Thurman#1 Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 i believe they offered him $8-10 million. They may have. But there's no way to know past $7.5.
Thurman#1 Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 Indy, Who is to say that Jason Peters wont keep doing what he did last year? Do you really want to go through two more years of that (and I truly believe Peters was stupid enough to do just that) he was getting bad advice and listening to it. Or suppose that player that is taken at that new pick ends up being a stud player.......dont we come out ahead? God I KNOW that you dont trade left tackles.....but he really was hurting this team. They already signed him. At an amount that was much less than he had "demanded." As cooler heads had said over and over, Peters was merely negotiating. You say "Suppose that player that is taken at that new pick ends up being a stud player.......dont we come out ahead?" No, we don't. Because first we have to use (probably) the 11th pick on an LT. Which means that all our other needs have to be downgraded from 11th to 28th. So we probably would have gotten a better stud with the earlier pick. And all this is depending on whoever we pick up at LT being good. Which is simply a chance. It might easily not happen. Do you remember how long it took us to find a good LT? Ten years? We'll be picking up whatever is our most crucial other need later than otherwise. This is horrible. No more chance for Brown or Maybin if we liked them. Pettigrew won't make it to 28. Mack is fairly likely to be gone, though there's a chance he might still be there. This was devastating. Clay Matthews? Gone. Brian Orakpo? Don't make me laugh. Ayers? See ya. Cushing? Gone. We don't really see a benefit from this till our 4th rounder (?) hits.
Thurman#1 Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 Everyone who is saying this is def entitled to their opinon....but I just want to throw this out there....... It is obvious that JP is motivated by nothing but money......so what happens when he actually GETS that money. If I was the Eagles this is what would concern me. He wasn't motivated ONLY by money. But you may not have noticed it but we live in a capitalist society. EVERYONE is highly motivated by money here. Hello, McFly. Motivated only by money? There's no proof or even indication of that. Peters is going to be an uber-stud in Philly. Just like he was until last year when he missed a training camp where the OL put in new signals.
cale Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 - Is it everything that I wanted? No I wanted the earlier of the 1st round picks and a 3rd. But did everybody stop and think that this was the BEST the bills could get and they knew they weren't going to be able to sign Peters? What do you do? You take the best deal you can get and obviously this was it. - There is something that has been bothering me about Peters for some time now. Peters knew that he was getting set for a big payday last year and yet he didn't do what needed to be done to have a great year....as a matter of fact he had the WORST year of any starting LT in the league. This just screams "warning" at me. A motivated player would want to dominate and ensure that paycheck. Peters REGRESSED. SOOOO what will people be saying if Peters either a. Goes out and bombs with the Eagles this year or b. Cant stay healthy like he has been unable to do the past two years? Will having an extra first round pick look more worth it then? - The bills will probably go LT with that 11 pick.....but I actually dont think I need to. I am a big D. Bell fan. The kid has very athletic feet and a whole offseason conditioning program. - Now that the bills know they wont be paying huge LT money......will they step up and bring in a couple more veteran free agent guys? - I wanted closure....I got it. John I respect your viewpoint. I think we lost out on this deal and we could have had more. That and that franchise LTs don't grow on trees. The truth of the matter is that we lucked out blind when we got him as a FA. I just don't think lightning is gonna strike twice. To compound matters we don't have an especially mobile QB. We should have kept him or paid him - if we were only gonna get this much for him. The option c in the above scenario is that JP becomes a perennial Pro Bowler playing for a better team. That and that our #28 pick sucks rocks. C
John from Riverside Posted April 18, 2009 Author Posted April 18, 2009 He wasn't motivated ONLY by money. But you may not have noticed it but we live in a capitalist society. EVERYONE is highly motivated by money here. Hello, McFly. Motivated only by money? There's no proof or even indication of that. Peters is going to be an uber-stud in Philly. Just like he was until last year when he missed a training camp where the OL put in new signals. Time will tell Thurman
