Thurman#1 Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 Funny. How many LT's can handle elite pass rushers one on one? Isn't that what makes those rushers elite? Very few LTs can handle elite pass rushers one on one. Jason Peters has proven that he is one of those who can. When he goes to camp, he has done it extremely well.
Thurman#1 Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 yeah, it's the 200 lb safeties that run right past him, untouched There is a great deal of doubt whether that was his man. And again, how many sacks were recorded on Peters in 2007?
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 I think this says it all with regards to Peters: What Peters has accomplished more than anything else is create a huge cloud of doubt around himself. He's clearly more worried about making money than playing football. So what happens when he gets that money? If your only motivation for playing well has been to make money, what happens when you finally get that mega contract? I'm certain that's why no one is rushing to give him the most money any NFL lineman has ever gotten. Of course, that GM might really be interested in Peters and posturing a bit to drive the price down.
Leonidas Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 I agree with most of this. I just don't think the Bills want to trade him, nor can they get what he is worth, and they are in no hurry to. And most importantly... if other teams are willing to pay him the eight figures, why wouldn't we? And yes, it's another Peters thread. I have been looking for one of these all day. http://myespn.go.com/blogs/afceast/0-7-46/...gest-story.html Did Tim Graham just call Peters "perhaps the best player at football's second most vital position?" Just like the stock market: buy low, sell high. They bought this guy extremely low and have the opportunity to sell him very, very high before the 'market' catches up to the fact that he's a lazy slob. Get it done! Thanks for the kind words everybody. I did have to change the headline to get people to read it, though. For more than two hours nobody was clicking on it. As soon as I inserted the word "trade," people started looking. Tim: you're the God damned man. On behalf of anybody who says ontherwise on this site, I apologize. Bills are offering 8mil and Peters want 11mil why is 9.5mil so hard to come to, make it a 2year extension instead of four years, promise not to use the Franchise tag, have bigger penalties for missing OTAs or Preseason, and a signing bonus take back if Peters holds out in the future. WHAT???? Savior? Who is claiming that? If you comb through the other JP threads - and I highly recommend not doing this for your sake - there are some that infer that we are a playoff/super bowl team with him, and a mediocre 8-8 team without him. Blows my mind too.
mrags Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 If you comb through the other JP threads - and I highly recommend not doing this for your sake - there are some that infer that we are a playoff/super bowl team with him, and a mediocre 8-8 team without him. Blows my mind too.
The Dean Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 (The Dean @ Apr 10 2009, 03:13 PM) *Savior? Who is claiming that? If you comb through the other JP threads - and I highly recommend not doing this for your sake - there are some that infer that we are a playoff/super bowl team with him, and a mediocre 8-8 team without him. Blows my mind too. Well, I get your point, but I'm not sure that is calling Peters a ""savior". I think it just might just be the reaction to losing a very good LT with nobody proven to take his place.
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 Well, I get your point, but I'm not sure that is calling Peters a ""savior". I think it just might just be the reaction to losing a very good LT with nobody proven to take his place. What? Bell could walk out on the field and be an instant All Pro this year. After all, he wears the Bills uniform. What could go wrong?
thebandit27 Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 Vic basically said the same thing at the Bills Booster Club meeting at RWS 2 weeks ago; that the Bills cannot let Peter's contract become a bigger distraction to the team. Both Vic C. and Steve Tasker spoke at the meeting. On another note, Vic brought up Larry English's name at least 3 times when there was a Q&A period after both spoke. Questions were mostly about Peters and the draft and Vic mentioning English on 3 different questions sort of jumped out at me. Same guy that guaranteed to me personally (face to face) that Buffalo would trade up for AJ Hawk in 2006.
Thoner7 Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 The Bills need to sign Peters to a deal that allows them to jump ship and run if Peters plays like a load of crap after signing. Im not saying huge incentive layden deal, but one with very little signing bonus. From my understanding of it, when a team cuts a player, the players cap hit that season is the bonus money -- which was otherwise spread out over the years of his contract -- all added up for that year. I dont think it involves the guarenteed money of a contract. If he plays like donkey balls straight up cut him.
