thebandit27 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 It might be time to bring in Orlando Pace. If Pace passes a physical, sign him then trade Peters. You want to get rid of Peters and sign Pace? Do you watch football? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Pay him $10 million for a $2 million effort? No thanks. Time to part ways and reality check time for Payme. No one is indispensable. For $3 Million we can find someone that will at least equal his effort. This makes sense. Don't pay your guy for their best seasons, the season when they were fully prepared. No, no, pay them for the season when they didn't know the signals which had been changed. Yes, that's it. Sure. Don't pay them for their proven potential. Pay them for their all-time worst effort. By the way, we should try this with injured guys, too. Yeah, they had terrific years before. But last year you did nothing for us but sit in a hospital bed. So that's how we want to pay you next year, as if you are going to sit in a hospital bed. Yeah, that would really save some money for us. Of course, we could pretty much guarantee that we would never sign another of our own FAs, never mind FAs from other teams, as long as we had a franchise. But we should definitely do this even though it would hurt the team and our competitive ability. After all, cutting off your nose to spite your face has proven to be an excellent competitive strategy. Hasn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Um, didn't we get Peters real cheap? And at the time, his value was very low, too. But through sheer hard work, he has transformed himself into an extremely valuable commodity. So naturally, we should ignore that and get somebody cheap who has a much lower value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffaloed in Pa Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Good riddance,one player doesn`t make a team. There is no I in TEAM. Seeya ya fat whiny slob. Damn this dude gets my goat. Someone will pickup the slack and play better than he did last year. Maybe not 2yrs ago. But better than last. I`m more worried about a pass -rushing DE since we are staying with the 4-3 again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 So what does your father think of Derrick Dockery? Can't speak for his father but my father thinks we aren't paying Dockery ANYTHING this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 It sounds like everyone (media included) just assumes they won't meet somewhere in the middle. I understand the defeatist attitude at times, but sweet baby J folks, he ain't even out the door yet! Exactly, Lynchmob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Sadly, when it comes to our beloved Bills, doing something this stupid is a distinct possibility. If Jason Peters is traded, the odds of getting someone in his class to replace him is next to impossible. There is virtually no chance of this given how good he is, as well as where and how the Bills draft. Jason Peters is a member of this team because the Bills are lucky. Sure, he was brought in as a UDFA, but he was also at one point cut. Sorry, it was pure luck. A smart team would rip up his old contract and pay him what he deserves. If it takes 10 million or a little more per year, that's what they should do. The Bills, with Trent, TO, Evans and Lynch have the potential to be a potent, exciting offense. A coach and front office with any sort of brain would be looking at ways to strengthen a line which is already questionable, instead of getting rid of its strongest component. When opponents don't fear the run and sacks pile up, people will certainly be blaming Trent instead of the cheap fools who caused this. You are right, it will be difficult to find another LT to give up the most sacks of any LT in the league...LMAO...everone still living in 2007 and ignore the 3 years before that and 2008... Honestly, I dont think Peters wants to be here...either that or he is an idiot...he holds out for 10 mil a year...doesnt get it, but then goes out and puts up a bad season not worth 4 mil a year...so whats he do...he comes back and wants MORE money than he originally did? Get the out of here with that nonsense...I am starting to think he is just trying to get traded...figures he either gets traded or the Bills cave and give him the massive contract...either way, its a win win for him and a lose lose for us... If you want the organization to ADJUST your pay for performance, then the FO should have the right to adjust your pay when you underperform...and he severly underperformed in a year where he was playing for a HUGE contract...thats NOT our fault of the FO fault,, ITS HIS. He played WELL, WELL, BELOW the absurd contract he wants, so why should we know give him an even BIGGER contract than he wanted last year when he held out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 I vote to trade him and let someone making a lot less than 10 million per play the position. Do you really believe Peters would give you that much more productivity to warrant his additional salary. If a 2 million man gives up 15 sacks and peters gives up 10, is he worth the additional 8 million? Not in my world. I vote to trade him quick. God, it stuns me how often the people who unreasonably hate Peters only are willing to look at the one year, because it is the only one which even slightly backs up their contentions. Last year, Peters was essentially playing with concrete shoes. He didn't know the signals and hadn't worked together with Dockery and the line to develop the unspoken communication this position requires. Just look at the years when he went to training camp. Not only