Peters' apologists beware...

[Kelly the Dog]

You assume

Please tell me, and this board, and the entire Bills Nation, and World Wide Web, that you truly believe it's remotely possible that the Bills are willing to pay Peters 10+ million a year, right now, and will negotiate with his agent for that amount if he just comes into camp. And they just haven't told Parker they are close on money, because they just want to make a point that we don't negotiate without you here. Knowing full well, of course, that if they just told him he gets his big money, he would be in camp tomorrow.

 

If you don't believe that's the case, what else could it possibly be besides the big 10+ mil money.

[apuszczalowski]

Please tell me, and this board, and the entire Bills Nation, and World Wide Web, that you truly believe it's remotely possible that the Bills are willing to pay Peters 10+ million a year, right now, and will negotiate with his agent for that amount if he just comes into camp. And they just haven't told Parker they are close on money, because they just want to make a point that we don't negotiate without you here. Knowing full well, of course, that if they just told him he gets his big money, he would be in camp tomorrow.

 

If you don't believe that's the case, what else could it possibly be besides the big 10+ mil money.

It doesn't matter what I believe, you are making a complete assumption that they have even discussed numbers and that the Bills and Parker are only at odds over the figures in the deal. Who said they even talked numbers? Its only been said they have had brief conversations and that the teams policy is to not negotiate unless the player reports.

 

Of course its possible. Its also remotely possible that Peters is holding out because he wants an extra piece of steak after workouts, and for them to stock purple gatorade on the field too.

 

I'm not denying that Parker may have told them what he is looking for, but that is all unknown to anyone at this point, so you are only assuming its true because it makes the most sense to you

[stuckincincy]

Of course its possible. Its also remotely possible that Peters is holding out because he wants an extra piece of steak after workouts, and for them to stock purple gatorade on the field too.

 

Maybe a guarantee that 50% of the formations will be double tight ends?

[apuszczalowski]

Maybe a guarantee that 50% of the formations will be double tight ends?

Or its possible he wants to call 1 play every drive?

 

Maybe the negotiations are all about him wanting to chose when they get to wear the throwback unifomrs?

 

All remotely possible situations

[Kelly the Dog]

It doesn't matter what I believe, you are making a complete assumption that they have even discussed numbers and that the Bills and Parker are only at odds over the figures in the deal. Who said they even talked numbers? Its only been said they have had brief conversations and that the teams policy is to not negotiate unless the player reports.

 

Of course its possible. Its also remotely possible that Peters is holding out because he wants an extra piece of steak after workouts, and for them to stock purple gatorade on the field too.

 

I'm not denying that Parker may have told them what he is looking for, but that is all unknown to anyone at this point, so you are only assuming its true because it makes the most sense to you

No, because it's the only thing that makes sense, and it has been reported by professionals very close to the situation with specifics. I asked you for any other possible scenario and your response was "He wants an extra steak after workouts." And you're right. That's how stupid any other scenario sounds. You don't have to have actual documentation signed by a notary in front of you to make an "assumption" with 99% certainty that this is about big money. Now.

[stuckincincy]

Or its possible he wants to call 1 play every drive?

 

Maybe the negotiations are all about him wanting to chose when they get to wear the throwback unifomrs?

 

All remotely possible situations

 

Could be!

 

In any event - nothing you or I can do. Better to keep up a humorous spirit and sit back and watch things unfold.

[UB Bull]

Stupid? Sorry, but Jason Peters is a VERY smart man....

 

http://forum.signonsandiego.com/archive/in...hp/t-26633.html

 

His 9 on the wonderlic begs to differ

[The Senator]

I'd hold out for the extra steak.

[bowery4]

Will you be sliding protection towards Walker and putting a TE on his open side, like we had to do on the right side last year?

 

 

My first post, been lurking for years.

My prediction is they have a long term problem that won't get solved and we will be lucky to see Peters this season, they both seem to think they have a strong position. I don't see Ralph caving in this. Maybe we will be lucky and Peters will, but I think not either.

 

The Bills have a good blocking fullback again now and a TE to line up on the right or left.

They may still suck w/o Peters in there though.

 

This will play out one way or another on Friday. We will see who is the more serious party after the deadline. I think both sides are well aware of the tunafish over paying the rook and the Bills are open to doing a new deal but Peters will not to play, comes in to it here.

 

That is where the rich owners screwed themselves in the CBA. This IMHO has to be about numbers and the biggest real problem is the cash to the cap policy. Which I happen to think is a good one.

If the Bills get good though in the next couple of years, they are going to have problems just like the 90s team did. (Watch out in 09-10, 10-11 rich owners will f#%k that up for sure) Ralphie knows it and thats why he was sooooo against the CBA. All that being said we are a better team with Jason Peters in there so I hope they can get talking with him soon. For everyone who says JP get into camp well it would be a holdout then and his leverage is gone at that point. I can just hear Brandon saying oh yeah, we'll talk, we'll talk.......

I hope that something can be done and the sooner the better.

 

I also think part of this rests on how much Evans gets. I think they will have to forcefully keep anglo crowell which is a pity because he is very good and he will be gone after (although his final year he will be paid pretty well).

[Mickey]

It doesn't matter what I believe, you are making a complete assumption that they have even discussed numbers and that the Bills and Parker are only at odds over the figures in the deal. Who said they even talked numbers? Its only been said they have had brief conversations and that the teams policy is to not negotiate unless the player reports.

 

Of course its possible. Its also remotely possible that Peters is holding out because he wants an extra piece of steak after workouts, and for them to stock purple gatorade on the field too.

 

I'm not denying that Parker may have told them what he is looking for, but that is all unknown to anyone at this point, so you are only assuming its true because it makes the most sense to you

They don't need to have discussed specific numbers to know whether they want to give him a new deal or not. They know what the market range is for a top LT and they know they clearly don't want to pay it. So, although you are right, we don't know if they have talked numbers, that really isn't relevant to the point. He wants more money and he wants it now, we all agree on that. The Bills won't give it to him, that is why he isn't here. And, they have told us, they expect him to honor the commitment he made two years ago. Translation? "No new contract." Result? Hold out.

[Turn Down For Watkins]

According to Chris Brown's report, the following player is "looking good:"

 

"Langston Walker has been very efficient on the left side at tackle. It's still not live football, but he's worked against Aaron Schobel the past two days and has held up well."

 

Yeah, but I'm not too sure about having Chambers being the starting Right Tackle for us.

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

The Bills won't give it to him, that is why he isn't here. And, they have told us, they expect him to honor the commitment he made two years ago. Translation? "No new contract." Result? Hold out.

The Bills won't give it to him UNLESS he's there. They said it so many times. They expect him to honor his commitment by showing up, and they're willing to discuss a new deal. We don't know their top line, but it all starts with Peters showing up. He's (probably) being told, right or wrong, that if he shows, he loses his leverage. Which is what most hard line agents like Parker would say to do. Not sure why you keep saying it's the other way around, since the FO has been very consistent.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

let shope Jason Taylor doesn't rip Trent Edwards head out of his socket. Ralph Wilson is screwing this situation up like he always does everytime he has a good thing going. why he gave Schobel and Kelsay raises and not Peters is a big joke

Um, Taylor's on the Foreskins now.

[Bill from NYC]

So you have seen what the bills offensive line looks like in a game situation with Chamber as a RT and Walker at LT?

 

Of course we have. Where have you been? We have been seeing the Bills OL suck for more than a decade. Walker is not a LT. He is a bruising (and just a wee bit plodding) RT. From what little I have seen of Chambers, I must say that I have seen worse. Greg Jerman anyone? Kris Farris, remember him?

 

Is this the kind of sub-par OL that you want to go back to? Because if you don't care, what you are saying is that the Bills winning football games matters less to you than Ralph's rather deep pockets, and other abstract nonsense.

 

How about we discuss how many good blockers we have had on this team in the last 10 or 12 years, OK? Ruben Brown was very good. Villarial played well at RG.....for a bit more than 1/2 of one season. I liked Jennings at OT, on the rare occasions that he wasn't half dead in some hospital.

