Poeticlaw Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 I can see a trend building here. You cant let players dictitate when you give them a raise becuase you cant reduce it when they arent playing up to the standard. But after Peters and Jackson gets theirs whats to stop Trent from saying hey I am the starting QB and the back up is making a million more than me to hold a clip board He didnt complain becuase JP was the starter before him but now JP isnt there why should someone behind him make more money? Whats to stop him from saying If you dont pay me I will sit out. Then who comes after Trent in this non stop redo my contract I am no longer making what I am worth crap!! Playout the exsiting contracts!!!
Shanahan's Horseshoe Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 When Trent proves he can put together a consistent 16 game season, he can have all of the money he wants!
Pat7s Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 I can see a trend building here. You cant let players dictitate when you give them a raise becuase you cant reduce it when they arent playing up to the standard. But after Peters and Jackson gets theirs whats to stop Trent from saying hey I am the starting QB and the back up is making a million more than me to hold a clip board He didnt complain becuase JP was the starter before him but now JP isnt there why should someone behind him make more money? Whats to stop him from saying If you dont pay me I will sit out. Then who comes after Trent in this non stop redo my contract I am no longer making what I am worth crap!! Playout the exsiting contracts!!! There's a difference here though... Peters signed a 5 year deal when he was getting close to the league minimum. That was dumb because now he's stuck with it. We did pay Peters, he's just pissed that he made a bad decision. Jackson gets a lousy qualifying offer and from what I understand that's all they have to do next year to keep him too... forgive me, I read that at either WGR's site or through the Buffalo news and don't have the patience too find it. He's 28 now... running backs don't last long in this league. He has to get paid NOW or else he could be screwed. Everyone on this board would do exactly what Fred is doing if they were in his situation. The Bills should pay him.
BillsNYC Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 I can see a trend building here. You cant let players dictitate when you give them a raise becuase you cant reduce it when they arent playing up to the standard. But after Peters and Jackson gets theirs whats to stop Trent from saying hey I am the starting QB and the back up is making a million more than me to hold a clip board He didnt complain becuase JP was the starter before him but now JP isnt there why should someone behind him make more money? Whats to stop him from saying If you dont pay me I will sit out. Then who comes after Trent in this non stop redo my contract I am no longer making what I am worth crap!! Playout the exsiting contracts!!! If I had to choose, Peters wanting top LT money this season, or Trent wanting top QB money after next season, I'd dump Peters and and pour that money into Edwards. That's what the "Just pay Peters" crowd doesn't get, you can't just give him $12 million a year and not understand the consequences for future signings. What if Whitner has a huge year, he's going to need an extension soon too. So is McGee. Lynch in 2 years.
stuckincincy Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 I can see a trend building here. You cant let players dictitate when you give them a raise becuase you cant reduce it when they arent playing up to the standard. But after Peters and Jackson gets theirs whats to stop Trent from saying hey I am the starting QB and the back up is making a million more than me to hold a clip board He didnt complain becuase JP was the starter before him but now JP isnt there why should someone behind him make more money? Whats to stop him from saying If you dont pay me I will sit out. Then who comes after Trent in this non stop redo my contract I am no longer making what I am worth crap!! Playout the exsiting contracts!!! Some feel that TE still concussed.
1billsfan Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 I can see a trend building here. You cant let players dictitate when you give them a raise becuase you cant reduce it when they arent playing up to the standard. But after Peters and Jackson gets theirs whats to stop Trent from saying hey I am the starting QB and the back up is making a million more than me to hold a clip board He didnt complain becuase JP was the starter before him but now JP isnt there why should someone behind him make more money? Whats to stop him from saying If you dont pay me I will sit out. Then who comes after Trent in this non stop redo my contract I am no longer making what I am worth crap!! Playout the exsiting contracts!!! You're thinking waaaaay too highly of Trent Edwards. His play was very bad after the Charger game except when facing the defenseless Chiefs and Broncos. He played Losman-like bad. During JP's worst stretches of play bad. Trent was bad. The Bills should actually be thinking about drafting a raw talented QB with very good potential after the third round. If "The Natural" Trent Edwards continues his downward spiral then the Bills will no doubt have a four or five win season in 2009 and will be drafting a QB within the first five picks of the 2010 draft. Although you never know with Ralph, he did hand one of the worst coaches in NFL history a three year deal. Trent might as well throw his hat into the renegotiating contract ring.
Cynical Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 If I had to choose, Peters wanting top LT money this season, or Trent wanting top QB money after next season, I'd dump Peters and and pour that money into Edwards. That's what the "Just pay Peters" crowd doesn't get, you can't just give him $12 million a year and not understand the consequences for future signings. What if Whitner has a huge year, he's going to need an extension soon too. So is McGee. Lynch in 2 years. Let me get this straight. And please clarify if I am missing something ... You do NOT want to pay the left hand today "x" amount of money, but you would be willing to pay the right hand tomorrow the same "x" amount of money. THEN ... you chastise those who want to pay the left hand today, because they do not understand what the future consequences are when they give "x" amount of money to someone. That is some screwed up logic ...
Leonidas Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 You're thinking waaaaay too highly of Trent Edwards. His play was very bad after the Charger game except when facing the defenseless Chiefs and Broncos. He played Losman-like bad. During JP's worst stretches of play bad. Trent was bad. The Bills should actually be thinking about drafting a raw talented QB with very good potential after the third round. If "The Natural" Trent Edwards continues his downward spiral then the Bills will no doubt have a four or five win season in 2009 and will be drafting a QB within the first five picks of the 2010 draft. Although you never know with Ralph, he did hand one of the worst coaches in NFL history a three year deal. Trent might as well throw his hat into the renegotiating contract ring. Here's to hoping you're wrong, but afraid that you're right. That's what the "Just pay Peters" crowd doesn't get, What, that you should chew before you swallow?? That rocks aren't edible?? Let me get this straight. And please clarify if I am missing something ... You do NOT want to pay the left hand today "x" amount of money, but you would be willing to pay the right hand tomorrow the same "x" amount of money. THEN ... you chastise those who want to pay the left hand today, because they do not understand what the future consequences are when they give "x" amount of money to someone. That is some screwed up logic ... I think his point is that a) Peters didn't earn it, and b) $12M/year is enough to pay several contract extensions. And I agree with him.
Kelly the Dog Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 If I had to choose, Peters wanting top LT money this season, or Trent wanting top QB money after next season, I'd dump Peters and and pour that money into Edwards. You mean except for the fact that Trent hasn't been really good yet? We have no idea if he is a franchise quarterback or not?
Cynical Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 I think his point is that a) Peters didn't earn it, and b) $12M/year is enough to pay several contract extensions. And I agree with him. I think that's what he's trying to say, but he said this: ... or Trent wanting top QB money after next season, I'd dump Peters and and pour that money into Edwards. Last I checked, "top" QB's were being paid some serious coin, and he did not attach any other qualifiers to that statement, like "assuming he plays well ...".
Big Hurt Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 If I had to choose, Peters wanting top LT money this season, or Trent wanting top QB money after next season, I'd dump Peters and and pour that money into Edwards. That's what the "Just pay Peters" crowd doesn't get, you can't just give him $12 million a year and not understand the consequences for future signings. What if Whitner has a huge year, he's going to need an extension soon too. So is McGee. Lynch in 2 years. I think you are the one that not getting it. Other teams pay to keep their best players. The Bills choose to cut or trade them away. That's why this team hasn't made the playoff for over 10 years. Fans of other teams would not think this is acceptable.
The Senator Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 I can see a trend building here. You cant let players dictitate when you give them a raise becuase you cant reduce it when they arent playing up to the standard. But after Peters and Jackson gets theirs whats to stop Trent from saying hey I am the starting QB and the back up is making a million more than me to hold a clip board He didnt complain becuase JP was the starter before him but now JP isnt there why should someone behind him make more money? Whats to stop him from saying If you dont pay me I will sit out. Then who comes after Trent in this non stop redo my contract I am no longer making what I am worth crap!! Playout the exsiting contracts!!! Then you just tell him, "Here ya go, Trentie Boy - here's a clipboard for you to hold while we give Ryan a try at QB. Now go back to looking at your Dakota Fanning scrapbook."
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 When Trent proves he can put together a consistent 16 game season, he can have all of the money he wants! And after he gets us to the playoffs.
