A rational person needs to give props to Peter's agent

[DazedandConfused]

refresh my memory - how long did kelsay and schobel hold out?

 

folks aren't pissed 'cause peters wants more money - they're pissed at his selfish attitude and how it affected the team last season, and rightly so. they're also thinking that maybe he's not the greatest player to ever set foot on the gridiron, and just might not be worth all the trouble or all the money.

How do you think his hold out and selfish attitude affect the team?

 

I don't think it actually was a big problem for us.

 

It impacted Peters' play a significant amount from what I saw as his play went down from a level which actually did deserve his first Pro Bowl nod for the 07 season to far below stellar play at the start of the 08 season.

 

The really good news is that this had zero impact on the all important W/L stat as his very slow start while he played himself into shape and reinforced the chemistry of the OLhappened to coincide with the Bills facing relative weak opponents and OL problems did not cause nary a one L in the first four games because there were no losses.

 

Thus in terms of Peters self-centered actions having their greatest impact there was no real effect on the team's results.

 

 

Did his relatively poor play extend into the season beyond game 4 where one can detect the impact on the team's play which you are talking about?

 

Maybe as I have not taken the time to do the analysis of the actual games to determine this and I would be overjoyed to see an in depth analysis of these games (rather than simple fact-free opinion that Peters sucked and blew up the team as all indications are that this analysis will not really indict Peters' play as a cause of any problems.

 

1. Peters did seem to improve in my judgment as the season wore on and he played himself into game shape and built chemistry with an increasingly fluid in terms of starters Bills OL. This seems confirmed by Peters clearly not deserving a Pro Bowl nod from his early season performances, but it was late and clearly the second half of the season which saw a resurgence of the old Peters.

 

2. The statistical analysis of who gave up sacks also show Peters giving up the vast majority of his dozen or so sacks early in the season which mostly saw the Bills winning so arguments that his selfishness had an on field effect would seem to be false.

 

3. One might fall back given that neither the team or personal stats seem to hold up the contention that Peters somehow hurt the team by giving a fact-free opinion that his emphasis on contract over the team's W/L was divisive and earned him the disapproval of his teammates.

 

In fact , I heard nothing of this splitting the team and saw no sense thet the players were lobbying him to cave to the Bills. In fact, my guess is that the players do not view this as either go for the team or go for the player contract demands. In fact they want both things to happen, In fact if push comes to shove and there is no deal, my guess is that the players favored an outcome similar to what happened the player neither caves and the player does not miss any actual games.

[The Senator]

I don't think

 

fixed

 

You really need to find something else to amuse yourself at 4 AM on Friday nites - I can't bear trying to get through your stream-of-consciousness, rambling, massive missives.

 

Try distilling your tomes down to a paragraph or two and maybe I'll read them.

[Mickey]

At least those guys bring it week in and week out and put the team above themselves. Peters is seeming more and more like a fat tub of lard who is going to balloon up to 380 and coast when he signs a new, big money deal. I'm all for a player getting the most money possible. But in return, i expect 100% on the field, not taking 9 games to get into game shape because his fat ass wasn't in camp.

 

Its his antics that people are pissed at, NOT his desire for more money. If Peters had showed up to camp last year and busted his ass, there would be overwhelimg support in his corner to give him a new deal from everyone. Instead, he chose to be a selfish fat baby which is why so many people are against him.

Good, lets pass them out a few merit badges for their selfless devotion because afterall, who cares about winning? It's about being the gosh darn nicest team around.

 

And don't forget Schobel held the team up, and held out of 4 OTA's to get a new contract, the biggest one on the team, when had just been given a new, huuuuge contract all because the team caved in a big way to Kelsay. Schobel wasn't thinking about everyone else then, he was thinking about himself and only himself. You don't think it was just a little prima donna-ish for Schobel to insist on a new deal just because he wanted to make more than Kelsay?

 

Precisely what "antics" are talking about? His only "antic" was to hold out, hardly a shocking, unprecedented thing. This is just about money, and its someone elses money yet you guys take this personally and are positively vitriolic about the guy. So you are all over a pro bowler, the first decent left tackle we have had for years and you give a complete pass to the geniuses who have brought you a steady diet of uninspired, boring, playing scared 7-9 football.

 

A hold out is a player's only card in the situation Peters is in. And that hold out cost him nothing, it cost the team having him at his best which he would have been if he had a new contract. What you complain about is exactly his leverage. You don't think the team is thinking about what it is going to cost them on the field this year if they have another drama like last year?

 

The team has to decide if Peters at his best, after a full camp etc. for this year and having him inked to a long term deal is worth the extra money they are going to have to pay this year and next. It is just a business decision. Do they want the Peters of 2007 or the Peters of 2008 in '09?

[Mickey]

How do you think his hold out and selfish attitude affect the team?

 

I don't think it actually was a big problem for us.

 

It impacted Peters' play a significant amount from what I saw as his play went down from a level which actually did deserve his first Pro Bowl nod for the 07 season to far below stellar play at the start of the 08 season.

 

The really good news is that this had zero impact on the all important W/L stat as his very slow start while he played himself into shape and reinforced the chemistry of the OLhappened to coincide with the Bills facing relative weak opponents and OL problems did not cause nary a one L in the first four games because there were no losses.

 

Thus in terms of Peters self-centered actions having their greatest impact there was no real effect on the team's results.

 

 

Did his relatively poor play extend into the season beyond game 4 where one can detect the impact on the team's play which you are talking about?

 

Maybe as I have not taken the time to do the analysis of the actual games to determine this and I would be overjoyed to see an in depth analysis of these games (rather than simple fact-free opinion that Peters sucked and blew up the team as all indications are that this analysis will not really indict Peters' play as a cause of any problems.

 

1. Peters did seem to improve in my judgment as the season wore on and he played himself into game shape and built chemistry with an increasingly fluid in terms of starters Bills OL. This seems confirmed by Peters clearly not deserving a Pro Bowl nod from his early season performances, but it was late and clearly the second half of the season which saw a resurgence of the old Peters.

 

2. The statistical analysis of who gave up sacks also show Peters giving up the vast majority of his dozen or so sacks early in the season which mostly saw the Bills winning so arguments that his selfishness had an on field effect would seem to be false.

 

3. One might fall back given that neither the team or personal stats seem to hold up the contention that Peters somehow hurt the team by giving a fact-free opinion that his emphasis on contract over the team's W/L was divisive and earned him the disapproval of his teammates.

 

In fact , I heard nothing of this splitting the team and saw no sense thet the players were lobbying him to cave to the Bills. In fact, my guess is that the players do not view this as either go for the team or go for the player contract demands. In fact they want both things to happen, In fact if push comes to shove and there is no deal, my guess is that the players favored an outcome similar to what happened the player neither caves and the player does not miss any actual games.

The only people seriously questioning Peters' ability are people, some of them anyway, on this board. I can certainly understand, even if I disagree, with those who think the hold out was bad strategy. The idea, however, that he is some sort of malcontent who in the end, isn't all that good, is just silly. It's an opinion born of anger and bitterness which I really have trouble understanding when there are other players who have done similar things. But if you think about it, even those opinions contain the seeds of their own demise. There would be no need to be that bitter, that angry, that concerned if Peters really wasn't a good player. The overblown reaction is due to these people, despite all the bile, knowing just how good he is, how important it is to keep him on the roster and what a long term set back it would be if the team doesn't resolve the dispute. They won't admit it but with every additional, increasingly shrill post, it becomes pretty clear what they really think of hs abilities. They truly do protest too much, not to mention condescend, accuse, and insult too much.

 

A team trying to claw its way out of a 7-9 hole (with an easy schedule no-less) can ill afford a public feud with one of its best players and rising stars. But that is where, under the leadership of this oh-so-talented front office, we find ourselves.

[iinii]

Here's the thing timmo... I agree with most of what you say. I just think that the fact that the Bills have done nothing to address the depth at tackle should not be underestimated. Let's suppose the Bills signed a starting caliber free agent or drafted a promising young tackle... then suddenly Peters is hanging out to dry. Now, Peters' camp knows that the Bills really have no other credible option at LT so they are trying to stick it to them.

 

You're right -- business is business. Well-run businesses formulate contingency plans. The Bills have not done so with Peters, which is why he has added leverage in this situation.

how do you know they don't have a contingency plan? just because you can't see it from the couch it ain't there?

[The Senator]

A hold out is a player's only card in the situation Peters is in. And that hold out cost gained him nothing, it cost the team having him $600K in fines

fixed

 

The team has to decide if Peters at his best, after a full camp etc. for this year and having him inked to a long term deal is worth the extra money they are going to have to pay this year and next. It is just a business decision. Do they want the Peters of 2007 or the Peters of 2008 in '09?

So, in essence, you're saying that Peters gets to decide what kind of effort he puts forth, based on whether or not the Bills have sufficiently placated his greed. If he's not satisfied, just hold out, show up out of shape, and go thru the motions.

 

Glad you're finally realizing why folks are so displeased with the guy.

[The Dean]

I enjoy your posts D&C and appreciate how much thought you put into them.....and usually agree with you on what you have to say. But in regards to this situation I tend to largely disagree.....