Magox Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 The Bills need to sign Peters to a deal that allows them to jump ship and run if Peters plays like a load of crap after signing. Im not saying huge incentive layden deal, but one with very little signing bonus. From my understanding of it, when a team cuts a player, the players cap hit that season is the bonus money -- which was otherwise spread out over the years of his contract -- all added up for that year. I dont think it involves the guarenteed money of a contract. If he plays like donkey balls straight up cut him. One problem with that. That's not how the real world works
Leonidas Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 One problem with that. That's not how the real world works It's amazing the scenarios people come up with, as if the player's agent doesn't understand how signing bonuses work...
K-9 Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 There is a great deal of doubt whether that was his man. And again, how many sacks were recorded on Peters in 2007? There is NO doubt: Elam was NOT Peters' man on the play. The Jets did a great job on that play as well. They showed blitz from the WLB and Peters actually did the right thing by narrowing his gap with DD to take away that threat. Meanwhile Elam, whom should have been Losman's first read (and didn't appear to be), lined up two yards behind the LOS and to the rigtht of the WLB. Elam did a good job of anticipating the snap and got a moving start. Peters' first responsibility, the WLB was negated but by that time Elam was passed the LOS and on his way to the QB. When you see this play from the endzone view you can really appreciate the distance Peters would have had to cover just to get a hand on Elam let alone make a block. Again, give the Jets credit for a good scheme in that situation. I have many reasons to dislike Peters but that play against the Jets is not one of them. He was one of the few on that play who made the correct read and played it like he should have. It was a terrible playcall against a run blitz and a terrible misread by Losman. But most of the credit should go the the Jets and Elam for making a good play. GO BILLS!!!
Dan Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 That may well be. But Peters has a history. What did he do after recieving a much better new contract, at excellent money for a RT (though not an LT)? He kicked ass, that's what he did. There does seem to be some doubt over this. IMHO a look at his history should eliminate that doubt. I agree with and understand your statements regarding his history. However, you have to consider that even as a RT with a decent raise, he was still playing for the big payday. Why rest on your laurels as a RT making $4mill/yr when you know you could move to LT and make $10mill/yr. I'm not suggesting Peters WILL become complacent with a new mega contract. But, he's definitely dialed it back a notch since becoming a ProBowl LT. There can be little doubt that he looked very average in 2008 in comparison to 2007's play. Certainly a lot of factors come into play, but he took one hell of a bad time to miss the entire offseason, show up to work a little out of shape, and then get injured again at the end of the year. So, I'm sorry. But I do have doubts about his play if he gets a $10+mill/yr contract. If for no other reason than he's ended 2 consecutive seasons on the sideline. Either the added weight on his frame combined with the extra work to become a top flight LT is causing himself to get injured more easily or he's sand bagging it when it's apparent we're no longer in the playoff hunt. Either way, it should be a cause for concern especially when combined with the attitude of pay me now (before my body completely gives out). Of course, that GM might really be interested in Peters and posturing a bit to drive the price down. Excellent point and very likely.
iinii Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 Peters and his agents have managed to create a lot of doubt about the guy's willingness to play and work hard. Yes, he was voted to a Pro Bowl but he was the LT that gave up the most sacks in the NFL last year.....hardly a guy who deserves 11M per year. The Bills hold ALL the cards here. He is under contract for two more years. The Bills can keep him at a VERY reasonable amount of under 4M per year. They also can get similar production that they got from Peters last year. Anyone who watched him saaw a big drop off in his play. If Peters and his agents want to play this game for another two years and then see what the market is in the offseason in 2011 then fine.....but sounds like a bad strategy. I'd pay him 8M a year but not more. Didn't really notice much of a difference for the games he wasn't there.....that should be the biggest indication. I have two words for everyone, Anquan Bolden. played with a busted head for what was it? 900k. He was disgruntled too but still but his pads on like a man and did his job. The Bills need to hold the line, long before Graham wrote his article, someone in here suggested that Peter's motivation was suspect. Peters is shooting himself in the foot. NO one is going to pony up elite money for a guy who only plays when he deems the team, game or bank account worthy.
