DrDawkinstein Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 i agree bill. the LT position is very important. and we need to re-sign him and make him happy and lock him up. i just wish he'd show up. and i dont blame the bills for doing nothing until he does.
eball Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 OK, I see your point, and it certainly has merit. The thing is, we are talking about a Left Tackle. If we had a pro bowl qb (for example if Peyton Manning of Brady was a Bill), imo he would have full fan support in terms of being underpaid. I base my posts about this matter on the premise that the LT position is every bit as important as QB, and I think that most qbs would agree. That is why I am not particularly worried about what Crowell, Whitner, etc. might think. Once again, jmo. With all due respect, Bill, you've really become quite a Chicken Little on this Peters thing. I don't agree with the strategy his agent has talked him into, and am glad the Bills haven't voluntarily offered him a new contract at this point. I believe Peters will be paid handsomely by the Bills after another All-Pro type season at the position. I'm guessing Peters shows up after the Rochester camp closes (Wed.), when he'll be able to report "quietly" and rejoin his teammates for the final couple of weeks of preseason. Peters' leverage took a significant blow on Thursday night when the first string offense ran and passed effectively in marching to two TD drives against a very good defense. Did Buffalo do that in ANY game, preseason or otherwise, last year with our All-Pro LT on the field?
dave mcbride Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 With all these Jason Peters threads, no one has remembered that he WAS one of the dumber athletes coming out. So if he is at least partly calling the shots on his negotiations, that could explain why it seems so illogical. Remember his Wonderlic score? A big 9 Egads. At the risk of sounding incredibly naive, how are some of these players getting into college in the first place? I mean, anything below 15 means barely literate, and there a lot of guys with 11s and 12s.
bobinaz Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 I'm guessing Peters shows up after the Rochester camp closes (Wed.), when he'll be able to report "quietly" and rejoin his teammates for the final couple of weeks of preseason. I agree with you here. Just to save himself from embarassment and the harassment with the media, he'll show up at OP ready to play. Too bad he missed all this time. My question is if he does show up, how out of shape will he be?
Sisyphean Bills Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 His agent should be working a deal for him 2 weeks ago to have the fines waived if he shows up at practice. Peters made his point and extending his holdout further is only going to hurt him now. He needs to show up and show the Bills that he's still a great player and they are idiots for not paying him. It's not clear what Peters and his agent have in mind as their objective; but, it is not inconsistent that they may have decided that they want to force the Bills to trade Jason out of Buffalo. There are, without a doubt, many teams that would pony up huge contracts for a franchise LT just entering his prime.
FLFan Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Speaking very gererally, once a Bullalo Bill hits free agency, he is gone (if he is any good). A notable exception was Ruben Brown, who failed to get the offers he expected. Ostroski too, but he was terrible. The free agent arguement is really not applicable here. Peters owes the Bills three more years. Even supposing he refused to negotiate on the Bills timetable in those three years, they can still lock him in for at least another year with a franchise tag. Four years is an eternity. Peters has no leverage and needs to play for his contract this year. The Bills have shown a willingness to renegotiate in term extensions and will I am sure in this case when they think the timing is right. If so, Peters will sign, because waiting out his existing contract or refusing to play under are not realistic options. It would be a horrible precedent to let any player dictate the timing of renegotiation by throwing a temper tantrum. They have to think of the big picture here.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 It would be a horrible precedent to let any player dictate the timing of renegotiation by throwing a temper tantrum. They have to think of the big picture here. I just don't think that is true, because this is such a peculiar case. The Bills can easily, and rightfully, say to any agent or player to try to use this as a precedent, "Okay, if you completely over-perform your contract by three years and become an All-Pro in your first full year at the position, and become a consensus top 3 player in the league at one of the most important positions in the game, you can renegotiate, too. Otherwise, it's just not the same and you can't say say we did it for him, why not you." They would likely be thrilled to have that problem.
SouthernMan Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 His agent should be working a deal for him 2 weeks ago to have the fines waived if he shows up at practice. Peters made his point and extending his holdout further is only going to hurt him now. He needs to show up and show the Bills that he's still a great player and they are idiots for not paying him. It's not clear what Peters and his agent have in mind as their objective; but, it is not inconsistent that they may have decided that they want to force the Bills to trade Jason out of Buffalo. There are, without a doubt, many teams that would pony up huge contracts for a franchise LT just entering his prime. Force a trade? How? They have absolutely no leverage. He can't go play somewhere else. He's under contract. He's being fined. The ONLY leverage they have right now is his lack of services, which is being covered at least adequately at the moment. Their best hope for negotiating leverage is if the QBs blind side is consistently raided unobstructed by DEs and the threat of a QB injury becomes a big concern or if plays aren't able to be executed because of the substitute LT. Neither has happened to where it's become a common occurence in the worry department. Bruce Smith used to pull this summer stunt regularly. He was, well...Bruce Smith. Lock for first ballot HOF by the time this became his standard operating procedure. Jason, we knew Bruce Smith, and you're no Bruce Smith. Jason, cut the crap. Pack your duffle bag and get to camp.
apuszczalowski Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Agree.If he's really that good, can show that he's consistently dominating and not just one or two year phenom, he can play under his current contract for three years and hit the jackpot as a free agent when his contract is up. He'll still be a reasonably young player and should be able to secure a contract that will set him for life. If the Bills are smart and truly believe he is one of the best, they'll attempt to tie him up to a long term deal to keep him around, either this year or next. Either way, for the good of this team, he needs to be familiar with the playbook get some reps before the season starts. In a 16 game schedule, one win or loss can mean the difference between post season play or not. His prolonged absence could be that difference. Peters - If you're only following your agent's advice, fire him and get into camp - NOW! He's not helping you or the team. Why Bother? they just did that 3 years ago, and its done nothing for them because once someone else gets a bigger paycheck, or he gets another Pro Bowl under his belt (or atleast actually plays in the game, not just gets named to one) he will sit out and ask for more, and Bill and Mickey will be crying that he needs a new deal cause the Bills won't survive without him, Ralph is being cheap, and some dig about DB's
PromoTheRobot Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Why Bother? they just did that 3 years ago, and its done nothing for them because once someone else gets a bigger paycheck, or he gets another Pro Bowl under his belt (or atleast actually plays in the game, not just gets named to one) he will sit out and ask for more, and Bill and Mickey will be crying that he needs a new deal cause the Bills won't survive without him, Ralph is being cheap, and some dig about DB's Bingo. It's an endless cycle. Everyone crying poor for Peters forgets he got a generous deal at that time, a deal that should have kept his contract situation in check for at least 3-4 years, not two. If Peters won't honor this contract, why would he honor the next one? The next LT gets a larger deal and guess what? Another pouting holdout. Someone earlier ( I forget who) made the point that Eugene Parker doesn't make a dime off Peters until he negotiates him a new deal. DING DING DING!! There's you reason for holding out! It's not Peters, it's Parker looking to cash in off his new client. PTR
SouthernMan Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Why Bother? they just did that 3 years ago, and its done nothing for them because once someone else gets a bigger paycheck, or he gets another Pro Bowl under his belt (or atleast actually plays in the game, not just gets named to one) he will sit out and ask for more, and Bill and Mickey will be crying that he needs a new deal cause the Bills won't survive without him, Ralph is being cheap, and some dig about DB's I understand what you're saying, but I still think it's a matter of fairness. The Bills should at least consider extending the contract. If it's written properly, it's a win-win for both sides. If the Bills pay him on a scale that reflects his level of play, he should be content. I don't think he'd be stupid enough to come back again in 2 years and demand more if he's already one of the top paid LTs. The issue now is that he feels he's underpaid. Peters has exceeded the expectations of everyone since he signed the last contract. I can see where he might feel that way. If you performed proportionally in your job, you'd expect the same. If you were working circles around Bill and Mickey, receiving commedations, and were a vital part of the company success, you'd certainly hope to be paid at a rate similar to your peers at the high end of your position. I don't think his desire is unreasonable with consideration to his level of play. Unfortunately for him, he just doesn't have much much leverage.
apuszczalowski Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 OK, I see your point, and it certainly has merit. The thing is, we are talking about a Left Tackle. If we had a pro bowl qb (for example if Peyton Manning of Brady was a Bill), imo he would have full fan support in terms of being underpaid. I base my posts about this matter on the premise that the LT position is every bit as important as QB, and I think that most qbs would agree. That is why I am not particularly worried about what Crowell, Whitner, etc. might think. Once again, jmo. Here we go again. Let me guess, the LT spot is the Rodney Dangerfield of the NFL? They get no respect, No respect at all! Peters does have full fan support that he is underpaid, the problem is his tactic for renegotiating. Its not about the position he plays, or the money he wants, its about how he is going about trying to get the raise. It has been shown in the past that the Bills will pay their players they feel are worth the money if they show up and put the team first (Schoebel is the perfect example, Pro Bowler who just signed a new deal and was becoming underpaid at his position compared to the rest of the team and league) And you might not be worried about Whitner and Crowell, but if the Bills cave to Peters, whats to stop someone like them or Lynch, or Poz from holding out to get a bigger deal? They could hurt the Bills just as much if they hold out too.
keepthefaith Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Bingo. It's an endless cycle. Everyone crying poor for Peters forgets he got a generous deal at that time, a deal that should have kept his contract situation in check for at least 3-4 years, not two. If Peters won't honor this contract, why would he honor the next one? The next LT gets a larger deal and guess what? Another pouting holdout. Someone earlier ( I forget who) made the point that Eugene Parker doesn't make a dime off Peters until he negotiates him a new deal. DING DING DING!! There's you reason for holding out! It's not Peters, it's Parker looking to cash in off his new client. PTR Exactly. Peters is out ot lunch here. He's outperformed his contract for 1 year. Only 1 year. Players that become pro-bowlers often look to be underpaid and overpaid during different points of their careers. It's not a perfect system. Peters could choose to wait until he's a free agent to cash in on the big bucks (if he continues to play at a high level) or he can try to get something done now for longer term with the Bills. Frankly, he'd be in a better bargaining position in a year if he can play at a pro-bowl level again this year.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Should Anquan Boldin just come to practice and play nice for the next three years when the guy that plays right next to him, at the same position, and he is as good as, makes four times as much every day, every game, every year? And the only reason he makes four times as much is his team renegotiated with Fitzgerald who had two years left?
CosmicBills Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Should Anquan Boldin just come to practice and play nice for the next three years when the guy that plays right next to him, at the same position, and he is as good as, makes four times as much every day, every game, every year? And the only reason he makes four times as much is his team renegotiated with Fitzgerald who had two years left? I agree with you. I think Peters should get his new deal. And I think the Bills are willing to do it. But Peters has to show up to work first. To me it's so simple -- show up for work, start negotiating, and if it looks like the Bills are full of sh--, then leave. At least that way there is positive movement forward. Either way, I think Peters shows up in the next 10 days or so and life goes on.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 I agree with you. I think Peters should get his new deal. And I think the Bills are willing to do it. But Peters has to show up to work first. To me it's so simple -- show up for work, start negotiating, and if it looks like the Bills are full of sh--, then leave. At least that way there is positive movement forward. Either way, I think Peters shows up in the next 10 days or so and life goes on. Oh, I do, too. To me, though, the agent surely knows what the Bills are willing to pay. If they were actually in the ballpark of what Peters and Parker want, Peters would be in camp. But they're not, so why go in and start negotiating when it isn't going to be near what you want right now? There is no way possible, IMO, that the Bills are willing to pay Peters 10 million a year, which is without question what he wants, BUT are not telling the agent they are willing to go that high just because they want him to come in first. It just doesn't make any sense in the real world. And what they gain by making the player come in first is not made up for by the fact the OL has to be changed dramatically, Peters is missing weeks of workouts, their franchise QB is in danger of getting battered from behind, the new offense isn't able to be fully installed properly, etc.
apuszczalowski Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Should Anquan Boldin just come to practice and play nice for the next three years when the guy that plays right next to him, at the same position, and he is as good as, makes four times as much every day, every game, every year? And the only reason he makes four times as much is his team renegotiated with Fitzgerald who had two years left? Is Boldin holding out or demanding that his contract be re-negotiated? He has every right to ask that his contract be re-negotiated to make something similar, this debate has nothing to do if anyone feels that Peters i worth the money or not, cause I don't think anyone is saying he isn't worth it. Its the fact that the Bills have said we will not re-negotiate or talk about it unless you are in camp. He would have alot more people on his side, and more leverage if he showed up like the Bills asked and they refuse to talk like they said they would. Brandon has said the Bills expect him to honor his current contract. And to do that, he has to show up to camp. Of course they have also said they want him to play out his deal he signed 2 years ago, what GM wouldn't want him too? GM's would rather underpay then overpay. He never said they would not re-negotiate, just that they would like him to honor his contract and report, and that they don't negotiate unless he is in camp.
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Peters who? 5.1 yards per carry rushing against the Steelers 1st stringers.
apuszczalowski Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Oh, I do, too. To me, though, the agent surely knows what the Bills are willing to pay. If they were actually in the ballpark of what Peters and Parker want, Peters would be in camp. But they're not, so why go in and start negotiating when it isn't going to be near what you want right now? There is no way possible, IMO, that the Bills are willing to pay Peters 10 million a year, which is without question what he wants, BUT are not telling the agent they are willing to go that high just because they want him to come in first. It just doesn't make any sense in the real world. And what they gain by making the player come in first is not made up for by the fact the OL has to be changed dramatically, Peters is missing weeks of workouts, their franchise QB is in danger of getting battered from behind, the new offense isn't able to be fully installed properly, etc. But we have no idea what they have discussed, so as sure as you are that the Bills no what he is looking for and just don't want to pay it, its just as likely that the Bills have not had those types of discussions with Parker, and that the discussions they have had have just consisted of them telling him they won't talk numbers until he shows up to camp. Even if they knew what he wanted and were going to pay it to him, by giving it to him to end the hold out, without him meeting their demands first (by showing up and reporting to camp) it shows the Bills cavin to his demands, and not something that would be good for the team. They need to show everyone else that no one is above the team and they do not cave. It just makes it harder in the future with contract negotiations.
Bill from NYC Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 And you might not be worried about Whitner and Crowell, but if the Bills cave to Peters, whats to stop someone like them or Lynch, or Poz from holding out to get a bigger deal? They could hurt the Bills just as much if they hold out too. The "just as much" part is simply not true. LTs and QBs are frequently drafted in the top 5. This is of course because there are so few really good ones. Guys like DiGiorgio and Elison stepped up and were OK to a dgree. LT is another story. You don't just replace one without having to make big time adjustments, which limits an offense. Royal looked great against Pitt. Do you want to be forced to keep him inside for protection when the real games start? It is a sad situation, much worse than you think imo.
Recommended Posts