players in the league at a franchise position. How is that not proving himself? I'm going to have trouble understanding how NOT paying him is a good business decision.

 

You did mention the possibility of throwing money away. But if that happens, it will only be because of injury. We have all watched this kid his entire career, and he's been around long enough that the Bills have a good grasp of his character and work ethic. He seems like he is going to continue to get better, and most importantly, WANTS to do so. I don't think there's a risk that the Bills would be throwing away money because of sudden poor performance. In the sport of football, there's always an injury risk, on both sides. Peters is just trying to insure himself against that possibility as well.

 

If the salary guarantees were set up differently, I might feel differently. And obviously every different player's situation with every different team is completely its own entity. In this case, with this player and team, I completely see where he's coming from and don't blame him.

[Dan]

The thing about this whole situation is that this version of the FO has shown nothing but a willingness to work with and pay players that are good and are 100% behind the team. Look no farther than Schobel, Kelsay, Parish, and now Evans. Heck even Peters was on that list 2 years ago. That's what's so dumbfounding about this situation. Why is Peters and his agent taking such a hard stance? Why no contact since the end of the season? It just doesn't make sense.

 

That all being said... even if Peters was in camp and saying he wants a new contract, shouldn't it be the FO's priority to extend Evans first? Afterall, he's our top WR and he's entering the last year of his contract, while Peters has 3 years remaining.

 

The only thing that can even remotely make sense to me is that Peters and/or his agent asked for a new contract in Feb. The Bills said absolutely no way will we consider it until next year. This year we're signing a few key FA's and re-signing a few guys (Evans). Peters will get discussed after 2008. So the agent responded with we'll see you in 2008, then.

 

That's the only way I can understand an all out hold out on Peters part. But even then, I don't agree with it. Peters is good - he's great. But, is he really the best LT in the league after a year and half? He made the Pro Bowl as an alternate. Good, but not the same as being named a starter outright. Regardless, since when did a single trip to the Pro Bowl make you irreplaceable? There's plenty of reason to think that Peters is on his way to being one of the best 5 LTs in the league. I just think he and his agent are a year premature. If they waited a year, the Bills FO wouldn't have the distraction of re-signing Evans and Peters would have 2 solid years and 2 Pro Bowls (I'll assume). It seems he could get much more money if he came all this off season and put together a second consecutive stellar year.