Poeticlaw Posted April 7, 2009 Author Posted April 7, 2009 You're thinking waaaaay too highly of Trent Edwards. His play was very bad after the Charger game except when facing the defenseless Chiefs and Broncos. He played Losman-like bad. During JP's worst stretches of play bad. Trent was bad. The Bills should actually be thinking about drafting a raw talented QB with very good potential after the third round. If "The Natural" Trent Edwards continues his downward spiral then the Bills will no doubt have a four or five win season in 2009 and will be drafting a QB within the first five picks of the 2010 draft. Although you never know with Ralph, he did hand one of the worst coaches in NFL history a three year deal. Trent might as well throw his hat into the renegotiating contract ring. Personally I do not think Highly of Trent and strongly believed we should have been looking for his replacemnt once he faltered this season. But now we have fitzpatrick who is a back up making more money then our starter. Im just pointing out a trend which actually started with Kelsay getting more money then schoebel then schoebel balks and gets more money though he shouldnt have gotten it either, Jason peters balked and got redone then they bring in walker/dockery which are higher paid then him and makes him balk some more. I understand the reasons why jackson wants a new contract and I agree he deserves more than his tender but if not for the Bills he would be making ZERO. Show some respect to the team that has given you a chance which includes the UNDRAFTED TE JASON PETERS!!!! Despite how we feel about Trent he would have the right to balk at his salary for a STARTING QB in this leaugue he in the bottom 50 with his backup making more than him. Just saying.
Poeticlaw Posted April 7, 2009 Author Posted April 7, 2009 I think you are the one that not getting it. Other teams pay to keep their best players. The Bills choose to cut or trade them away. That's why this team hasn't made the playoff for over 10 years. Fans of other teams would not think this is acceptable. I have to disagree with you. The blue print is by the NE patriots who have let go of every good player they had and replaced them with quality players. The only pay players such as TOM BRADY which they know is their franchise player. Unlike some on this board I dont feel Jason Peters is a franchise player and I also dont think he deserves franchise money. NOw if he played out his renegotiated contract with class and proved he was a franchise player then he would be worth the franchise money.
Mr. WEO Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 When Trent proves he can put together a consistent 16 game season, he can have all of the money he wants! Like Fitzpatrick?
1billsfan Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 Personally I do not think Highly of Trent and strongly believed we should have been looking for his replacemnt once he faltered this season. But now we have fitzpatrick who is a back up making more money then our starter. Im just pointing out a trend which actually started with Kelsay getting more money then schoebel then schoebel balks and gets more money though he shouldnt have gotten it either, Jason peters balked and got redone then they bring in walker/dockery which are higher paid then him and makes him balk some more. I understand the reasons why jackson wants a new contract and I agree he deserves more than his tender but if not for the Bills he would be making ZERO. Show some respect to the team that has given you a chance which includes the UNDRAFTED TE JASON PETERS!!!! Despite how we feel about Trent he would have the right to balk at his salary for a STARTING QB in this leaugue he in the bottom 50 with his backup making more than him. Just saying. If Trent wants to pout, then so be it. If he feels the starting QB should be the one making the most money then maybe they should go ahead and bench Trent and start Fitz. At least Peters showed pro bowl ability in 2007 whatever happens in regards to his contract. Edwards can't seem to get the ball into the endzone, especially against decent defenses. He should worry more about that.
billsfreak Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 As much as I wouldn't care if they traded Peters yesterday, at least he accomplished something in one good season, Trent hasn't accomplished anything yet. But the Bills are no different than any other team in the NFL when it comes to today's players. O.K., maybe a little different, at least their players aren't asking to be the highest paid at their position when they are at or near the bottom of the list of rankings at thier positions.
BillsNYC Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 Let me get this straight. And please clarify if I am missing something ... You do NOT want to pay the left hand today "x" amount of money, but you would be willing to pay the right hand tomorrow the same "x" amount of money. THEN ... you chastise those who want to pay the left hand today, because they do not understand what the future consequences are when they give "x" amount of money to someone. That is some screwed up logic ... No, what I'm saying is that there is a spending cap and the Bills are cash to cap, and they can only afford to sign 2 maybe 3 franchise players to big contracts. You give into Peters demands then either Whitner, Lynch, or Edwards is gone. If Edwards has a breakout year, you HAVE to sign him, there's no more important franchise position than QB. If you sign Peters to $12 million a year, no way are Edwards, Lynch, and Evans all on this team in 2 years. I'd rather put my money into players that touch the ball on offense. If Peters comes down on his demands then sign him, but I feel if it was a choice between Peters this year or the risk/potential of Edwards resigning next year, I'd put my chips on Edwards as the QB position is more important. I would also rather use that $12 million on Edwards, then down the road on Lynch as well.
BillsNYC Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 Last I checked, "top" QB's were being paid some serious coin, and he did not attach any other qualifiers to that statement, like "assuming he plays well ...". Hmm...I thought that would be obvious.
Recommended Posts