scoring is not hardy Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 I have to believe that he doesn't want to miss a game paycheck. I knew he had a unique situation but I never thought is was so unique so as to potentially lead to a regular season hold out which is a doomsday scenario for all involved, the team, Peters, the front office and the fans. There is still time for it to get resolved before that and as a fan, you just have to hope it does. It's hard to imagine how anyone ever won a football game without Jason Peters, or how the game was ever played at all before he came along.
cody Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 There is still time for it to get resolved before that and as a fan, you just have to hope it does. No matter what happens the 1st game, the Bills should be in a good position to make the playoffs if they can win in Jacksonville. If the week one gamecheck is the incentive it takes for Peters to report, he may have enough time to be ready for the game on the 14th. If Peters is does not report prior to Sept. 6th*, don't expect to see him until week 10. * We probably have another week of wondering.
nucci Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 Any way you slice it, it is a tough position for a coach to be in. I just hope that Jauron gets to wrestle with it sooner rather than later. What do you think the odds are of him holding out for any portion of the regular season? I think the national sports media is going to start to give this issue more coverage. They love controversey and they can't make every story about Bret. I can not remember a player holding out in the regular season since the latest CBA. There is too much to lose. It does not matter if he gets a new deal anytime soon. That is lost money anyway you look at it. I would be very surprised if Peters does not show by Monday. If he does miss the 1st game, then I don't expect him to show for a long time.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 So what if Peters comes back and the Bills dont redo his contract? Peters maybe a disgruntled worker and whoever is at qb maybe eating alot more turf than they did last season.If they dont redo his contract,are we to believe he will play at a probowl level,or will his play drop off the deep end?Its a very touchy situation and can only hope the Bills pay him. This is another reason why the Bills hold nearly all the cards. Even more stupid than holding out, not playing his ass off and at a Pro Bowl level would be incredibly stupid for Peters to do. Then he wouldnt get the huge contract next year or 2010. He has to play at his top level, and the Bills know it. It's another solid reason why they wouldn't and shouldn't cave.
jwws9999 Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 I can not remember a player holding out in the regular season since the latest CBA. There is too much to lose. It does not matter if he gets a new deal anytime soon. That is lost money anyway you look at it. I would be very surprised if Peters does not show by Monday. If he does miss the 1st game, then I don't expect him to show for a long time. you'd better hope he comes back, because when that offensive line starts facing real defenses and complicated blitz packages, edwards and losman will get their heads ripped out of the socket
cody Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 So what if Peters comes back and the Bills dont redo his contract? Peters maybe a disgruntled worker and whoever is at qb maybe eating alot more turf than they did last season.If they dont redo his contract,are we to believe he will play at a probowl level,or will his play drop off the deep end?Its a very touchy situation and can only hope the Bills pay him. Dispite my signature, if an NFL player were to do a half-assed job, he would be giving away money. If Peters comes in under his current, he will be playing for his next one. Another pro-bowl will make him a lot more money. It's just another example of how pride and principles can cost a person in the long run.
drg2021 Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 I can not remember a player holding out in the regular season since the latest CBA. There is too much to lose. It does not matter if he gets a new deal anytime soon. That is lost money anyway you look at it. I would be very surprised if Peters does not show by Monday. If he does miss the 1st game, then I don't expect him to show for a long time. I agree because if he is disgruntled he may just start waving the "OOOLE" flag
nucci Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 you'd better hope he comes back, because when that offensive line starts facing real defenses and complicated blitz packages, edwards and losman will get their heads ripped out of the socket Thanks for the advice. If you say so, then I do hope he comes back.
apuszczalowski Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 Yeah I don't like the idea of him coming in and not playing either. He might as well not come in. He's the best guy at his position on the whole team; he better be on the field. Lawyer Milloy started week one after he was on our team for all of 5 days. And that was going to a completely new team. I realize they've made some changes within our offense, but it's basically the same. I'm sure Peters could handle it. Didn't Milloy have a full training camp and Pre-season with the pats before being cut during the final cuts? The issue wouldn't be Peters learning a new playbook in that time, he is a linemen and it shouldn't take him long compared to a QB, RB, or WR to learn it, its his conditioning. The guy has not practiced or workout with his teammates since January, he needs to get into game shape/condition first before he can play and have a big impact, so they would probably be looking at a few weeks of practice first before he takes his position back. Also, I don't believe it says DJ would sit him because he held out, i think he would sit him because he doesn't want to risk an injury to him and have a player who is not in game shape on the field
eball Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 It's hard to imagine how anyone ever won a football game without Jason Peters, or how the game was ever played at all before he came along. He has revolutionized not only the position of left tackle, but the game of football itself. In fact, whispers around the NFL offices are that a petition is being circulated to officially change the name of the position to "Where Jason Peters Plays." Of course, the name will be shortened to WJPP on the roster sheet.
Ramius Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 This is what the front office has done to Peters, the team and to itself. The team forced peters to holdout and not learn the new offense? Did they lock him in his dorm room at SJF and/or bar him from training camp? Put your crackpipe down and enlighten me.
Mickey Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 Dispite my signature, if an NFL player were to do a half-assed job, he would be giving away money. If Peters comes in under his current, he will be playing for his next one. Another pro-bowl will make him a lot more money. It's just another example of how pride and principles can cost a person in the long run. When he comes back, whenever in god's name that happens, I have no reason to think he won't give his all. That is how he became what he is from where he started.
John from Riverside Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 He has revolutionized not only the position of left tackle, but the game of football itself. In fact, whispers around the NFL offices are that a petition is being circulated to officially change the name of the position to "Where Jason Peters Plays." Of course, the name will be shortened to WJPP on the roster sheet. LOL
Mickey Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 The team forced peters to holdout and not learn the new offense? Did they lock him in his dorm room at SJF and/or bar him from training camp? Put your crackpipe down and enlighten me. Ummm....if they did what they did the year before for Schobel and paid him what he is worth, or at least started negotating with him back in February, he would be pancaking linebackers for Marshawn and Trent next week. Now if you think a guy should play for less than half of what he is worth, if you think a guy who almost made the pro bowl in his first year as a starter and made it last year shouldn't be rewarded for superior performance, if you think its okay to make Jason Peters the most underpaid pro bowler in the league, then I am sure you're tickled pink that our best lineman isn't here. Me, I think that in a job where you are never more than a play away from Kevin Everett's fate, you need to do what you have to do to get paid what you are worth. Radical concept isn't it? "Getting paid for what your performance indicates you are worth". You are right, I must be on crack to think performance and pay should have anything to do with one another. Pay based on merit? Perish the thought.
Mickey Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 He has revolutionized not only the position of left tackle, but the game of football itself. In fact, whispers around the NFL offices are that a petition is being circulated to officially change the name of the position to "Where Jason Peters Plays." Of course, the name will be shortened to WJPP on the roster sheet. Has anyone ever said anyting remotely like that? All I have ever heard is that he is the best lineman on the team and one of the best in the league. Do you agree or disagree? If you agree, you might want to stop mocking a position you hold yourself.
nucci Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 Has anyone ever said anyting remotely like that? All I have ever heard is that he is the best lineman on the team and one of the best in the league. Do you agree or disagree? If you agree, you might want to stop mocking a position you hold yourself. I think it's called sarcasm.
JM57 Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 Ummm....if they did what they did the year before for Schobel and paid him what he is worth, or at least started negotating with him back in February, he would be pancaking linebackers for Marshawn and Trent next week. Now if you think a guy should play for less than half of what he is worth, if you think a guy who almost made the pro bowl in his first year as a starter and made it last year shouldn't be rewarded for superior performance, if you think its okay to make Jason Peters the most underpaid pro bowler in the league, then I am sure you're tickled pink that our best lineman isn't here. Me, I think that in a job where you are never more than a play away from Kevin Everett's fate, you need to do what you have to do to get paid what you are worth. Radical concept isn't it? "Getting paid for what your performance indicates you are worth". You are right, I must be on crack to think performance and pay should have anything to do with one another. Pay based on merit? Perish the thought. He should certainly get paid what he is worth, but in order to do that, he should actually SHOW UP TO WORK first. This is a job for these athletes. If you were running your own business and you had a spectacular employee who stopped showing up for work because "they believed their performance is worth more than they are making now" what would you do? Would you appease them and say "Okay little boy, you do a great job and thanks for not showing up when you were scheduled to be here. Have 250% of what you used to make" Or would you wait until they actually came to work and continued doing what they're supposed to to reward them for their exemplary performance?
Mickey Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 I think it's called sarcasm. I know what it is, sarcasm used to take a shot at people who disagree with him. Which I responded to by pointing out that it was more than a little foolish to mock his own opinion. Unless of course he disagrees that Peters is our best lineman, that would have been a fun opinion to mock.
Mickey Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 He should certainly get paid what he is worth, but in order to do that, he should actually SHOW UP TO WORK first. This is a job for these athletes. If you were running your own business and you had a spectacular employee who stopped showing up for work because "they believed their performance is worth more than they are making now" what would you do? Would you appease them and say "Okay little boy, you do a great job and thanks for not showing up when you were scheduled to be here. Have 250% of what you used to make" Or would you wait until they actually came to work and continued doing what they're supposed to to reward them for their exemplary performance? The NFL is not the average work place. The rules are a bit different. Maybe this is the first holdout you have ever heard of taking place hence your shock and dismay but I assure you it is standard issue in the NFL. The team told him no new deal this year, period. From the ESPN article everyone is raving about: "They also have made it known to Peters' agent, Eugene Parker, they're not willing to renegotiate 2008, insisting any additional money will be paid next year forward." So, you agree he should get more money. The team told him no more money this year. So what should he do to get what you agree he is entitled to? What option do you suggest he should have pursued that would have resulted in the additional pay we agree he is entitled to? Coming to camp would not have done it, that much is clear unless you see some wiggle room in the phrase "not willing to renegotiate 2008". The only option a player has, the only card he has to play, is to withhold his services, to holdout, so that is what Peters is doing, playing the only card he has. It is true that the same article pointed out that the Bills won't talk to him unless he is in camp but coupled with the absolute refusal to even consider a new deal for this year, that only means that the team would talk to him about a new deal for 2009 if he came to camp. So there you have it, Peters has two choices here: 1. Play this year as one of the most underpaid OT's in the league for the third year running; or 2. Holdout and hope that it works and if it doesn't report just in time for his 1st game check so he ultimately loses nothing for having made the effort. Which one of these would you have advised that he do?
Recommended Posts