 

Fina and Ostroski were bags of schitt (krazycat doesn't think so if that helps my case at all), and both of them, when TD cut them about a thousand years ago, were being paid more than Jason Peters. In fact, getting rid of these horrible players cost our team close to 11 million dollars in cap space. Fina was a scrub for Arizona and he was promptly cut; Ostroski never played another game. See the difference?

 

Look, I would like Peters in camp as much as you, but this team needs him to have a ghost of a chance. Whitner, Youboty, McCorner and Corner will only carry this team so far. Actually, somebody has to block. It might as well be the Pro Bowl Left Tackle that we lucked into, no?

[R. Rich]

Of course we have. Where have you been? We have been seeing the Bills OL suck for more than a decade. Walker is not a LT. He is a bruising (and just a wee bit plodding) RT. From what little I have seen of Chambers, I must say that I have seen worse. Greg Jerman anyone? Kris Farris, remember him?

 

Is this the kind of sub-par OL that you want to go back to? Because if you don't care, what you are saying is that the Bills winning football games matters less to you than Ralph's rather deep pockets, and other abstract nonsense.

 

How about we discuss how many good blockers we have had on this team in the last 10 or 12 years, OK? Ruben Brown was very good. Villarial played well at RG.....for a bit more than 1/2 of season. I liked Jennings at OT, on the rare occasions that he wasn't half dead in some hospital.

 

Fina and Ostroski were bags of schitt (krazycat doesn't think so if that helps my case at all), and both of them, when TD cut them about a thousand years ago, were being paid more than Jason Peters. In fact, getting rid of these horrible players cost our team close to 11 million dollars in cap space. Fina was a scrub for Arizona and he was promptly cut; Ostroski never played another game. See the difference?

 

Look, I would like Peters in camp as much as you, but this team needs him to have a ghost of a chance. Whitner, Youboty, McCorner and Corner will only carry this team so far. Actually, somebody has to block. It might as well be the Pro Bowl Left Tackle that we lucked into, no?

 

 

I want to see Jason Peters back in camp as much as you do. I also want the Bills and Peters to actually come to an agreement on a long term deal to keep him here. The problem is, seemingly, that neither side wants to be perceived as "giving in". I would've loved for him to voice his displeasure w/ his contract situation while continuing to practice/play. Alan Faneca did so in Pittsburgh and while the Stillers were not able to keep him (some idiot figured that giving big money to a couple All Pro guys like Polamalu-a safety, fer crying out loud and Roethlisberger were more important than keeping one All Pro lineman), he did get the big payday he so desired.

 

To me, this isn't a case of being pro Jason Peters or pro Bills management. Both sides need to meet in the middle and do what's right. Good luck w/ that, though.

[Bill from NYC]

I want to see Jason Peters back in camp as much as you do. I also want the Bills and Peters to actually come to an agreement on a long term deal to keep him here. The problem is, seemingly, that neither side wants to be perceived as "giving in". I would've loved for him to voice his displeasure w/ his contract situation while continuing to practice/play. Alan Faneca did so in Pittsburgh and while the Stillers were not able to keep him (some idiot figured that giving big money to a couple All Pro guys like Polamalu-a safety, fer crying out loud and Roethlisberger were more important than keeping one All Pro lineman), he did get the big payday he so desired.

 

To me, this isn't a case of being pro Jason Peters or pro Bills management. Both sides need to meet in the middle and do what's right. Good luck w/ that, though.

 

How many years did Big Ben have to play before he got a new contract?

 

PS: I would rather have Jason Peters on my football team than Ben Roethlisberger. Certainly, LaDarius will take exception to this.

[R. Rich]

How many years did Big Ben have to play before he got a new contract?

 

PS: I would rather have Jason Peters on my football team than Ben Roethlisberger. Certainly, LaDarius will take exception to this.

 

 

True, YOU would, but Stiller fans have been in a similar situation in regard to QBs that Bills fans have been in w/ the O line. After years of so-so play from the position (other than a few decent seasons from Brister, a good season from Maddox and a couple pretty good seasons from Stewart), they finally have themselves a QB that can lead them.

 

I have to think that the Bills will value Peters enough to work out a deal w/ him. I don't know if it'll happen on our timeline (any time in the next 8 seconds), but I do think it will happen.

[apuszczalowski]

Of course we have. Where have you been? We have been seeing the Bills OL suck for more than a decade. Walker is not a LT. He is a bruising (and just a wee bit plodding) RT. From what little I have seen of Chambers, I must say that I have seen worse. Greg Jerman anyone? Kris Farris, remember him?

 

Is this the kind of sub-par OL that you want to go back to? Because if you don't care, what you are saying is that the Bills winning football games matters less to you than Ralph's rather deep pockets, and other abstract nonsense.

 

How about we discuss how many good blockers we have had on this team in the last 10 or 12 years, OK? Ruben Brown was very good. Villarial played well at RG.....for a bit more than 1/2 of one season. I liked Jennings at OT, on the rare occasions that he wasn't half dead in some hospital.

 

Fina and Ostroski were bags of schitt (krazycat doesn't think so if that helps my case at all), and both of them, when TD cut them about a thousand years ago, were being paid more than Jason Peters. In fact, getting rid of these horrible players cost our team close to 11 million dollars in cap space. Fina was a scrub for Arizona and he was promptly cut; Ostroski never played another game. See the difference?

 

Look, I would like Peters in camp as much as you, but this team needs him to have a ghost of a chance. Whitner, Youboty, McCorner and Corner will only carry this team so far. Actually, somebody has to block. It might as well be the Pro Bowl Left Tackle that we lucked into, no?

So because the Bills haven't had good players on the line prior to Peters, that means Walker and Chambers will ultimatly fail???

 

My point is, you don't have any clue just how well the line will do with Walker at LT, and with Chambers playing RT because we have have yet to actually see those guys play those positions before. I'm not saying they will end up Pro Bowlers and its possible they could be flops at the positions, but they are being written off by you before you have actually seen them play in a game. What would you have said if someone told you 5 years ago that the Bills were practicing an UDFA TE at the LT spot? You probably would have written this nobody named Peters off too, instead of preparing his Bust for the Hall of Fame.

 

We get it, Peters is the key to the bills success this year and the Bills have to have him back. No one will ever adequatly be able to fill his shoes ever.

[bowery4]

I hope someone makes the first move soon this game of wills is boring and I want him to learn the new playbook. That being said I don't see it happening. I hope the August 8th thing motivates him.

[Mickey]

The Bills won't give it to him UNLESS he's there. They said it so many times. They expect him to honor his commitment by showing up, and they're willing to discuss a new deal. We don't know their top line, but it all starts with Peters showing up. He's (probably) being told, right or wrong, that if he shows, he loses his leverage. Which is what most hard line agents like Parker would say to do. Not sure why you keep saying it's the other way around, since the FO has been very consistent.

I invite you to go back to the quotes, that is not what they said. In fact, as far as getting a new deal, what they said is that they would "never say never". And frankly, it makes no sense for them to take the position you think they have taken, that they will pay him a gazillion bucks, no problem, they just want to be here when the papers are drawn. McCargo held out, Whitner held out, Lynch held out and none of them showed up until their deals were signed.

 

Lets take a look at what the team has said or at least quoted as having said by the media:

 

Brandon on Peters:

 

"...we made a commitment to Jason two years ago and we expect him to honor that commitment..."

"...its difficult to have discussions with someone that is not here..."

"...again, we expect Jason to be here and to honor his commitment as the organization made a substantial commitment to him two years ago..."

"...Jason was in I believe to have a quick check up coming off his surgery..."

 

See See WGR audio tape of Brandon's comments regarding Peters

 

From that tape, it is clear they want him to honor his deal from two years ago, ie, no new deal, he even said it twice and pointed out that the commitment the team made was "substantial". It also puts the lie to so many posts hereabouts that the team has no idea how the surgery went because there has been zero contact with the team. The guy came in for a check up with the team doctors after the surgery. Lastly, the comment about it being difficult to have "discussions with someone not here" is patent BS. Parker has a cell phone, I am sure Brandon and the team can reach him anytime they want. Peters isn't returning calls because his agent is the guy to speak to, not him. That is why they hired him. The notion that physical absence from camp is some sort of logistical bar to negotiating a deal is Bozo level foolishness.

 

More from Brandon on Peters:

 

"Brandon said Peters’ absence from all offseason activities at Ralph Wilson Stadium has been puzzling because he has been unable to get a read on the situation, primarily because he hasn’t spoken to Peters and has had only brief discussions with the player’s agent, Eugene Parker."

 

"Brandon said the bulk of the discussions with Parker have centered on Hardy’s deal and not Peters’ impending holdout."

 

See D&C Article quoting Brandon

 

From the above, all those posts about there being no contact with the team are total BS. There has been contact, in fact, there has been more than one discussion with Parker (it says discussions). Also note that "bulk of" is not the same as "all of" thus, they did speak about Peters. Have they been brief? Sure but "brief" is not the same as "none". It also doesn't take long for the team to tell them no new deal this year and for Parker to tell them to call if they change their minds.

 

Then there was this from Chirs Brown, note that the assertion is Brown's opinion, not a quote from the team:

 

It appears the Bills are not opposed to discussing a new deal, but Brandon would like to see Peters in person to begin such talks.

"It's difficult to have discussions with someone that's not here and has not elected to participate in what we're trying to do," said Brandon.

 

See Brown on Peters

 

This is just a repeat of the line quoted in the D&C from which Brown reaches his own opinion as to what it means. It is the same BS line about it being somehow "difficult" to have a discussion with someone not in the room with you. I'll personally chip in a few tin cans and really long string from Brandon's office to Parker's.

 

From the Buffalo News:

 

Brandon said the two sides barely have discussed Peters' deal. "Very briefly with Eugene," Brandon said.

 

And this:

 

Brandon did not rule out considering a new deal for Peters, but made it clear nothing is happening anytime soon.

 

"You never say never," Brandon said. "We have conversations with our guys all the time, and I think we have a proven track record of trying to get guys done and extend guys out. We've done it already this offseason with Kyle Williams and Brad Butler. We've done it with [Aaron] Schobel in the past and Terrence McGee. It's a long line of guys that we've done it with. But it's very difficult to have those conversations when the individual is not participating in your work."

 

See Buff News' take on Brandon Press Conference

 

The first quote is yet another example of Brandon admitting that despite his "road map of silence" meme, he has spoken with Parker about Peters. Was it brief, I'll take his word on that but I do note that the guy who came up with "road map of silence" has in fact had a number of discussions with Parker. Again, how long does it take to say "Jason wants a new deal" and "No new deal this year"???

 

The second quote, the "never say never" line is apparently the line you are relying upon to assert that the team is willing to give him a new deal for millions of dollars more but only if he comes to camp. "did not rule out" and "Never say never" is not exactly a committment to give him a new deal now is it? Sounds like what my wife would say if I asked her to go to a hockey game or for a certain special present on my birthday. Besides, he finishes that line with the same lame justification that it is just so gosh durn difficult to negotiate with Jason not here. Presumably, Brandon has maxed out his minutes this month talking to Evans' agent so cell phones are out. It also ignores the many deals the team has made with hold outs who actually held out. McCargo, Whitner and Lynch are just a few that I can recall off the top of my head.

 

And so, respectfully, I think you are wrong in asserting that the stumbling block to a new deal is his absence from camp. The team has never committed to giving him a new deal if he simply comes in to camp. The have done nothing more than say the equivalent of "maybe, who knows, you never can tell, stranger things have happened, etc." The stumbling block is the financial reality that Peters is worth way more than his current contract but that the Bills could conceivably get another year out of him at a bargain basement price because he has so many years left on his deal. Peters isn't going to easily accept getting paid so much less than he is worth and the team isn't going to easily part with more money for a player already under contract.

 

There is no idiocy or prickiness on either side. There is no easy solution that we see that the team or Peters doesn't because he or they are bunch of greedy, good for nothing morons. The agent isn't a jack a$$ and neither is Peters. Peters is justifiably trying to get what he is worth and he has an experienced agent with a track record of success dealing with these situations and getting his clients a good deal. The team is justifiably trying to enjoy the fruit of the good bet they made on Peters. This is life in the NFL.