John from Riverside Posted April 18, 2009 Author Posted April 18, 2009 John I respect your viewpoint. I think we lost out on this deal and we could have had more. That and that franchise LTs don't grow on trees. The truth of the matter is that we lucked out blind when we got him as a FA. I just don't think lightning is gonna strike twice. To compound matters we don't have an especially mobile QB. We should have kept him or paid him - if we were only gonna get this much for him. The option c in the above scenario is that JP becomes a perennial Pro Bowler playing for a better team. That and that our #28 pick sucks rocks. C I am so torn over this one......yes we had the "money" to pay him......yes maybe we should have done it. Something just doesnt sit right with me about Peters.....actually there are several things. Yes I still think we should have the earlier first round pick....or the pick next year should at least be a 1st day pick not a day 2 one. BUT......and this is just theoritical......suppose the bills go Everette Brown at 11.....and Mack with that second 1st. D. Bell to LT....and bring in a free agent for veteran insurance. I think Mack is a pretty darn good player and an upgrade. Trade the 4th round pick to Denver for their TE. We might have less talent at one spot but possibly upgrade 3 others. This is the thing and it is only my opinion....I think that if Ralph would have opened the checkbook to pay Peters he does jack @hit at the other positions. And this is for a guy who has no idea of the meaning of "team" when you are going to pay that kind of money the guy should be a LEADER of your team not a fricken merc. He is holding the team for ransom and putting the bills into a spending holding pattern. Now...I could be totally wrong about this.....maybe Ralph is just being a cheap old basturd and wont spend a dime of that money he just saved by trading Jason Peters.......or maybe he now signs a vet OLB and a vet LT for insurance. All of which actually WANT to be on the team. Now that I am officially over the Peters era I am very interested to see what the bills next moves are......
spartacus Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 I am so torn over this one......yes we had the "money" to pay him......yes maybe we should have done it. Something just doesnt sit right with me about Peters.....actually there are several things. Yes I still think we should have the earlier first round pick....or the pick next year should at least be a 1st day pick not a day 2 one. BUT......and this is just theoritical......suppose the bills go Everette Brown at 11.....and Mack with that second 1st. D. Bell to LT....and bring in a free agent for veteran insurance. I think Mack is a pretty darn good player and an upgrade. Trade the 4th round pick to Denver for their TE. We might have less talent at one spot but possibly upgrade 3 others. This is the thing and it is only my opinion....I think that if Ralph would have opened the checkbook to pay Peters he does jack @hit at the other positions. And this is for a guy who has no idea of the meaning of "team" when you are going to pay that kind of money the guy should be a LEADER of your team not a fricken merc. He is holding the team for ransom and putting the bills into a spending holding pattern. Now...I could be totally wrong about this.....maybe Ralph is just being a cheap old basturd and wont spend a dime of that money he just saved by trading Jason Peters.......or maybe he now signs a vet OLB and a vet LT for insurance. All of which actually WANT to be on the team. Now that I am officially over the Peters era I am very interested to see what the bills next moves are...... Brandon handled this situation very well -for what he was looking to accomplish. The Bills had no interest paying more to Peters since he had an existing contract. Tey determined this last year and told Peters point blank that in janaury. From that point on, Brandon has engaged his spin doctors to paint Peters as this big malcontent and evil person who was holding the Bills hostage and destroying locker room chemistry. Funny how Peters or his agent NEVER made any demands thru the media or bad mouthed the front office of the team. The spin has all been one sided. Also funny how the players never bad mouthed Peters either. and obviously, it has been supremely effective as evidenced by the nonsense being spewed in this thread. Bell, a talent so highly thought of last year that 32 teams passed on him through 6 rounds of the draft. With minimal college experience, we will plug him in at LT in his 2nd year and magically have upgraded our OL from a 2 time Pro Bowler. Yeah right Now the Bills are onto getting rid of 2 of the 3 playmakers on the team they are screwing with Fred Jackson because they can. yeah- he is an RFA who they don't have to pay. But why act like jerks when your other RB is already suspended. They also think trading Roscoe for a 5th rounder is a good plan. Like a 5th round backup LB will be a good exchange for the league best punt returner. But the brilliant fans of this team fully support these moves which continue to gut the team of talent. Bills fans get what they deserve in supporting this front office a full decade of no playoffs with no improvement in sight.
Recommended Posts