Here's what I don't understand

[Chilly]

but but but, krazypats said that his injury rarely requires surgery.

 

he's just blabbing out of his ass, at least bill in NYC has a legit love for the bills, inspite of his creepy OL love and corner hate. he also offers a lot of insight into the game. kk just blabs on. is there an ignore feature?

 

Click on Name --> view member profile --> profile options --> ignore user

[K-9]

Have he or his agent stated that he wants to be paid like the highest paid LTs? I haven't heard that.

 

I also disagree that the Bills will automatically make him their highest paid lineman. They haven't done anything with Evans yet and if I were Peters I'd use that as the primary gauge. Now the team's hands may be tied financially, but they could at least do something going forward.

 

As to the Schobel situation, there are similarities, but mostly in what players of lesser value got playing the same or similar positions. All similarities end there. Schobel got a huge deal as he was leaving his prime. Peters is just entering his and can fully be expected to continue to improve whereas Schobel can only be expected to get worse.

 

I still think that it's on the team to reach out to Peters and his agent and at least begin to explain where they stand on this contrasted with their giving Butler (this year) a seemingly inflated extension also with even less on record to suggest that he's gonna even be an average G, and Dockery and Walker's deals last year. If they can explain that to them, then progress will be made. If not, then they're just going to have to face the music from the band that they hired.

 

As to "having to get into camp," I could agree with you and we all could agree, but the reality is that holdouts are standard ploys by high profile players and just a part of the business and anyone thinking that loyalty to the team by players comes first, especially here in Buffalo, is deluding themselves. It's business and the business part of this organization just doesn't function well.

 

The question was asked by Dawgg in his post. That's what I was responding to. Peters and his agent haven't said anything but I don't think they're holding out because they DON'T think he should be one of the highest paid LTs.

 

As for Evans, it's been reported numerous times that he's a top priority and that there are ongoing discussions. Will anything get done, don't know. But they ARE talking and Evans seems pleased that they are. So yeah, maybe Peters SHOULD use the Evans situation as a guage. You don't see Evans holding out. Instead he's busting his ass and building his case.

 

Schobel has not left his prime. Don't know where you get that idea. If you wish to point to the decrease in last year's sack numbers as proof positive then I have to question your football acumen. The Bills redefined, in mid stream due to all the injuries, Schobel's responsibilities as they did for the other DEs last season to compensate for the inexperience playing behind them.

 

No, it's on Peters and his agent to honor their contract and get into camp. They don't owe him ANY explanation for why they redid Butler's deal. None at all. Has nothing to do with the situation. But they should probably know it's for many of the same reasons they redid PETERS' deal in much the same manner. A deal they DIDN'T have to accept, BTW. Maybe Peters and Parker should explain to the Bills why THEY want what they want instead.

 

Brandon has said and the Bills' record indicates, they are willing to redo merited deals but the player has to show good faith and be in camp is if he's obligated to do so. Brandon and Co. have to answer to EVERYONE in the organization, not just Peters. So I give them lots of credit for sticking to their policy. You see it differently. It's the FOs fault for everything.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[krazykat]

First of all, I appreciated your posts on other topics as they are at least well thought out and supported by facts. On this topic however I disagree with you. On a philosophical level, the Bills helped make Peters what he is today - a highly rated O lineman. In addition, he got a hefty raise not too long back. Given this, his hold out is disturbing and mildly frustrating to me.

I do understand this is a business and there is a legitimate case for him to get much more money. Which side needs the other more is debatable but what is clear is that both sides need each other badly.

Apart from my philosophical (BS) point above, Peters has chosen the path of confrontational negotiations which is an unpleasant way to go about things. Even if he signs in time for Aug 8th, he still will have hurt the team.

Great post!

 

And what would it be like if we all agreed.

 

As to frustrating, it's frustrating to me too. But we have to look at culpability here. Allow me to use an analogy.

 

Let's suppose you're best friend wins a multi-million dollar lottery and starts giving all kinds of people that he barely knows or are just acquaintences $10k apiece but gives you, his best buddy for a long time nothing. How would that make you feel? Does he owe you something? No, obviously not. But by handing out money to people that he cares less about and who have done less for him over the years and not giving you a dime, he makes a statement, no?

 

It's the same thing here.

 

Yes, he did get a hefty raise two years ago, but that was only "hefty" because he was getting UFA type money to begin with but providing much more.

 

Now I agree with you that Peters is at fault in this, but this situation wouldn't have come up, purely my opinion but a very reasonable one, if the Bills hadn't started shelling out Peters like money to guys like Mitchell, Johnson, Butler. Again, it's your best friend shelling out money to everyone but you. They're no more proven that Peters is and even less so.

 

But the Bills are at fault too. I haven't read anything that says that Brandon is waiting at the local Tim Horton's to meet with Peters either. Peters wants to talk now and Brandon says no, show up first. Well suppose Peters shows up and does get injured? Wouldn't that take something off of his leverage, especially if that injury means missing time this season? Clearly it would. So is Peters being unreasonable from that angle? I don't think so.

 

Again, the team needs to reconcile these contracts they're handing out to backups, rotational players, and completely unproven and average starters to Evans and Peters, two players truly capable of making an impact unlike the other signings of good money.

 

You're right, both sides do need each other badly. But I'm just not sure what Brandon thinks he's doing. This team absolutely needs to post a winning season this year! Mission critical or we can all look forward to calls for Jauron's dismissal and therefore another change at the top. No one's going to be patient with three straight losing seasons by a coach that's only lost throughout his career for the most part with no evidence that he's even an average coach much less more apart from irrelevant things like "the players like him."

 

Brandon can't afford a losing season as a GM, especially if Evans walks and this Peters thing is a big reason why when he's the man responsible for patching it together.

 

Can Peters afford to sit out? In one sense, no, he can't, but financially in another, sure, he can. In fact, his value skyrockets if we do poorly without him because if anything it will reveal, at least on paper, how much not having him cost this team. Would that result in a huge contract next season? Who knows, maybe, maybe not. But what it would do is give Brandon a very short leash as the new GM of this team, again, likely with media statements as to how he was out of his league and that kinda stuff.

 

You can disagree and view it differently, but based on what you're saying, seems to me that the question is which can each afford to have happen least: Peters lose out financially likely only for the short term, or the team post another losing season in this very critical year for the team. Anyone seeing it differently IMO is missing the much bigger picture.

 

IMO this team can weather that a lot less gracefully than Peters can. Peters may come and go and who knows, if tensions get too high and Parker and Brandon both play enough hard ball, Peters may not even be with the team next year at this point. I cannot imagine that if this thing goes on much longer, particularly if not accompanied by a winning season, that any good will will be generated as a result.

 

But the Bills are the Bills. They are an organization and one that is represented by the same Buffalo (both logo and city) and one that remains constant in that sense from year to year. It's been a struggling franchise and one that hasn't been in the playoffs for what, like 8 years and one that hasn't won a playoff game in like 12 or so, 13 if we don't this year.

 

It needs to enter the season with both feet forward. It's been shelling out retarded money as if it were water in a restaurant. But just like your best friend who won the lottery, they forgot to give some to their best friends. Whether you would still be a friend of that person is one thing as the relationship wasn't a business one to begin with. But for both Peters and Evans it is a business relationship. Almost entirely. think differently if you will, but it is as we all know that football is a business first. That's why the little guy is getting priced out of going to games.

 

To wrap this up, I believe that as a result of their own business actions, the Bills have turned themselves into an organization that is more business oriented than most meaning that players only come here for money. We hardly ever if ever get a bargain player that just wants to come here because we're winning for the simple reason that that's not the case as it might be with the Pats, Colts, Chargers, Jags, Steelers, Giants, Cowboys, etc. That's a position that this team has created for itself. They've chosen to overpay Dockery and Walker and Tripplett two years ago, and Fowler, and Peerless Price, and Royal, and now Williams and IMO Butler and Johnson too. Maybe they had to otherwise those players woudln't have come here or stayed here, IDK although that's likely and a distinct possibility at least in several cases.

 

You say that "Peters has chosen the path of confrontational negotiations which is an unpleasant way to go about things." But I don't see anything less confrontational about Brandon suggesting that he's willing to redo the deal, but only after Peters puts himself at risk, in essence, for injury. I mean if all the team wants to know is if he's injured, they could say meet us at the practice bubble at OBD and we're going to have you run a few minor drills that won't risk you getting injured yet will prove to us that you're not injured. But have they done that? I haven't read anything about that.

 

So I would argue that Brandon's simply trying to make a name for himself here by playing hardball like the Pats do yet without the winning track record. OK, so I'm being a little facetious, but IMO he's trying to make a statement that you don't screw with the team. That works in some cases, but not with a team that will rely heavily on the player that they are playing hardball with to simply make it to .500 much less post a winning season. Because I don't think there are too many, even here in homerville, that think that our offense is going to do much without Peters anchoring the LT position. Edwards will get killed with Walker or Chambers in there.

[krazykat]

First of all, I appreciated your posts on other topics as they are at least well thought out and supported by facts. On this topic however I disagree with you. On a philosophical level, the Bills helped make Peters what he is today - a highly rated O lineman. In addition, he got a hefty raise not too long back. Given this, his hold out is disturbing and mildly frustrating to me.

I do understand this is a business and there is a legitimate case for him to get much more money. Which side needs the other more is debatable but what is clear is that both sides need each other badly.

Apart from my philosophical (BS) point above, Peters has chosen the path of confrontational negotiations which is an unpleasant way to go about things. Even if he signs in time for Aug 8th, he still will have hurt the team.

You know, I also have to say that it's incredible that some people here talked about Peters as if he is the focal point to our making our offense go up til this preseason, and which he may very well be. But now all of a sudden the same people talking about how he hasn't proven nearly that much, or is overrated which I might agree with, or that he's all but expendable. It reveals a fickleness that entirely removes any objective analysis from the equation of our having a good team.

[The Senator]

Holy crap, Kat - your latest massive missives make PyriteGal's seem concise!

[krazykat]

Click on Name --> view member profile --> profile options --> ignore user

PLEASE, PLEASE do!

[krazykat]

Holy crap, Kat - your latest massive missives make PyriteGal's seem concise!

Right, and post such as this by you add so much to a debate.

 

ADD?

[Kelly the Dog]

Another thing that needs to be mentioned in this discussion is that it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY if Peters does come into camp that the Bills are going to "negotiate in good faith". So when they say he needs to just come in and then we will talk, it's really kind of disingenuous to me, and is more for the fans and other players than the agent and player.

 

They probably have no intention of giving Peters what he is worth this year, and Parker knows it. Which is why I think Parker is just laying the groundwork this year for the holdout that will come next year, when Peters will likely get his big contract. If he caves early this year, it will hurt him next year.

 

If Peters comes into camp, and Parker says "Okay, we did what you asked. He's here and he's ready. We want him to be paid Jake Long money (five-year, $57.75 million contract with $30 million guaranteed). The Bills are going to say. "No chance. He has three years left. We'll give you Howie Long money. If you want Jake Long money, talk to us in a year or two". So it's kinda bullschitt IMO for us to say he should just come in and the Bills would take care of him when they won't. It's a completely different situation than Butler or McGee or even Schobel because it's SO much money.

 

EDIT: This is what Sal Maiorana said in his blog today:

A Bills official confirmed to me the other day that talks with Peters are almost non-existent and that the team is demanding he play at least this season under the five-year contract extension that he signed in 2006 which will pay him $3.25 million in base salary this year.

[krazykat]

You show me his med records post-surgery indicating he's 100% and ready to play. YOU show me video of Peters in pads lining up anywhere near a practice field post-surgery. Sh*t, show me a picture of him in gym shorts breaking a sweat since his surgery and i'll be happy. YOU are the one assuming buddy. You want the team to hand a guy top-5 OT money after one (one!) great season AND coming off an injury that required surgery to repair. Oh, and you want the team to do this without even seeing the guy practice even once. You are dense.

 

"a distinct possibility, regardless of the chances" - OK that statement makes no sense and contradicts itself; but besides that, it is not "a distinct possibility" Peters holds out a season. Even if it was, I say let him. He won't get paid, his value to other teams drops, his agent is exposed for the fool he is. Maybe that's why you support Parker and Peters so much, you're on their level intellectually.

Show me a groin injury that required surgery and then take the percentage of groin injuries that have occured and tell me what percent have ended the careers of players just moving into their primes or under say the age of 28 and correspondingly what percentage of any surgery incidents you can find from routine groin injuries ended careers.

[krazykat]

He ended the season on IR and he had offseason surgery. Since then, he hasn't been seen jogging, much less playing football. What more do you want?

Boy, you're right on top of things, huh. Do you even know what he had surgery on? I mean what the surgery was for?

 

This isn't even worth addressing.

 

And you know, like I've said in other posts, the team can feel free to ask him to come to OBD and run some drills such as "jogging." If at that point, and maybe it's happened and I've just missed it, he refuses, well then perhaps there's cause for concern.

 

But as of now I read nothing that an offer to evaluate him without his risking injury on the field has even been made.

 

And you know, you may very well be right, but until he begins refusing to even show up for a physical I'd like to see our team reach out a little bit more than insisting he show up and play.

 

Is Peters wrong? Probably. But the team is gonna be in a world of hurt if this continues.

[WellDressed]

From football 365.com

 

"If a regular blitz is almost as unwelcome in this defense as Tim Anderson was, a zone blitz would be much more acceptable"

[The Senator]

Right, and post such as this by you add so much to a debate.

 

ADD?

I don't see what can possibly be added - everything has already been regurgitated mulitple times, ad naseum, and that's just by you alone, not counting all the others.

 

And no, it's not ADD - it's just that your ridiculous ramblings are so painful to read.

[tennesseeboy]

The Bills don't have a bad reputation concerning contract negotiation or extending players. I'm not just pulling that out of my ass -- I've read specific quotes from top agents like Rosenhaus that the Bills are professional and good to work with. They've let a few players walk after their contracts expired (Pat Williams, Nate Clements), but in terms of working with current players on the roster they've never (to my knowledge) taken a hard line position or been unreasonable. Recent draft picks certainly haven't expressed displeasure with the way things were handled.

 

Which begs the question -- what the hell is Eugene Parker doing?

 

I know there's already a long holdout thread going, but I really think this is a different question. Why would Parker think this is the right way to deal with the Bills?

It isn't about the right way to deal with the bills. It is recognizing an opportunity where his client has great leverage and a perceived salary inequity. The reason for the holdout and the clout is the same reason the proverbial dog licks his testicles...because he can. I don't like the situation but it is exactly what I would expect my agent to do if I were in that situation.

[krazykat]

Another thing that needs to be mentioned in this discussion is that it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY if Peters does come into camp that the Bills are going to "negotiate in good faith". So when they say he needs to just come in and then we will talk, it's really kind of disingenuous to me, and is more for the fans and other players than the agent and player.

 

They probably have no intention of giving Peters what he is worth this year, and Parker knows it. Which is why I think Parker is just laying the groundwork this year for the holdout that will come next year, when Peters will likely get his big contract. If he caves early this year, it will hurt him next year.

 

If Peters comes into camp, and Parker says "Okay, we did what you asked. He's here and he's ready. We want him to be paid Jake Long money (five-year, $57.75 million contract with $30 million guaranteed). The Bills are going to say. "No chance. He has three years left. We'll give you Howie Long money. If you want Jake Long money, talk to us in a year or two". So it's kinda bullschitt IMO for us to say he should just come in and the Bills would take care of him when they won't. It's a completely different situation than Butler or McGee or even Schobel because it's SO much money.

Yeah, I agree Kelly.

[krazykat]

but but but, krazypats said that his injury rarely requires surgery.

Keep chattering partner. It's obvious that you have it out for me.

 

Do you know what Peters had surgery on this offseason? Apparently not. Was it for his groin?

[krazykat]

I don't see what can possibly be added - everything has already been regurgitated mulitple times, ad naseum, and that's just by you alone, not counting all the others.

 

And no, it's not ADD - it's just that your ridiculous ramblings are so painful to read.

Fine, then why do you feel compelled to read them. Just use the ignore function. But quit bitching about something that you repeatedly choose to do.

[Zulu Cthulhu]

Show me a groin injury that required surgery and then take the percentage of groin injuries that have occured and tell me what percent have ended the careers of players just moving into their primes or under say the age of 28 and correspondingly what percentage of any surgery incidents you can find from routine groin injuries ended careers.

 

...you done? Blow it out of proportion to make your point, go ahead. Never did I suggest that the injury was career threatening. The injury doesn't have to be career threatening to make a team (justifiably) hesitant to just hand over money to a guy who ended the previous year on IR. Maybe Peters is fine, 100% and ready to go. Maybe he's even stronger and quicker than last year. Show me then, Jason. Show your teammates, show Brandon and Jauron you are. Go to camp, practice, and get your money. At least kat will shut up then for a couple of days, until he finds another reason to bash the FO.

[krazykat]

It isn't about the right way to deal with the bills. It is recognizing an opportunity where his client has great leverage and a perceived salary inequity. The reason for the holdout and the clout is the same reason the proverbial dog licks his testicles...because he can. I don't like the situation but it is exactly what I would expect my agent to do if I were in that situation.

It's all business.

 

This is really just another indictment of the organization IMO. They always shell out money for the marginal but let players like Pat Williams, Ruben Brown, Evans, Peters walk.

 

And honestly, does anyone not think that they couldn't have found a G to give us what Butler does for half the money. Or what Johnson does for half the money. Of course just like Johnson, they don't want to play here unless they get extra for doing it. And hey, rightly so. We have no winning dividend in the rear view mirror.

[SuperKillerRobots]

You first have to understand that there's never been a case like Peters, or at least not one that I can remember. He signed his last extension/renegotiation/restructure, whatever it was, before ever starting at LT. So whether you think he's right or wrong, you have to consider that.

 

This isn't just a typical case of superstar [insert name] drafted in round 2 not round one at a particular position then having become a top player at his position. Peters was a project that worked out, in spades!

 

He hardly played in '04 when he was signed as an undrafted free agent. He played RT in '05 but only began to start the second half of the season. Unless I'm mistaken, he signed his last deal after that season and with the team's loose plans to play him at LT the following season in '06, which he eventually did and excelled at it relatively speaking.

 

He and his agent have seen the kind of money we throw around at players that will eventually be only backup or rotational guys or marginal starters tops or for players that will contribute nothing and be cut two years after they get that money; guys like Butler, Spencer Johnson, Kyle Williams, Kelsay last year, Tripplett two years ago (seems like more) and when Peters was here to watch, Price, etc.

 

He and Parker watched the team hand Kelsay ~ $6/season in contract essentially forcing the team's hand in giving Schobel more even though he had just signed an extension/renegotiation/restructuring ~ a year before too.

 

So for anyone saying that he should play out his existing contract, why? Schobel didn't?

 

He and Parker are not stupid. They see what's happened and the retarded money we're throwing around at many players. Hell, our most expensive DT at the time Tripplett is already gone after a hero's welcome and the biggest contract that a DT of ours had seen until that time. Peerless Price took our front office to school and to the bank as well.

 

Peters plays a critical position, perhaps the most critical position on offense given our situation, and indisputably one of the top few key positions for any NFL team. Throw in the fact that every successful NFL team and eventual SB winner has a top LT, and Peters and his agent realize that this team is backed into a corner.

 

My perspective: You can't throw around the kind of money you're giving Kelsay, Williams, Johnson, Walker, and Dockery and expect a guy like Peters to be happy. There is precedent, at least with our team, that gives a player a "renewal" soon after having signed one. (Schobel off of Kelsay) Schobel's past his prime too, Peters is just entering his.

 

This is Brandon's first significant test as a GM. He's fighting a team habit of overpaying for talent (players already mentioned) while not taking care of the top players on the team. (Evans, Peters) His stamp will go on this team beginning now with how this ends up. I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that we're not going to improve much offensively without Peters playing. And granted, per rumors/suggestions, Peters may be entirely out of shape, not at full health, etc. We don't know. But this nonsense about "getting him in camp first" then renegotiating is just that, nonsense. Peters clearly doesn't believe that his show of good faith in that regard would be reciprocated. If that were what was holding this up, then this team would have something done with Evans now.

 

Parker has some other high profile clients and no doubt he's very comfortable with his position here. Either way, you have a team supposedly on the rise, paying all kinds of players that may never amount to anything for this team, then ignoring what is indisputably one of the three most critical elements to the 2008 success of the team.

 

We can argue whether or not that's smart, but it is what it is. The team's going to go a lot further with Peters than with Spencer Johnson and Kyle Williams if it's a one or the other thing, as merely one example.

 

Here's the rub, Peter's is not grossly undercompensated although he is undercompensated. But guys like Kelsay, Dockery, Walker, Johnson, Williams, maybe Mitchell, Butler, Josh Reed, and maybe a few others are overcompensated, mostly by a sizeable amount. Why? Poor management and our team having to overpay to lure talent. Again, Parker and Dockery see that.

 

Regardless, the Bills are now tinkering with seeing their season collapse over this. Anyone not thinking that Peters missing a bunch of games isn't going to impact the team's performance, win or lose, is naive. It doesn't matter who's right and who's wrong. What matters is that Peters is in camp, in shape, and ready to go in a month. This team is already questionable in terms of whether a rookie WR can change how horrible it was on offense last year. Any gains made by Hardy or Johnson will be quickly eradicated by Peters' absence.

 

But the Bills set the tone for this with their inconsistent yet predictable crappy signings. Anyone that was being honest knew that Tripplett sucked long before he got here. But the rah-rah types here won't see that. Ditto for Price, Fowler, Gandy, Kelsay (whom they've already paid for by having to give an aging Schobel more), and even Robert Royal who with a $10M contract may not even start this year according to team reports and who has already been demoted.

 

The Bills are far from guilt free in this and Brandon has his hands full with this. If he continues to play hardball and it costs the Bills this year that will set the tone for his tenure here and already present an uphill battle for him to remain on. If he plays into Peters/Parkers hands then he won't be doing anything differently that we've done in the past with Schobel as a precedent. Everyone here was good with Schobel's situation even though Schobel was already on his back-9 by that point, yet the sentiment is different for Peters, a player entering his prime and meaning more to this team than Schobel. That's what I can't understand.

 

Some of you are going to launch into the typical childish "he's not a Bills fan," but at times I seriously question whether most of you are Bills fans or front office, GM, or coach fans first.

 

As to what Parker's doing, he's had success with this route with some high profile clients. The party that's playing with fire on this though is Brandon specifically and the Bills generally. He and the team have a lot more to lose than Peters' does. If Jauron doesn't post a winning season people are going to want him gone which will present a whole new set of issues for Brandon.

 

I have two thoughts on this post:

 

1. I think Peters, since he signed his last contract, has a new agent: Eugene Parker. I may be wrong on this, but I am pretty sure that agents only get paid for contracts they negotiate (whether it be yearly, based on pay or a one-time shot upon signing, I don't know). Therefore Peters' last agent made the 15% to 20% commision on his 2005 contract and Parker has made nothing. Could it be that Parker is playing hardball because he hasn't made any money on this client yet?

 

2. One of the most important things to do is to extend current players. To say that Kyle Williams, Chris Kelsey, Brad Butler, etc are over paid is misleading. The cap is no longer in the $80 million range! Witht he cap currently being about $116 million, the average roster player salary is over $2 million per. I understand that players, based on seniority or ability, do not get that much, but it does put the salaries in perspective. Wheather you like it or not, starting defensive ends get $6 million per year. Starting guards get about $3 million per. It seems like they tried to do this year with the offensive line what they did last year on the defensive line. They signed Kelsey to a big, new contract and Schobel was underpaid. They probably went to Schobel (a usual non-participant in offseason activities) and said, "Here's what Chris got. You are underpaid and we will give you a riase to bring you in line with other DEs in the league and on the team, but you have to show up to offseason activities to get the ball rolling. If you remember he actually showed up for a few weeks last offseason and got his contract in Training Camp. This year they extended Butler and were probably set to say, "Jason, you need a raise too, please show up and you can have it." To this point, it seems Peters nor his agent never said they weren't coming until they didn;t show up. Therefore, no new contract. It makes sense. They set this precedent last year.

[tennesseeboy]

It's all business.

 

This is really just another indictment of the organization IMO. They always shell out money for the marginal but let players like Pat Williams, Ruben Brown, Evans, Peters walk.

 

And honestly, does anyone not think that they couldn't have found a G to give us what Butler does for half the money. Or what Johnson does for half the money. Of course just like Johnson, they don't want to play here unless they get extra for doing it. And hey, rightly so. We have no winning dividend in the rear view mirror.

Actually the Bills are playing it pretty well as of now. It doesn't mean much if Peters rests up the next few weeks, and the Bills are going to cough up some money at the end of the game. This is a dance and I would be surpised if a deal isn't fashioned before the start of the season.