 

I agree that the end result looks pretty good for Peters. He most likely will become one of, if not the highest paid OLman in the league. To give props to his agent however, implies that the direction he took was the wisest course of action(or at least wasn't a bad choice).

 

When playing poker, if somebody assumes you are bluffing & therefore calls you.....and then gets lucky on the river.....you don't give them props for their play. This to me is a similar situation.

 

Peters was lucky to make his second pro bowl. He didn't have anywhere near as good a year as 2007 & even though he finished the year closer to that form his overall performance for the year would never have netted him a probowl nod throughout the previous decade. Without that second probowl appearance his 'worth' and 'bargaining power' would have been significantly reduced.

 

The other more important aspect is 'the hold out'.

As you mentioned.....he stuck to his guns and held out. What was the purpose of doing that? He was looking to get himself a massive new extension last season. The hold out was to try and force the Bills into action. This didn't work. Interestingly, had the holdout worked he would have been looking at an overall money level quite a bit less than what he is looking at now(was probably asking for around $9-$10mil/year).

 

What would likely have happened if he didn't hold out?

He could have made it clear that they expect a new deal in 2009(which I'm certain the Bills were already on board with).

Assuming it was his holdout that caused his regression in 2008......he would have played at true all-pro level. This would have not only increased his bargaining power but most likely would have set him up for even more money than he is looking for now.....and I'm sure the negotiations would be quicker and smoother as the Bills would have gotten 2 full seasons to become 'sure' with their purchase.

 

 

Basically the plan of his agent was to 'get more money now'......which didn't work.....and hindered the chance of even greater money in the following year. He is in a good position now despite the holdout.....not because of it.

 

 

I'm with you on this one, Dibs. I don't think the holdout helped Peter's cause, at all. It didn't get him more money last year (and may have cost him a chunk of fine money), and it won't translate into a bigger contract offer (that could have been worked out had he not held out), this year. In fact, I suggest that Peters reporting last year, and having a spectacular 2008 would have gone a long way to getting Peters the kind of money he is looking for.

 

Some here (Dawgg, for example) should remember the Bills had no real replacement for Peters last year, either...and they didn't cave. What makes anyone thing the Bills will cave, or take a bad deal, this year? I'm not saying what the Bills did was right, or smart...but the Bills willingness to let Peters sit out, last year, has to be in the back of their heads, this year.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Actually, I don't think Parker did such a great job with Peters last year. A holdout is an instrument (really one of very few options) to express, unmistakably, a player's dissatisfaction to management. Jason Peters was, justifiably in my opinion, upset about his contract and that the Bills were paying far more for lesser lineman at less valued positions than they were paying him. It's completely understandable why someone would be upset in his position. Making that disappointment crystal clear to the front office was a business decision on Peters part.

 

Did Parker and Peters feel that Peters could pull off a Walter Jones sort of holdout and come back with limited reps and play mistake free football? That didn't happen, primarily because Peters is not Walter Jones -- nobody is. Were the Bills trying to undermine the player/agent relationship? It wouldn't be the first time. Regardless, the decision to have a protracted holdout and miss all of camp and preseason was a mistake; as it was a mistake to holdout with Ralph Wilson pulling the strings in Buffalo. The owner can really dig in his heels when he wants to.

 

It would've been better tactics to express the dissatisfaction with a limited holdout, but showing up for the mandatory stuff and demonstrating on the practice field the readiness and ability to continue to play at an elite level. Why? Because, the Bills would've had far fewer public opinion cards to play and could have been brought to the negotiating table sooner and easier, perhaps. Not to mention that Peters wouldn't have racked up all those fines and given the team back money that should have been his. Also, if Peters practiced well and had taken yet another huge stride forward in his profession, he'd have unquestionably been the best LT in the NFL at the rate he had been improving. Now, there are real questions about whether he was more of a quick horse out of the gates and is going to fade badly after the first turn...

[SouthGeorgiaBillsFan]

"Do you honestly think other teams, evaluating potential interest in some future free agency, will over look his attitude and poor performance directly resulting from his unwillingness to play to his contract? His value in this respect deminishes as time goes on."

 

Are you joking? This is the NFL. Peters is a left tackle - the most critical position on a football field other than QB, and an elite one at that. If the Bills don't pay him, some other team will. But here is the simple truth - the Bills know this guy should be getting more money, and by releasing Derrick Dockery they were pretty much showing their intentions to pony up and pay the guy. And lets not forget - he deserves more money. We are paying him like a mediocre left tackle and he has demonstrated he is elite. And if you really think about it, Peters' request to be the highest paid tackle in the NFL is not all that unreasonable, because he is young with tons of room to grow but is already established as probably the premier player at the position in the NFL right now. I cannot understand how any fan who wants to see the Bills win could suggest the Bills do anything besides sign this guy for the long term. Our offense is poised to be very good next year but if we lose peters you can kiss that goodbye. Draft picks are not more valuable to any team that wants to win now than an established elite player, especially at such a critical position. The Bills have to pay him and they will, and we should all be hoping they do.

[iinii]

ps. Also, if Peters practiced well and had taken yet another huge stride forward in his profession, he'd have unquestionably been the best LT in the NFL at the rate he had been improving. Now, there are real questions about whether he was more of a quick horse out of the gates and is going to fade badly after the first turn...

I am coming to the same conclusions. Peters is acting like he just wants the money, now that he has tasted real money. Anquan Bolden played last season for far less and after suffering a serious injury. Peters came in only when he was about to lose a check. That whiff in the Jets game that wound up costing us the game spoke volumes.

[iinii]

"Do you honestly think other teams, evaluating potential interest in some future free agency, will over look his attitude and poor performance directly resulting from his unwillingness to play to his contract? His value in this respect deminishes as time goes on."

 

Are you joking? This is the NFL. Peters is a left tackle - the most critical position on a football field other than QB, and an elite one at that. If the Bills don't pay him, some other team will. But here is the simple truth - the Bills know this guy should be getting more money, and by releasing Derrick Dockery they were pretty much showing their intentions to pony up and pay the guy. And lets not forget - he deserves more money. We are paying him like a mediocre left tackle and he has demonstrated he is elite. And if you really think about it, Peters' request to be the highest paid tackle in the NFL is not all that unreasonable, because he is young with tons of room to grow but is already established as probably the premier player at the position in the NFL right now. I cannot understand how any fan who wants to see the Bills win could suggest the Bills do anything besides sign this guy for the long term. Our offense is poised to be very good next year but if we lose peters you can kiss that goodbye. Draft picks are not more valuable to any team that wants to win now than an established elite player, especially at such a critical position. The Bills have to pay him and they will, and we should all be hoping they do.

As has been said here before, there is a team just south of Buffalo with brand new rings and no pro bowl left tackle..... I equate elite with professional and Peters is far from professional.

[The Dean]

Are you joking? This is the NFL. Peters is a left tackle - the most critical position on a football field other than QB, and an elite one at that. If the Bills don't pay him, some other team will. But here is the simple truth - the Bills know this guy should be getting more money, and by releasing Derrick Dockery they were pretty much showing their intentions to pony up and pay the guy. And lets not forget - he deserves more money. We are paying him like a mediocre left tackle and he has demonstrated he is elite. And if you really think about it, Peters' request to be the highest paid tackle in the NFL is not all that unreasonable, because he is young with tons of room to grow but is already established as probably the premier player at the position in the NFL right now. I cannot understand how any fan who wants to see the Bills win could suggest the Bills do anything besides sign this guy for the long term. Our offense is poised to be very good next year but if we lose peters you can kiss that goodbye. Draft picks are not more valuable to any team that wants to win now than an established elite player, especially at such a critical position. The Bills have to pay him and they will, and we should all be hoping they do.

 

 

1. "he deserves more money": Indeed. I think everyone (with any sense) realizes that. He might already have a new contract, had he not held out, last year.

 

2. "paying him like a mediocre left tackle and he has demonstrated he is elite". Actually, the Bills are paying him far LESS than a mediocre starting LT. While I disagree he deserves "elite" LT money, just yet, he deserves a chance to earn it, if he continues to improve.

 

3. "already established as probably the premier player at the position in the NFL right now". No, simply not true. He has the potential to be that, but he's not there, right now.

 

4."The Bills have to pay him and they will, and we should all be hoping they do.". Well, as they demonstrated last year, they don't HAVE to do anything. He is under contract and has very limited unilateral options. What will he do, sit out again? That would be phenomenally stupid on his part. But, I agree we should all be hoping they come to an agreement...sooner rather than later.

[DazedandConfused]

I think a lot of this dispute comes down to the ultimately unanswerable question of whether Peters would have helped get to the ultimate goal of a new contract by holding out or playing under his current contract and being a solid citizen and the Bills would reward him appropriately.

 

Actually I think real answer is of course somewhere in between the two extremes (though ironically as bad as some folks judge Peters action there is a more extreme version of mercenary player action embodied in the Joey Galloway approach).

 

My sense is it would be nice if the Bills were such good folk that they would reward benevolence, but I think like many on TSW who react screw him they are businessfolk whom caveat emptor is the only reasonable reaction. Even worse with their cave in to Schobel over his hissy fit and their stupid contract with Kelsay they have shown there can be advantage to taking them on.