was Peters probably the best LT in football or the second or third best at absolute worst, but he is young and hasn't fully reached his potential. Peters brings HUGE added value. Virtually every team in the league cheats their line over to the left to support the LT's struggle against the defense's best pass rusher. This hurts the line's overall ability but is simply necessary. Only two or three teams can avoid doing this, and avoiding doing it puts the other four guys on the line in much better position to do their jobs. Only two or three teams in the league can avoid doing this. Only the teams with LTs they trust enough to play them on an island. The guys who can do this are worth much more than even good LTs who don't play on an island. Peters is one of those very very few valuable guys. There are only about two or three of those guys in the league. It simply doesn't make sense to jettison a guy who can play on an island and pick up a guy who will play slightlly worse even with the help that shifting the o-line will bring at the cost of making the other four guys jobs more difficult. Good plan!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKOOBY Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 No matter what we pay Peters now, it will not be good enough in 2 years. We have a problem and he is never going to be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 No matter what we pay Peters now, it will not be good enough in 2 years. We have a problem and he is never going to be happy. Ok just think about this for a second. For all of you who want Peters gone, Look who you are in agreement with Skooby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Ok just think about this for a second. For all of you who want Peters gone, Look who you are in agreement with Skooby I think Skooby was also a fan of the T.O Deal too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Could we pay Peters already? How many holes are we going to create on our oline? WTF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 God, it stuns me how often the people who unreasonably hate Peters only are willing to look at the one year, because it is the only one which even slightly backs up their contentions. Last year, Peters was essentially playing with concrete shoes. He didn't know the signals and hadn't worked together with Dockery and the line to develop the unspoken communication this position requires. Just look at the years when he went to training camp. Not only was Peters probably the best LT in football or the second or third best at absolute worst, but he is young and hasn't fully reached his potential. Peters brings HUGE added value. Virtually every team in the league cheats their line over to the left to support the LT's struggle against the defense's best pass rusher. This hurts the line's overall ability but is simply necessary. Only two or three teams can avoid doing this, and avoiding doing it puts the other four guys on the line in much better position to do their jobs. Only two or three teams in the league can avoid doing this. Only the teams with LTs they trust enough to play them on an island. The guys who can do this are worth much more than even good LTs who don't play on an island. Peters is one of those very very few valuable guys. There are only about two or three of those guys in the league. It simply doesn't make sense to jettison a guy who can play on an island and pick up a guy who will play slightlly worse even with the help that shifting the o-line will bring at the cost of making the other four guys jobs more difficult. Good plan!! The problem with the bolded statement is that he had ONE good year at LT and one BAD year at LT. You assume because of one GOOD year that he's a good LT. Others are choosing to believe that because of one BAD year, it's not safe to assume we'll get nothing but quality play from the guy. He's sucked 50% of the time, to me that's no guarantee of ANYTHING. Therefore, he doesn't deserve any more money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybob Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Everything I here from the Bills says that Bell is going to play somewhere on the line this year- either LG, RT or LT - if Peters is traded he will move to LT. Philly and the Lions are pretty desperate for LTs - many on this board says Philly would never give up two 1sts and a 3rd for Peters but how many picks would they have to give up to move into the top 5 ? and is any tackle in the NFL draft going to be as good as Peters in their Rookie year, Philly might only have a couple shots at a Superbowl before McNabb is too old so they Need good experienced tackles now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 The problem with the bolded statement is that he had ONE good year at LT and one BAD year at LT. You assume because of one GOOD year that he's a good LT. Others are choosing to believe that because of one BAD year, it's not safe to assume we'll get nothing but quality play from the guy. He's sucked 50% of the time, to me that's no guarantee of ANYTHING. Therefore, he doesn't deserve any more money. But you omit his 2006 season at RT. Where he had a good year. I keep hearing people with your argument, but they conveniently forget his 2006 season at RT. So the Reality is that he had 2 good years and one substandard year. That is the reality. So according to your logic he played well %66 of the time. That makes 2 good and one not so good. Not to mention, the year he didn't play well was the year he didn't participate in any of the minicamps, preseason and held out till right before the day the season started. Undoubtedly this played a role in his substandard play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 But you omit his 2006 season at RT. Where he had a good year. I keep hearing people with your argument, but they conveniently forget his 2006 season at RT. So the Reality is that he had 2 good years and one substandard year. That is the reality. So according to your logic he played well %66 of the time. That makes 2 good and one not so good. Not to mention, the year he didn't play well was the year he didn't participate in any of the minicamps, preseason and held out till right before the day the season started. Undoubtedly this played a role in his substandard play. No, I didn't forget 2006. That's why I specifically referred to his time at LT--it's a completely different position from RT, and demands a higher pay scale. If he wants to be paid like a LT, then you have to evaluate his time at LT. Otherwise, if you believe solid RT = ability to play LT, then you'd agree that moving Walker wouldn't be that much of a downgrade with Chambers at RT, given Chambers' solid play filling in for Peters last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ1 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 God, it stuns me how often the people who unreasonably hate Peters only are willing to look at the one year, because it is the only one which even slightly backs up their contentions. Last year, Peters was essentially playing with concrete shoes. He didn't know the signals and hadn't worked together with Dockery and the line to develop the unspoken communication this position requires. Just look at the years when he went to training camp. Not only was Peters probably the best LT in football or the second or third best at absolute worst, but he is young and hasn't fully reached his potential. Peters brings HUGE added value. Virtually every team in the league cheats their line over to the left to support the LT's struggle against the defense's best pass rusher. This hurts the line's overall ability but is simply necessary. Only two or three teams can avoid doing this, and avoiding doing it puts the other four guys on the line in much better position to do their jobs. Only two or three teams in the league can avoid doing this. Only the teams with LTs they trust enough to play them on an island. The guys who can do this are worth much more than even good LTs who don't play on an island. Peters is one of those very very few valuable guys. There are only about two or three of those guys in the league. It simply doesn't make sense to jettison a guy who can play on an island and pick up a guy who will play slightlly worse even with the help that shifting the o-line will bring at the cost of making the other four guys jobs more difficult. Good plan!! Hey, how about coming up with a quote from mister all-world concerning his desire to make a maximum (or any effort) to continue to play for the Bills in the last 15 months. The guy has degenerated into a money-grubbing underachiever. You think one good year proves his immense value? Several fans and apparently the FO do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 May seem slightly out of the blue, but I'm watching NFL Replay Week 2 on NFL Network. Just saw the play where Lynch scored the 1st quarter TD. Peters kicked the DE to the outside, then wrapped back up the middle and pushed the OLB (Daryl Smith, who eventually supplanted Mike Peterson as the starting MLB) from the 10 yard line all the way to the 4 and pancaked him. Lynch ran right behing him and wasn't touched until he got to the goal line. I know it's just one play, but it's what I call a microcosm. You guys are right, it'll be really easy to replace that guy. Also, I'm curious where this rampid "lazy" stuff comes from. I, for one, won't call a guy that slams his body into 275 pounders for a living lazy. In fact, I'd bet a king's ransom (however much that is) that Peters works harder at his craft than 99% of the people on this board calling him lazy. For anyone that wants to refute that, which will likely be based upon an assertion that I don't know you and don't have the right to call you lazy, think about the aspersion that you're casting before you jump to defend yourselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ1 Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 May seem slightly out of the blue, but I'm watching NFL Replay Week 2 on NFL Network. Just saw the play where Lynch scored the 1st quarter TD. Peters kicked the DE to the outside, then wrapped back up the middle and pushed the OLB (Daryl Smith, who eventually supplanted Mike Peterson as the starting MLB) from the 10 yard line all the way to the 4 and pancaked him. Lynch ran right behing him and wasn't touched until he got to the goal line. I know it's just one play, but it's what I call a microcosm. You guys are right, it'll be really easy to replace that guy. The argument is about his freakin attitude as much as his skill level. Guy only wants money. I'd like to see more than that in a player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cynical Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Good riddance,one player doesn`t make a team. There is no I in TEAM. Seeya ya fat whiny slob. Damn this dude gets my goat. Someone will pickup the slack and play better than he did last year. Maybe not 2yrs ago. But better than last. I`m more worried about a pass -rushing DE since we are staying with the 4-3 again. Yeah, because a pass rushing DE will fix the anemic offense. Then throw in a FO seemingly hell bent on creating more problems with the offense, than they are fixing it. Can't wait for the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts