The Big Cat Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Just when I thought Leo and Sal's hate mongering couldn't get more out of control, they spiral into a five minute diatribe about all the pieces of the Bills puzzle which are destined to fall apart two years down the road when the OLine finally plays right. Talk about negative Nancies. I'm willing to bet they're both on a steady regiment of cranberry juice these days, if you know what I mean.
thewildrabbit Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 What does "rebuilding" mean anyway? Every team is rebuilding some aspect of their team every year. Would you call T.O & Evans a rebuilding set of WRs? PTR no, bringing in one new player at a position isn't called rebuilding The term rebuilding is often phrased when a team changes the head coach and it starts the rebuilding process, you know kinda like what Jauron did to the O line this year...
ThereIsNoDog Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 The Bills had a trade in the works with the Lions for trading Dockery and it didn't go through because they screwed it up. The only Bills player named to the pro bowl the last two years was LT Jason Peters, irregardless of how Bills fans view him now he is highly thought of around the NFL, in fact Andy Reid the HC of the Eagles stated Peters was the best LT in the NFL, which is why they gave up a first round draft pick for him. The average life span of a player in the NFL is THREE years, so IMO every player has a right to obtain the best pay he can get, while he can get it. The team will cut a player when they feel like it no matter what his contract states! A few years ago the Bills brought in Dockery and Walker and paid them both more then Peters, although Peters was clearly better then both of them. The Bills should have re upped Peters contract right then and there, they didn't and the result was an unhappy player. Had the Bills renegotiated his contract and paid him accordingly they would still have one of the premier left tackles in the NFL and all these posts about the O line would be moot What was the offer for Dockery that the Bills "screwed up?" And how did they screw it up? Regarding the bolded part, Peters has been in the NFL for 5 years. So if the average life span of a player is three years, giving him a gigantic contract, when he's missed 2 games due to injury the past 2 years, isn't exactly smart is it? And as of this moment, he's on the PUP list for the Eagles. Nevermind the utter lack of professionalism he showed last year, which, if the Bills "lowballed" him, was probably the reason they didn't go as high as he thought he deserved. And the Bills must think highly of Bell, if Clark Judge saw fit to write about it.
Buftex Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Sorry, I haven't read the entire thread, but Walker let it be known he wasn't comfortable playing LT last season.... another reason that many were wondering wtf the Bills were/are thinking, with this O-line. I hope it all works out, that Wood and Levitre are studs, Hangartner becomes an anchor at center (as opposed to a utility man), and that the tackles, as mediocre as they have been thus far, suddenly play like the Ballard and company, with the interior line so strong...but the Bills are banking an awful lot of things to go right, to just assume all of this will happen...and if it doesn't, we Bills fans will be left, wondering, again, if the Bills would be any good if they had an O-line...
zazie Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 What was the offer for Dockery that the Bills "screwed up?" And how did they screw it up? Regarding the bolded part, Peters has been in the NFL for 5 years. So if the average life span of a player is three years, giving him a gigantic contract, when he's missed 2 games due to injury the past 2 years, isn't exactly smart is it? And as of this moment, he's on the PUP list for the Eagles. Nevermind the utter lack of professionalism he showed last year, which, if the Bills "lowballed" him, was probably the reason they didn't go as high as he thought he deserved. And the Bills must think highly of Bell, if Clark Judge saw fit to write about it. I wish people would realize that Peters did exactly what his agent told him to do and thats why he hired the agent. The result was he got the huge contract and with a perennial contender in the NFC east. I just don't see how he could have done anything else really you hire a pro, you listen to them. Like you listen to your dr. or your lawyer or your acct. The detroit trade was a 7th rounder I thinkg that the Bills FO failed to get to the league office in time.
Thoner7 Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Langston is worried about getting exposed on the left side and falling out of favor with the coaches and fans. Lang was great at RT, leave him there. I really hope with Wood now signed the coaching staff starts getting Chambers some reps at LT. Bell is not close to being ready from what I saw at camp and Im not holding my breath for Walker to succeed. Chambers did well in spelling Peters at the end of last season, lets see what he can do.
thebandit27 Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 I'm just curious, should the Bills' FO re-up every player's contract when they have a good season and demand top 5 money? We have multiple players primed to be in exactly that position. Where do you draw the line? Or do you propose we allow the players to dictate their salary each year? I love how everyone was so happy with the FO for locking up this great potential talent to a reasonable contact. Then 2 years later, when the player complains, everyone is pissed at the FO for not re-upping his contract like he wanted. I suppose in hindsight, the FO shouldn't have given him a nice raise and insist he earn it at LT first. But, then again, I imagine everyone would be pissed because they didn't lock him up to a longer term, reasonably priced contract when they had the chance. The FO handled the Peters situation as well as could be expected. Just face it, some people you cannot make happy. They just don't want to be here. Or worse yet, all they care about is the money. And those are usually the ones that drop off considerably once they get it. Now, did the FO handle replacing Peters properly? That's the point of this thread, and one worth discussing. For me, I'll wait to see a little of Walker's play on the field in the preseason before I get too worked up about a few comments; especially, knowing Walker's sense of humor and conversation style. I don't mean to be disrespectful, Dan, but that's BS. Peters had no problem playing here, he liked it here, he just didn't like (and I'm fairly certain that not only have you seen this mentioned on this board, but that you'd also feel the same way in your line of work) that a guy who hadn't played a snap in the NFL was making literally 10x more than him, while his own organization touts him as a top-5 NFL LT. It was money, plain and simple. EDIT: Sorry, I missed the next sentance in your post. Yes, Peters was about the money, but to be honest I can't begrudge his stance considering the deals that unproven rookies get.
thewildrabbit Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 I'm just curious, should the Bills' FO re-up every player's contract when they have a good season and demand top 5 money? We have multiple players primed to be in exactly that position. Where do you draw the line? Or do you propose we allow the players to dictate their salary each year? I love how everyone was so happy with the FO for locking up this great potential talent to a reasonable contact. Then 2 years later, when the player complains, everyone is pissed at the FO for not re-upping his contract like he wanted. I suppose in hindsight, the FO shouldn't have given him a nice raise and insist he earn it at LT first. But, then again, I imagine everyone would be pissed because they didn't lock him up to a longer term, reasonably priced contract when they had the chance. The FO handled the Peters situation as well as could be expected. Just face it, some people you cannot make happy. They just don't want to be here. Or worse yet, all they care about is the money. And those are usually the ones that drop off considerably once they get it. Now, did the FO handle replacing Peters properly? That's the point of this thread, and one worth discussing. For me, I'll wait to see a little of Walker's play on the field in the preseason before I get too worked up about a few comments; especially, knowing Walker's sense of humor and conversation style. Show me another player on the Buffalo Bills that out performs his contract and then makes the pro bowl. Should the Bills look into redoing his contract if he out performs his old one, even if its only one year old? I look at it from the stand point you never know when and injury can end a career. I'll state it again, the average lifespan of an NFL player is THREE years. I dunno, perhaps I favor the players views rather then the views of the front office. But in my view any time a player is clearly better then others on the team at the same position and he is under paid and he knows it,then you pay him! So lets look at what happened, the Bills bring in Dockery and Walker as free agents and over pay them and it gets their best player upset. So what do they do, instead of simply paying Peters a dollar more then either. They screwed it up and lose him.
zazie Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 I don't mean to be disrespectful, Dan, but that's BS. Peters had no problem playing here, he liked it here, he just didn't like (and I'm fairly certain that not only have you seen this mentioned on this board, but that you'd also feel the same way in your line of work) that a guy who hadn't played a snap in the NFL was making literally 10x more than him, while his own organization touts him as a top-5 NFL LT. It was money, plain and simple. EDIT: Sorry, I missed the next sentance in your post. Yes, Peters was about the money, but to be honest I can't begrudge his stance considering the deals that unproven rookies get. Very few people anywhere in our society are NOT about the money. What else is there?
Dan Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Every year there's a new highest paid player in the league. And most of the time its a rookie. That's just the way. Yet, not all players hold out and demand a new contract. You simply cannot re-work contracts every year based upon the players' previous year's performance. If so, do you give players pay cuts, when they get injured and miss half the season or just play poorly for whatever reason? Peters wanted more money. His agent laid out a plan to get that money. That plan had a complete disregard for the Bills' interests. It worked. Yeah, for Peters and his agent. But, you cannot expect the FO to give in to each player's demands. You can't.
thewildrabbit Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 What was the offer for Dockery that the Bills "screwed up?" And how did they screw it up? Regarding the bolded part, Peters has been in the NFL for 5 years. So if the average life span of a player is three years, giving him a gigantic contract, when he's missed 2 games due to injury the past 2 years, isn't exactly smart is it? And as of this moment, he's on the PUP list for the Eagles. Nevermind the utter lack of professionalism he showed last year, which, if the Bills "lowballed" him, was probably the reason they didn't go as high as he thought he deserved. And the Bills must think highly of Bell, if Clark Judge saw fit to write about it. At the end of the Bills negotiations with Peters they finally said they would pay him what he wanted, and he said after all this I just want out, so they were forced to trade him. The Bills are notoriously cheap (RW) and will fight tooth fang and claw rather then pay certain players what they truly deserve, they screwed up with Peters and they know it.
zazie Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 At the end of the Bills negotiations with Peters they finally said they would pay him what he wanted, and he said after all this I just want out, so they were forced to trade him. The Bills are notoriously cheap (RW) and will fight tooth fang and claw rather then pay certain players what they truly deserve, they screwed up with Peters and they know it. Where are you getting this info from?
bananathumb Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 I'm going with the coaches on this one, though I am probably dumb to do it, given their years of failure. Walker has a decent chance of playing well at LT, based on his experience and smarts. If he looks bad there, he won't be the only LT to get beat in the NFL. If he's really bad, we can move him back to RT and try Chambers, then Bell at left tackle. Chambers has played there before and played well. The coaches "love" Bell's progress, so it seems he is the long-term hope. I am as much concerned about Butler at RT, so if Langston goes back there and Kirk plays the left side, that leaves Butler as one of the guards until Wood or Levitre is ready. In short, I think we have a decent bunch of O-linemen and the coaches will sort out who works best where. I'll start panicking if and when Edwards runs for his life every 3rd play.
thewildrabbit Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Where are you getting this info from? Think I read it in PFW,have to go look it up now.
zazie Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 I'm going with the coaches on this one, though I am probably dumb to do it, given their years of failure.Walker has a decent chance of playing well at LT, based on his experience and smarts. If he looks bad there, he won't be the only LT to get beat in the NFL. If he's really bad, we can move him back to RT and try Chambers, then Bell at left tackle. Chambers has played there before and played well. The coaches "love" Bell's progress, so it seems he is the long-term hope. I am as much concerned about Butler at RT, so if Langston goes back there and Kirk plays the left side, that leaves Butler as one of the guards until Wood or Levitre is ready. In short, I think we have a decent bunch of O-linemen and the coaches will sort out who works best where. I'll start panicking if and when Edwards runs for his life every 3rd play. Or flat on his back with career concussion #2
thewildrabbit Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Every year there's a new highest paid player in the league. And most of the time its a rookie. That's just the way. Yet, not all players hold out and demand a new contract. You simply cannot re-work contracts every year based upon the players' previous year's performance. If so, do you give players pay cuts, when they get injured and miss half the season or just play poorly for whatever reason? Peters wanted more money. His agent laid out a plan to get that money. That plan had a complete disregard for the Bills' interests. It worked. Yeah, for Peters and his agent. But, you cannot expect the FO to give in to each player's demands. You can't. Peters has two more years left on a contract he signed in 2006. He would have been paid an average of about $4 million, well below market value for an elite left tackle. The Miami Dolphins signed last year's No. 1 draft choice, Jake Long, to a five-year deal worth $57.5 million and $30 million in guarantees. The Carolina Panthers in February kept All-Pro tackle Jordan Gross from hitting the open market with a six-year contract worth nearly $60 million.http://myespn.go.com/blogs/afceast/0-7-83/...for-Peters.html Jeez, he was only being underpaid around 6 mill a year. Yea that greedy bastage should have played out his contract and been happy to do so... Can you really blame a player for wanting what he deserves, what loyalty is there in the NFL when the Bills outright cut Thurman Thomas, Bruce Smith and Andre Reed to stay under the cap.
The Senator Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 I'm going with the coaches on this one, though I am probably dumb to do it, given their years of failure.Walker has a decent chance of playing well at LT, based on his experience and smarts. If he looks bad there, he won't be the only LT to get beat in the NFL. If he's really bad, we can move him back to RT and try Chambers, then Bell at left tackle. Chambers has played there before and played well. The coaches "love" Bell's progress, so it seems he is the long-term hope. I am as much concerned about Butler at RT, so if Langston goes back there and Kirk plays the left side, that leaves Butler as one of the guards until Wood or Levitre is ready. In short, I think we have a decent bunch of O-linemen and the coaches will sort out who works best where. I'll start panicking if and when Edwards runs for his life every 3rd play. Walker played fine in the games that FatBoy sat out last year. Not really worried about the o-line at all - there's no way Walker could be any worse than that stupid lazy POS Peters was on this play...
Mickey Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 Every year there's a new highest paid player in the league. And most of the time its a rookie. That's just the way. Yet, not all players hold out and demand a new contract. You simply cannot re-work contracts every year based upon the players' previous year's performance. If so, do you give players pay cuts, when they get injured and miss half the season or just play poorly for whatever reason? Peters wanted more money. His agent laid out a plan to get that money. That plan had a complete disregard for the Bills' interests. It worked. Yeah, for Peters and his agent. But, you cannot expect the FO to give in to each player's demands. You can't. If anyone was arguing that, I would agree but I don't know anyone who is. For example, I don't think they should have given Schobel a new deal a year after he signed what was the biggest in team history. Arguing that they should have paid Peters is not the same as advocating that the always renegotiate. Rational people can disagree on whether Peters was ultimately worth it. Respectfully though, this notion of opening the flood gates is tired and false. Peters wasn't "every player", he was our only pro bowler. Overall, I just don't see a team getting better by losing the best players on their roster. Seems like a simple notion to me. But by "getting better", I am talking about wins and losses, not the salary cap or the team's balance sheet.
dollars 2 donuts Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 You must be wrong because in January and February we will be playing in the playoffs and Superbowl. YEAH BABBBBBYYYYYY!!!! Ah, that felt good.
Captain Caveman Posted July 31, 2009 Posted July 31, 2009 I look at it from the stand point you never know when and injury can end a career. I'll state it again, the average lifespan of an NFL player is THREE years. Likewise, the team never knows how many years they'll get out of a player, so when they give him a decent signing bonus (which is guaranteed) they expect him to play out his contract assuming he's healthy. Especially after renegotiating his contract once already.
Recommended Posts