AJ1 Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 This is different because Peters has three (3) years left. If you exhaust your contract you renegotiate. If you have one yr left you can extend. three 93) years out is STUPID. Jason just signed his $3 mm tow seasons ago. it is utter BULLsh--. adn this is why the bills hacve to represent the league. I think Parker's out to set precedent but as smart as he thinks he is, he picked the wrong team to try out this new BS.
cody Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 Precisely who has been making this accusations? I read it in a article about a holdout in 1996. I posted the link on a different thread, but I do not know how to find the thread and cannot find the link. I found it by googling 'eugene parker holdout'. When I try that now, I get pages of Jackson/Peters articles. As for precisely who, a sports reporter. He may have been the kind of reporter that they hire at WGR, explaining why nothing ever happened.
cody Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 This is different because Peters has three (3) years left. If you exhaust your contract you renegotiate. If you have one yr left you can extend. three 93) years out is STUPID. Jason just signed his $3 mm tow seasons ago. it is utter BULLsh--. adn this is why the bills hacve to represent the league. The 3 years issue has been brought up many times. The Bills re-negotiated Schobel's deal after his 1st pro-bowl, even when he had three years left. Schobel's people handled it much better than Peters'. I think Parker's out to set precedent but as smart as he thinks he is, he picked the wrong team to try out this new BS. This is not new BS. Parker has been pulling this crap for over 10 years.
keepthefaith Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 This is not new BS. Parker has been pulling this crap for over 10 years. Other potential clients should recognize that parker's negotiating skills are lacking if the holdout is his best tactic. Like all professions, there is a bell curve of talent. There are crappy agents just like there are crappy dishwashers.
ganesh Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 This is different because Peters has three (3) years left. If you exhaust your contract you renegotiate. If you have one yr left you can extend. three 93) years out is STUPID. Jason just signed his $3 mm tow seasons ago. it is utter BULLsh--. adn this is why the bills hacve to represent the league. This is stupid....Peters signed a contract to play RT for the Bills. However, the Bills have moved him to the LT position. LT get paid much bigger money than RTs. It is not Peters fault that he wants more money, The problem is the way Peters has approached the whole thing. If he had gone to the Bills and negotiated in good faith, this probably comes to an end long time ago..The Bills understand the critical position Peters fills and would have obliged and made it look like them rewarding him for his stellar play. At least I am glad they are not insulting each other with stupid comments.
Mickey Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 The 3 years issue has been brought up many times. The Bills re-negotiated Schobel's deal after his 1st pro-bowl, even when he had three years left. Schobel's people handled it much better than Peters'. This is not new BS. Parker has been pulling this crap for over 10 years. I think it is the team that handled it better. According to Overdorf, they approached Schobel's people as early as February of 2007 and started negotiating a new deal for him, acknowledging from the get-go that he deserved one. For whatever reason, they have no intention of extending Peters the way they did Schobel and it has nothing to do with what Parker or Peters has done. I think it might be because Marv was running the show in February of 2007 and Brandon has been running the show since January. Otherwise, I have no idea why they are treating Peters so drastically different than they did Schobel. I know, I know, I know, the situations are not exactly alike to the thousandth decimal. They are close enough though and for every difference people can cite justifying better treatment for Schobel, the other side could cite just as many in favor of Peters.
nucci Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 I think it is the team that handled it better. According to Overdorf, they approached Schobel's people as early as February of 2007 and started negotiating a new deal for him, acknowledging from the get-go that he deserved one. For whatever reason, they have no intention of extending Peters the way they did Schobel and it has nothing to do with what Parker or Peters has done. I think it might be because Marv was running the show in February of 2007 and Brandon has been running the show since January. Otherwise, I have no idea why they are treating Peters so drastically different than they did Schobel. I know, I know, I know, the situations are not exactly alike to the thousandth decimal. They are close enough though and for every difference people can cite justifying better treatment for Schobel, the other side could cite just as many in favor of Peters. Only thing I can think of is Peters demands are too extreme.
Mickey Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 This is stupid....Peters signed a contract to play RT for the Bills. However, the Bills have moved him to the LT position. LT get paid much bigger money than RTs. It is not Peters fault that he wants more money, The problem is the way Peters has approached the whole thing. If he had gone to the Bills and negotiated in good faith, this probably comes to an end long time ago..The Bills understand the critical position Peters fills and would have obliged and made it look like them rewarding him for his stellar play. At least I am glad they are not insulting each other with stupid comments. The team will not negotiate with him, they have made that clear. They went to Schobel in Feb. of 2007 just after the deal with Kelsay made it clear that Schobel was underpaid, especially considering he made the pro bowl. They then spen the next 6 months negotiating. Even so, Schobel skipped the firs 4 off season practices in March to send a message. He did that even though the team had already conceded he deserved a new deal and were negotiating one. All reports are that the team has no intention of extending Peters this year. The only quote anyone can come up with to the contrary is a mention that with regard to an extension the team would "never say never". I don't know what people base their belief on that the team is willing to get him a new deal if he just does this or that or whatever. The have said clearly that they expect him to honor the comittment he made to the team two years ago. They wanted to negotiate, they could have done what they did with Schobel, call his agent in February of 2008 and start talking. They could have done a deal in Februar, in March, in April, in June and in July. The reason they didn't is because they don't have to and don't want to. The team might be right to take the position they have but don't blame Peters for the financial decision the team has made not to extend him. If you think he shouldn't get a new deal then it should be easy to side with the team. If you think he should, then that is the team's fault at this point. His if they offer a good deal and he refuses.
cody Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 Other potential clients should recognize that parker's negotiating skills are lacking if the holdout is his best tactic. Like all professions, there is a bell curve of talent. There are crappy agents just like there are crappy dishwashers. Parker may have to pull this stunt to get deals, but clients go to him because they get $$$$. I would not sign up with him because I think he puts his own interests before the clients.
Mickey Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 Only thing I can think of is Peters demands are too extreme. If it has even reached the point where numbers have been tossed around. Doesn't sound like they even got that far. I think that if they were at a point where they were just trying to find the right number and had already conceded that he should get a new deal, he would have come to camp. No way for us to know for sure. Could be that Brandon thinks Levy was wrong to extend Schobel with 3 years left on his existing deal and doesn't want to make the same mistake.
KD in CA Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 Only thing I can think of is Peters demands are too extreme. 3 years left on his contract and last time anyone saw him he was limping off the field. Yeah, I'd say his demands are a little extreme.
nucci Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 If it has even reached the point where numbers have been tossed around. Doesn't sound like they even got that far. I think that if they were at a point where they were just trying to find the right number and had already conceded that he should get a new deal, he would have come to camp. No way for us to know for sure. Could be that Brandon thinks Levy was wrong to extend Schobel with 3 years left on his existing deal and doesn't want to make the same mistake. I have to believe some numbers were mentioned. Could be Parker said $15M per year, The Bills said no way and here we are.
jimmy griffin Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 The 3 years issue has been brought up many times. The Bills re-negotiated Schobel's deal after his 1st pro-bowl, even when he had three years left. Schobel's people handled it much better than Peters'. This is not new BS. Parker has been pulling this crap for over 10 years.
jimmy griffin Posted August 22, 2008 Posted August 22, 2008 You are right, Shoebel did extend with three (3) years left. I did not notice that. Wow. I'm surprised. I guess Peters has no past record -- like schoebel did -- shoebel had 50 sacks when they extended. And schoebel was healthy. regardless, you are right, they extended three (3) years out. hmmm....changed the dynamic.
Zona Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 just for the record, I predict that peters will report after the colts game. no reason for the optimism, just a hunch. that would give him 2 weeks to get ready. If he doesnt come back then, he might sit out for a LONGGGGGGG time. If he does, you may all call me the Amazing Zona.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 You are right, Shoebel did extend with three (3) years left. I did not notice that. Wow. I'm surprised. I guess Peters has no past record -- like schoebel did -- shoebel had 50 sacks when they extended. And schoebel was healthy. regardless, you are right, they extended three (3) years out. hmmm....changed the dynamic. I wonder if the Bills approached Schoebel on that deal, trying to lock him longer term before he got too expensive.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 What is Schoebel? Third on the All-time sack list for the Bills? Yeah, no reason why he should have been extended.
Lori Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 What is Schoebel? Third on the All-time sack list for the Bills? Yeah, no reason why he should have been extended. Second. But no, he's overrated, you know. It has to be true, because I read it right here on the Wall.
Trader Posted August 23, 2008 Posted August 23, 2008 If you want to talk about the law, the NFL is a monopoly, if any player challenged that in court, they would eventually win the right to be free agents signing with the highest bidder right out of college. That is why no team that I am aware of has ever taken a player to court for breach of contract. The NFL knows this, the agents know this, the union knows this and the players know this. That is why holdouts are not exactly rare despite your infantile understanding of contract law. As for Parker being a "punk", he could buy and sell you with the spare change stuck in the seats in his limo. His client list attests to his track record of success. The odds of any of us guessing what his long term strategy is for Peters is not very likely. As has been pointed out many times, this hold out is costing Peters nothing. He may report in time to avoid losing any game pay and what he will accomplish is setting the table for next year. The team will know he is serious, will not want to go through repeat of this next year. The team has carefully avoided any public committment to renegotiate if Peters shows up. For all we know, Parker's strategy is to get them to make that committment publicly so that they can force them to deal as soon as steps into the locker room, something the team is clearly not willing to do at present. We don't know. In the face or our ignorance of what is really going on, you can either assume that an experienced agent with a long track record of success and an impressive client list suddenly has turned in to an idiot or you can assume that he knows what he is doing even if we don't. Good point. The holdout is not costing Parker a dime. Parker will make a great living regardless of Peters new contract or if he ruins Peters career. Others have made the point that Brandon is a rookie and a bean counter. Brandon is Wilson's intermediary. Parker is negotiating with Ralph Wilson not with Brandon. Parkers annual income is chump change to Wilson. Wilson actually knows how to create wealth. Wilson also has the fortitude to tell Parker and Peters to jump off the nearest bridge. Remember he rejected the collective bargining agreement. Wilson is not about to let Parker or Peters push him around. Wilson is very willing to end Peters career. It will be his story to tell at the next meeting of the Billionaires club. I can see all those guys laughing now. ..."let me tell you about the time that this free agent to pro bowler hired a fancy agent tried to hold me up with 3 years left on his deal ....ha ha ha ... what did you do to him Ralph?..... Now he is running a 6 bay garage in Alabama ha ha ah ah ah . No sh-- ha ha ha ha. It will be a story that people will tell long after he is gone. Like the Lombardi stories that people tell 40 years later It's a better story than willing the Super bowl. Go ahead Parker make Ralph's day.
Trader Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 You are right, Shoebel did extend with three (3) years left. I did not notice that. Wow. I'm surprised. I guess Peters has no past record -- like schoebel did -- shoebel had 50 sacks when they extended. And schoebel was healthy. regardless, you are right, they extended three (3) years out. hmmm....changed the dynamic. Shoebel followed that prefromance with a below average year. Players take the money and dissappear. No incentive to excel.
Recommended Posts