Anything new on Peters??

[Beerball]

PFW:

 

Quick, name the only two veterans still holding out. If you came up with Bills OLT Jason Peters and Rams RB Steven Jackson, you’re a winner. And besides being far more athletic and wealthy than you and I, what do these two footballers have in common? Yep, they’re both represented by Eugene Parker. The obvious question this brings up is whether Parker has been initiating these holdouts, telling his clients than they can do better than their existing contracts.

 

 

Then the 'fun' begins:

Cue in on shirtless Peters sauntering around his kitchen, cell phone in one hand, tub of ice cream and spoon in the other.

 

Peters: You know what Eugene, I like you. My wife likes you. You’re good to her. But I’m hurting. (Bills COO) Russ Brandon ain’t showing me the love. Now for me to stay with you, I’m going to let you in on a little family motto. (brief pause). Show me the money. (brief pause, amps up speaker system). Oh! Yeah! Say it with me Eugene!

 

Cut to a visibly confused, nervous Parker, hunched over his desk, staring down the Drew Rosenhaus voodoo doll in his bookcase.

 

Parker (a little confused): Um, OK, uh, show you the money.

 

...

 

link

[nucci]

No one said you should feel sorry for him. It is people on your side of this calling him a greedy lazy bastard who should care more about the team than the financial security of his family. The only point I am making, that you still haven't addressed, is that he has just as much right to getting paid as much as he can for his services as you do. He doesn't play for a "team", he works for an employer, a business. It is no more his responsibility to take less pay than he is worth in the market than it is your responsibility to take a pay cut for the good of your employer/team. Maybe anyone who aspires to be more than a Joe Schmo is a fat greedy bastard to you but to those of us who are not socialist commies, I think he should get paid what he is worth.

 

If you want to end this arguement, just tell me how many times you have offered to take significantly less pay for the same job for the good of the "team". Peters is no different from any other player when it comes to securing the highest pay for his services. If you don't like it, go watch an intramural bowling league where they play for the pure love of the game...and beer.

Your 1st paragraph is correct. However, he is under contract and was arguably overpaid for the 1st 2 years. He does have all those rights but right now he is breach of his contract and negotiating from a position of weakness. The Bills will move on if he does not show up and will have to go through legal venues to get released from his deal.

[DrDawkinstein]

No one said you should feel sorry for him. It is people on your side of this calling him a greedy lazy bastard who should care more about the team than the financial security of his family. The only point I am making, that you still haven't addressed, is that he has just as much right to getting paid as much as he can for his services as you do. He doesn't play for a "team", he works for an employer, a business. It is no more his responsibility to take less pay than he is worth in the market than it is your responsibility to take a pay cut for the good of your employer/team. Maybe anyone who aspires to be more than a Joe Schmo is a fat greedy bastard to you but to those of us who are not socialist commies, I think he should get paid what he is worth.

 

If you want to end this arguement, just tell me how many times you have offered to take significantly less pay for the same job for the good of the "team". Peters is no different from any other player when it comes to securing the highest pay for his services. If you don't like it, go watch an intramural bowling league where they play for the pure love of the game...and beer.

 

 

ok, so in that line of thinking, we will renegotiate this year and sign him to a blockbuster deal. but IF and when he doesnt make the pro-bowl, then what? we get to renegotiate his contract and take him back down to the piddly $3million/year? so why bother signing a long term contract. lets just renegotiate EVERYONE based on their last season of play. oh wait, thats a ridiculous notion.

 

this is the same argument that has been going on since this new CBA went into place. this is NOT a year-by-year renegotiation plan. he signed a 5 year deal. he and his agent were too stupid to put in any clauses about Pro-Bowls and position changes for bonuses. he has completed TWO out of FIVE years of that deal, and now wants a new one?

 

tough sh--

[apuszczalowski]

No one said you should feel sorry for him. It is people on your side of this calling him a greedy lazy bastard who should care more about the team than the financial security of his family. The only point I am making, that you still haven't addressed, is that he has just as much right to getting paid as much as he can for his services as you do. He doesn't play for a "team", he works for an employer, a business. It is no more his responsibility to take less pay than he is worth in the market than it is your responsibility to take a pay cut for the good of your employer/team. Maybe anyone who aspires to be more than a Joe Schmo is a fat greedy bastard to you but to those of us who are not socialist commies, I think he should get paid what he is worth.

 

If you want to end this arguement, just tell me how many times you have offered to take significantly less pay for the same job for the good of the "team". Peters is no different from any other player when it comes to securing the highest pay for his services. If you don't like it, go watch an intramural bowling league where they play for the pure love of the game...and beer.

I have never been in a position yet where I have had to make a decision to take less for the good of the "team".

 

But I am making just enough money to scrape by living as a "Joe Schmo" in this world, I'm not in a position where my current one year salary is what the average person would make in a lifetime

 

He does have the right to want to make more money, everyone in the world has that right. I never said he was a fat greedy bastard either, and I never said he shouldn't get more money, maybe a handful of posters have actually said that he is greedy and lazy, I have just said that he is not going about this the right way, and that its not good for the Bills to just cave into his demands, thats not how successful buisnesses are run and not good negotiating tactics. Right now the Bills are doing the best thing possible in this situation, showing him that he does not mean more to this team then everyone else, and that they are willing to get by without him, at any cost by not caving and moving guys around to rework their lines. They also said infront of the media that they will not negotiate with him unless he is in camp and that they want him to honor his current contract

 

That last part is where the assumptions can be made depending on how you read that. The Bills won't come out and say "Come to camp and you will get a new deal" or "Come to camp and you will get what you want". What they are saying is that they won't talk to you until you report. AS for the "honoring the current Deal" comment. That can be taken as "We want you to play for the contract you have signed already" (Who wouldn't want a Pro Bowl Linemen who makes $3.5 mil a year????) or (since he is not at Training Camp, a requirement under his current deal that he reports every year to training camp on time) "We want him to show up and honor his contract by reporting to camp before we begin talking" It is most likely, after seeing a situation similar to this happen with Schoebel a few years ago, that they just want him in camp before they start working out a deal, they want to see him committed to the team before awarding him a huge deal, which in my opinion is not a big deal. What does he have to lose? He shows up to camp, opens negotiations with the team, and if the team says no we want you to play out your deal, then you walk and go sit at home til they do talk, and this gives you the leverage and more fans on your side because you did what the team asked and they refuse to negotiate.

[Mickey]

ok, fair enough. your have made good and valid points, no doubt. but how about this:

 

if you come to camp, then there is a chance we will renegotiate

 

if you DONT come to camp, then there is NO chance we renegotiate

We don't know what they have said in private so we can't really castigate or praise one side or the other based on what maybe they have said.

 

But to speculate, which is all we can do, this could be a trick it would make sense for the team to try. If they figure he will hold out but only for so long given how much longer he is still under contract, then they know that ultimately he will come in even without a new contract. So based on that, they decide they aren't going to give him a new deal. But they want him in camp so he is ready to go in week one reather than in week three. So why not lead him on, let him think that if he comes in, maybe they will do a deal? If he bites, he comes in, gets all the practice and in the end, they stiff him on the deal. They get him ready to go for week one and do so without a new deal.

 

Now, if you are his agent, what do you tell Jason when they waive that bait in front of him? What we complain about as far as him not being ready to play when he finally does come back is actually leverage he has on the team.

 

Guessing, I think the team just wants to get another year out of him to capitalize on the good bet they made two years ago. They must believe that they can get away with that and then pony up enough next year to soothe his anger and get him for the long term. They may be right.

 

I haven't wanted to argue that one side or the other is a villian here. I would rather the team make a point with some other player, not this guy but I see why they are doing what they are doing. Its not totally stupid. On the other hand, Peters and his agent are not out of bounds either. This is a well worn path many good teams and players have had to endure.

[DrDawkinstein]

i wouldnt call it a "trick" since they arent promising to renegotiate. that statement is merely saying, "if you want to have any chance at a new contract, since we hold 99% of the chips here, come to camp and we'll THINK about it"

 

going back to my point about year-to-year negotiating. it cant happen. and all Peters/Parker are doing is backing the team into a corner to prove that it wont. so fine, theyre not. now what? show up to work.

[Kelly the Dog]

This argument is getting more laughable every minute. So the Bills are willing to pay Peters what he wants, which is 10+ million a year, but they aren't going to tell the agent that because they want Peters to get to camp first, so they can say, "Okay, now that you're here, here is your 10 million a year." Even though three months ago, they could have called him and said, "Come in to camp and you can have your 10 million," but he said no, because he just wanted to be offered the 10 million before he went to camp. He's willing to turn down the 10 million because he wants to be asked politely first.

 

Yeah, right.

 

And if that weren't already insane enough, the REASON the Bills want him to come into camp, where they are prepared to pay him what he wants, is because they don't want to set a bad precedent for other players. In other words, they are telling other players by this stance, come into camp and we'll give you anything you want, just like we did Jason Peters.

 

Yeah, right.

 

:worthy: :worthy:

 

Oh, wait a minute, maybe they're not really willing to re-negotiate and give him anything close to what he wants if he comes into camp. Hmmmmm...

[Mickey]

I have never been in a position yet where I have had to make a decision to take less for the good of the "team".

 

But I am making just enough money to scrape by living as a "Joe Schmo" in this world, I'm not in a position where my current one year salary is what the average person would make in a lifetime

 

He does have the right to want to make more money, everyone in the world has that right. I never said he was a fat greedy bastard either, and I never said he shouldn't get more money, maybe a handful of posters have actually said that he is greedy and lazy, I have just said that he is not going about this the right way, and that its not good for the Bills to just cave into his demands, thats not how successful buisnesses are run and not good negotiating tactics. Right now the Bills are doing the best thing possible in this situation, showing him that he does not mean more to this team then everyone else, and that they are willing to get by without him, at any cost by not caving and moving guys around to rework their lines. They also said infront of the media that they will not negotiate with him unless he is in camp and that they want him to honor his current contract

 

That last part is where the assumptions can be made depending on how you read that. The Bills won't come out and say "Come to camp and you will get a new deal" or "Come to camp and you will get what you want". What they are saying is that they won't talk to you until you report. AS for the "honoring the current Deal" comment. That can be taken as "We want you to play for the contract you have signed already" (Who wouldn't want a Pro Bowl Linemen who makes $3.5 mil a year????) or (since he is not at Training Camp, a requirement under his current deal that he reports every year to training camp on time) "We want him to show up and honor his contract by reporting to camp before we begin talking" It is most likely, after seeing a situation similar to this happen with Schoebel a few years ago, that they just want him in camp before they start working out a deal, they want to see him committed to the team before awarding him a huge deal, which in my opinion is not a big deal. What does he have to lose? He shows up to camp, opens negotiations with the team, and if the team says no we want you to play out your deal, then you walk and go sit at home til they do talk, and this gives you the leverage and more fans on your side because you did what the team asked and they refuse to negotiate.

If you want to read all that "in between lines", fair enough. That is totally different than stating for a fact that the team would negotiate with him if he just came to camp. Peruse the boards and you will see that claim made over and over and over, that if he came to camp he would get a new deal and the only reason he doesn't have a new deal is because he is holding out. Thus, his agent is an idiot, Peters is an idiot, the team is reasonble, Peters is not, blah, blah, blah. The reason I believe that they won't give him a new contract is that they have had since January to give him one and he still doesn't have one. Here we are, a few weeks from the opener and he still doesn't have a new contract. If they wanted to give him one, they could have done so in January, in February, in March, in April, in May, in June, in July, or yesterday or today.

 

What he has to lose is the only leverage he has, his services, even if only for the first three games or so. As many have pointed out, given the length of his current contract, he is going to have to show up sooner or later. If he shows up on the Friday before the 1st game, he doesn't miss a game pay check but he won't be playing. He might not even be playing in week two or three. Maybe, as many have pointed out, he picks up a nagging injury due to having missed so much practice. If that happens, we lose him for more games but still have to pay him his full salary. So, if what people say is true, that the Bills own him for the next 3 years, doesn't that mean his only leverage for a new deal now, this year, holding out all through camp so that the team will lose him for give or take 3 games?

 

Who knows. Mabye this is all strategy for next year. Maybe the agent is waiting for the Bills to promise that they will give either give him a new deal or release him next year if he ends his holdout. Maybe Peters and his agent are going for it all. He simply refuses to play and at some point, it dawns on the Bills that he is never going to play for them again so they do they only thing they can do, trade him. And then he cashes in a huge FA contract now or late this year rather than 3 years from now.

 

Two heavyweights fighting over a lot of coin.

[Kelly the Dog]

Absolutely agree. Evans is an an example of how to do this the right way; Peters, the exact opposite.

 

As of today, Peters is into the Bills for $375K and counting. On September 7th, he also starts forfeiting his $200K/week game checks!

 

(So tell me again...who's got all the leverage? )

Evans is coming off a down year. Peters is coming off a Pro Bowl year. Evans is pissed off that not only is his buddy who throws the ball deep to him not playing, but the guy who is is not known for playing a downfield game. Evans knows he is very likely going to get more money next year if he has a good year this year, with Hardy next to him, and teams are going to be willing to pay out the ass for him if he hits the open market. It's not the same thing. Evans will probably sign as soon as the Bills give him what he wants. But there really wasn't a great reason to hold out for him, because he could get more money next year if he hits the open market. It's really a completely different situation. Evans is no threat to sit, he needs to put up numbers.

[PromoTheRobot]

When Peters gets his extension, I hope he tips Kelly and Mickey for their tireless lobbying on his behalf.

 

PTR

[MarkyMannn]

When Peters gets his extension, I hope he tips Kelly and Mickey for their tireless lobbying on his behalf.

 

PTR

 

Yeah really. All this is really BORING already

[The Senator]

When Peters gets his extension, I hope he tips Kelly and Mickey for their tireless lobbying on his behalf.

 

PTR

Your assuming that Peters reads TBD - I wouldn't even assume he knows how to read.

 

Guy scored a 9 on his Wonderlic. Guy just pissed away $400 grand on a pointless and futile holdout. Guy will be showing up soon with nothing but his dick in his hand, and if he ever finally gets his extension two years from now, he won't remember Mickey's or KTD's admirable, tireless crusade.

 

GO BILLSSS!!!

 

19 & 0 baby!!!!

 

(w/ or w/out Peters!!!!!)

[Dan]

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.

Bill, what's your limit? If Peters is asking for $20mill per year do you pay him? Give him a $50 mill signing bonus? You seem to be placing one player above the entire team. As though you could tell the probowl QB he's not as important as the LT, therefore he can't renegotiate; or the probowl RB, the probowl Safety. You're placing one position and one player higher than all others. And that's when you lose the team.

 

The biggest problem here is that the Bills went on a limb and signed Peters. They paid him plenty while he learned. They put time and energy into teaching him and grooming him. Then they give him a nice raise. All based on the promise of his potential. And at the first sight of that potential, Peters sits out and demands more. WTF?! After the Bills paying him on potential for 4 years, he says I want more after one decent season. I'm sorry but I call BS.

 

Yes, Peters is good. But he's not yet in the HOF. He's not yet a perennial ProBowler. He's not yet the best tackle in the game. He's good. That's it. He's not better than the team. He shouldn't be placed on a pedestal above all others. He should, however, come to camp and play with his teammates and continue to learn and become that future HOF player.

 

Yes, Peters is underpaid. But, lots of players with a 2-3 year old contract are underpaid as top FA's and 1st round rookies are signed. That's the nature of the game. Players all know that, but they don't sulk. They keep playing and cash in when their time comes. There's little doubt that the Bills would have begun negotiations with Peters and given him a big deal next year. They've done that with player after player. Next up is Evans. But, Peters decided he's more important that Evans. Screw Lee, pay Peters now. Is that his attitude? Sure seems like it.

[Dibs]

Bill, what's your limit? If Peters is asking for $20mill per year do you pay him? Give him a $50 mill signing bonus? You seem to be placing one player above the entire team. As though you could tell the probowl QB he's not as important as the LT, therefore he can't renegotiate; or the probowl RB, the probowl Safety. You're placing one position and one player higher than all others. And that's when you lose the team.

 

The biggest problem here is that the Bills went on a limb and signed Peters. They paid him plenty while he learned. They put time and energy into teaching him and grooming him. Then they give him a nice raise. All based on the promise of his potential. And at the first sight of that potential, Peters sits out and demands more. WTF?! After the Bills paying him on potential for 4 years, he says I want more after one decent season. I'm sorry but I call BS.

 

Yes, Peters is good. But he's not yet in the HOF. He's not yet a perennial ProBowler. He's not yet the best tackle in the game. He's good. That's it. He's not better than the team. He shouldn't be placed on a pedestal above all others. He should, however, come to camp and play with his teammates and continue to learn and become that future HOF player.

 

Yes, Peters is underpaid. But, lots of players with a 2-3 year old contract are underpaid as top FA's and 1st round rookies are signed. That's the nature of the game. Players all know that, but they don't sulk. They keep playing and cash in when their time comes. There's little doubt that the Bills would have begun negotiations with Peters and given him a big deal next year. They've done that with player after player. Next up is Evans. But, Peters decided he's more important that Evans. Screw Lee, pay Peters now. Is that his attitude? Sure seems like it.

I'm not sure I quite follow your argument here. Players who are in the top few of their position are generally paid at the appropriate level. This means that top QBs & LTs are certainly paid a hell of a lot more than the best FB in the league. Position determines the amount of money paid. (I'm assuming Peters will be wanting to be paid similar to other star LTs). Certain positions are more important than others. Young Star LTs(or QBs) do not move teams.....I can't think of any.....at least not without special reasons(injury/character)

 

There are very few who actually think that Peters does not deserve more money. How many young players considered to be in the top 3 at their position(regardless of position) are not re-negotiated into 'star' money levels?

 

IMO Peters needs to get to camp......and then the Bills need to pay him top dollar.

[Dan]

I'm not sure I quite follow your argument here. Players who are in the top few of their position are generally paid at the appropriate level. This means that top QBs & LTs are certainly paid a hell of a lot more than the best FB in the league. Position determines the amount of money paid. (I'm assuming Peters will be wanting to be paid similar to other star LTs). Certain positions are more important than others. Young Star LTs(or QBs) do not move teams.....I can't think of any.....at least not without special reasons(injury/character)

 

There are very few who actually think that Peters does not deserve more money. How many young players considered to be in the top 3 at their position(regardless of position) are not re-negotiated into 'star' money levels?

 

IMO Peters needs to get to camp......and then the Bills need to pay him top dollar.

Sorry, I was referring to his pay in relation to the other offensive linemen. Should he be the top paid guy? Yes. But, not necessarily within a year of the high end FAs signing. The other problem I have with this whole Peters situation is the talk that he's one of the top 3 or even top 5 LTs in the game. He's had one good year. A year, in which, he didn't even finish due to an injury. IMO, starting his career as an UDFA TE, he's got to prove it for a little more than 13 games before he becomes the one of the top 5 LTs in the game. Is that too much to ask - that he play one more year and reproduce his 2007 success while the Bills and his agent are discussing a new deal? If he has another good year, progresses, and stays healthy; then he gets the mega deal next offseason. This whole big hold out just seems a year premature, I guess.

[Dibs]

Sorry, I was referring to his pay in relation to the other offensive linemen. Should he be the top paid guy? Yes. But, not necessarily within a year of the high end FAs signing. The other problem I have with this whole Peters situation is the talk that he's one of the top 3 or even top 5 LTs in the game. He's had one good year. A year, in which, he didn't even finish due to an injury. IMO, starting his career as an UDFA TE, he's got to prove it for a little more than 13 games before he becomes the one of the top 5 LTs in the game. Is that too much to ask - that he play one more year and reproduce his 2007 success while the Bills and his agent are discussing a new deal? If he has another good year, progresses, and stays healthy; then he gets the mega deal next offseason. This whole big hold out just seems a year premature, I guess.

I see your point. There are two factors which I think are important for perspective on the Peters situation.

 

Firstly, it is relatively unprecedented for the LT position. In the modern era(to my knowledge) there has not been a star LT who has not been a top 6 draft pick. In all previous situations the young LT was earning very good money and usually if he pans out to be a star would have had a new contract before the last(5th) year of the contract was hit. Peters I think needs to be looked at in a similar way to QBs. Both QB & LT are primo positions which attract top dollar and QBs regularly get paid big money after less than one season of good play......often for QBs who were lower round picks.

 

Secondly, the level of money that he is getting now is actually pretty low. IIRC Brad Butler & Kyle Williams just got contract extensions to be in a similar range to Peters......I was actually surprised that those two players were given the new contracts simply based upon the concept that they are in no way 'good' players(yet) and were both still well within their rookie deals.

 

Peters who has had glowing reviews all throughout his career.....improved consistently to become a pro bowl player at one of the most important positions.....is still extremely young.....and is considered by most analysts(that I've seen) to be top 3 at the position is only earning the same amount as our 3rd year RG who at best is being spoken of as 'potential'.

 

It may well be a year too early.......but with the current level of contracts and the importance of the position I personally would love to see him signed up to a long(7 year) deal. It's also quite possible that waiting an extra year will end up costing more(with contract ballooning each season).

[eball]

Sorry, I was referring to his pay in relation to the other offensive linemen. Should he be the top paid guy? Yes. But, not necessarily within a year of the high end FAs signing. The other problem I have with this whole Peters situation is the talk that he's one of the top 3 or even top 5 LTs in the game. He's had one good year. A year, in which, he didn't even finish due to an injury. IMO, starting his career as an UDFA TE, he's got to prove it for a little more than 13 games before he becomes the one of the top 5 LTs in the game. Is that too much to ask - that he play one more year and reproduce his 2007 success while the Bills and his agent are discussing a new deal? If he has another good year, progresses, and stays healthy; then he gets the mega deal next offseason. This whole big hold out just seems a year premature, I guess.

Dan, this is spot on, IMO. I'm still not sure I understand Kelly's point that the holdout this year means Peters will get more when the deal is done next year, but perhaps that's just my own ignorance. I continue to believe Parker has made a mistake by not engaging the Bills in preliminary extension talks while advising his client to report. It just seems lazy and unprofessional to me, but again, I'm not in the business. It is certainly suspicious that the only two remaining holdouts in football are Parker clients -- are all of the other agents simply clueless?

 

My ongoing prediction -- Peters reports at the end of this week.

[The Senator]

Dan, this is spot on, IMO. I'm still not sure I understand Kelly's point that the holdout this year means Peters will get more when the deal is done next year, but perhaps that's just my own ignorance. I continue to believe Parker has made a mistake by not engaging the Bills in preliminary extension talks while advising his client to report. It just seems lazy and unprofessional to me, but again, I'm not in the business. It is certainly suspicious that the only two remaining holdouts in football are Parker clients -- are all of the other agents simply clueless?

 

My ongoing prediction -- Peters reports at the end of this week.

Good call, eball - much easier for the dumbass to slither quietly into OP, where practices are closed to the public, than the very public spectacle of reporting @ SJF with absolutely nothing to show for the 4-week holdout (except $400K in fines).

 

(Besides, at this point, the Bills are actually making money off the knucklehead to the tune of $15K/day - if I'm Russ, I'd suggest he stay away for another week or so! )

 

GO BILLSSS!!!!

[Bill from NYC]

Good call, eball - much easier for the dumbass to slither quietly into OP, where practices are closed to the public, than the very public spectacle of reporting @ SJF with absolutely nothing to show for the 4-week holdout (except $400K in fines).

 

(Besides, at this point, the Bills are actually making money off the knucklehead to the tune of $15K/day - if I'm Russ, I'd suggest he stay away for another week or so! )

 

GO BILLSSS!!!!

 

With all due respect Senator, why are you so hell bent on punishing our best player?

May I respectfully remind you that we are not talking about our money. This is a battle between a guy with hundreds of millions and a millionaire. It is also about the Bills fielding and building a winning/playoff team.

 

Perhaps both sides need to swallow their pride to some degree, no?

[BillsFan-4-Ever]

What more do you need to hear? The PFW headline says it all.

 

Solid play of Bills' O-line leaves Peters with few options

 

If the Bills starters can run the ball successfully against Indy then Peters has nothing to bargain against.

 

He gambled and he may have very well lost!!!!