thebandit27 Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 I have two words for everyone, Anquan Bolden. played with a busted head for what was it? 900k. He was disgruntled too but still but his pads on like a man and did his job. The Bills need to hold the line, long before Graham wrote his article, someone in here suggested that Peter's motivation was suspect. Peters is shooting himself in the foot. NO one is going to pony up elite money for a guy who only plays when he deems the team, game or bank account worthy. If you don't think a team SHOULD pay him, that's understandable, but precedent belies your statement. Plenty of players hold out and get huge contracts. It happens every single year, and eventually Peters will get one too. I'm not picking on you, but I firmly believe it's only a matter of time before Buffalo (or someone else after a trade) gives him $10M/year or more.
Leonidas Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 I have two words for everyone, Anquan Bolden. played with a busted head for what was it? 900k. He was disgruntled too but still but his pads on like a man and did his job. The Bills need to hold the line, long before Graham wrote his article, someone in here suggested that Peter's motivation was suspect. Peters is shooting himself in the foot. NO one is going to pony up elite money for a guy who only plays when he deems the team, game or bank account worthy. Umm...he signed a 6-year/$23.5M contract in '05.
offde-fence Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 I wonder how much contracts for these players can be performance based? They're all looking for guaranteed cash, but why not guarantee it against injury and then leave the escalators be performanced based? There should be some way to guard against that dreaded drop off once a player has signed.
Kelly the Dog Posted April 13, 2009 Author Posted April 13, 2009 I wonder how much contracts for these players can be performance based? They're all looking for guaranteed cash, but why not guarantee it against injury and then leave the escalators be performanced based? There should be some way to guard against that dreaded drop off once a player has signed. How do you performance base an offensive tackle? Just a sacks against stat is a horrible way, especially considering it isn't even an official stat. Pro Bowl? Don't think so. I also think that performanced based money can lead to individuals as well as teams making terrible decisions. Like if a WR has 9 TDs and gets a 5 million dollar bonus for 10 TDs, a meddlesome owner might say, "If we get near the red zone, look for the other guy", or a player may try to throw too many passes to the endzone to collect his performance based TD bonus.
Bill from NYC Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 How do you performance base an offensive tackle? Just a sacks against stat is a horrible way, especially considering it isn't even an official stat. Pro Bowl? Don't think so. I also think that performanced based money can lead to individuals as well as teams making terrible decisions. Like if a WR has 9 TDs and gets a 5 million dollar bonus for 10 TDs, a meddlesome owner might say, "If we get near the red zone, look for the other guy", or a player may try to throw too many passes to the endzone to collect his performance based TD bonus. Driving home from Philly last night I heard Jim Miller say that the Bills should trade Peters if they can (I am paraphrasing). Truthfully I was surprised to hear him say that.
LynchMob23 Posted April 13, 2009 Posted April 13, 2009 How do you performance base an offensive tackle? Just a sacks against stat is a horrible way, especially considering it isn't even an official stat. Pro Bowl? Don't think so. I also think that performanced based money can lead to individuals as well as teams making terrible decisions. Like if a WR has 9 TDs and gets a 5 million dollar bonus for 10 TDs, a meddlesome owner might say, "If we get near the red zone, look for the other guy", or a player may try to throw too many passes to the endzone to collect his performance based TD bonus. I think there are things you can put in place to ensure he's at his best in the regular season - weight limits, work out % at the facility....there's a number of ways they could frame it. The question is, would Peters and his representation allow it?
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts