PDaDdy Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 He had NO CHOICE but to sign that deal with the Eagles. NO TEAM was going to pay him as the best LT in the game & he wanted out of Buffalo. If that is the case then you can't state it as fact that Peters wouldn't have signed with the Bills, which is inherently included in the catch all "NO TEAM", for less than being the highest paid LT!!!!!!! He obviously would have and did!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 If Peters had even 1/2 the impact on any team that Jared Allen has, this would be a discussion worth having. SURE. If he went to a team like the BILLS that is in incredible desperate need of a good LT that can at least remember the snap count he could make a HUGE impact. Going to a good team replacing a great player he is a mild upgrade. Allen went to fill a big need on the vikings playing alongside the BEST 2 DTs in the game. He BETTER have had the impact he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 If that is the case then you can't state it as fact that Peters wouldn't have signed with the Bills, which is inherently included in the catch all "NO TEAM", for less than being the highest paid LT!!!!!!! He obviously would have and did!!! I don't understand what you are trying to say. He did NOT sign with the Bills, although it has been reported the Bills offered him the same money the Eagles paid him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 SURE. If he went to a team like the BILLS that is in incredible desperate need of a good LT that can at least remember the snap count he could make a HUGE impact. Going to a good team replacing a great player he is a mild upgrade. Allen went to fill a big need on the vikings playing alongside the BEST 2 DTs in the game. He BETTER have had the impact he did. So you are saying if Peters went to a CRAPPY team he would have had a greater impact? Well his impact on the Bills last year was 7-9. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 I don't understand what you are trying to say. He did NOT sign with the Bills, although it has been reported the Bills offered him the same money the Eagles paid him. Who reported this and when? The only reported figures I've seen (as I already linked to in this very thread) have the Bills' best offer at around $8M... Just trying to keep things accurate here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 That is a false analogy as there was no open free agency at the time, and the player would never have any opportunity to play for another team. Peters could have held out, showed up for the last 8 weeks of the next two seasons and be an unrestricted free agent. The Bills had no leverage. I wish we still had Peters, but based on what he has said since, he had no intention of signing here after he held out in 2008. LINK? Not to mention if we had paid him after 2007 like we should have for a better bargain than what he eventually wanted in 2009 we would be happy as clams right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornerville Posted October 13, 2009 Author Share Posted October 13, 2009 Just trying to keep things accurate here... That would really hurt The Senator's agenda, wouldn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 I don't understand what you are trying to say. He did NOT sign with the Bills, although it has been reported the Bills offered him the same money the Eagles paid him. Unsupported claims again. What I am trying to say is you can't throw out as fact that he wouldn't want to sign with the Bills because he wanted to be the highest paid LT in the league. By virtue of the fact that he signed with Philly for less than that invalidates that unsubstantiated claim. And NO, what little we heard about the details, or lack their of, of the contract negotiations we didn't offer him the same money. IF, memory servers from what little "hear say" I heard was that we were 1 million per year under the Philly offer AND we have no clue as to other clauses in the contract like bonuses and escalators that might have made the Philly deal even that much more attractive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triman Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Will you please just get over it!!! the Jason Peters trade was forever ago, the topic is DEAD , get it DEAD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 That would really hurt The Senator's agenda, wouldn't it? Funny, but I don't remember starting this thread....who was it that did? Before you spout-off any nonsense about my so-called "agenda" - why not go back and count how many, out of the nearly 300 posts in this thread that YOU started, belong to 'Thurman#1' and 'thebandit27'??? Then get back to me about who's got an "agenda". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Unsupported claims again. What I am trying to say is you can't throw out as fact that he wouldn't want to sign with the Bills because he wanted to be the highest paid LT in the league. By virtue of the fact that he signed with Philly for less than that invalidates that unsubstantiated claim. And NO, what little we heard about the details, or lack their of, of the contract negotiations we didn't offer him the same money. IF, memory servers from what little "hear say" I heard was that we were 1 million per year under the Philly offer AND we have no clue as to other clauses in the contract like bonuses and escalators that might have made the Philly deal even that much more attractive. There is NO way to know what went on behind closed doors. What I DO know is Peters played like CRAP last year after holding out. He is NOT a team player & I am HAPPY to have Wood here in his place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 There is NO way to know what went on behind closed doors. What I DO know is Peters played like CRAP last year after holding out. He is NOT a team player & I am HAPPY to have Wood here in his place. That's wierd. I thought that Wood played guard not LT. In Woods defense he is the only offensive lineman that didn't have a penalty accepted on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 That's wierd. I thought that Wood played guard not LT. In Woods defense he is the only offensive lineman that didn't have a penalty accepted on them. I'm pretty sure what he meant was that we used the Philly pick we got for FatBoy to draft Eric Wood. You knew that's what he meant, too, no? But your last sentence - what language is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Will you please just get over it!!! the Jason Peters trade was forever ago, the topic is DEAD , get it DEAD Unfortunately the topic is not dead if people still discuss it. Sorry but you don't get to make the call on what can and can't be discussed. The unfortunate fact of the matter is is that we are CURRENTLY dealing with the impact of that trade that took place 9 months, which according to you is roughly forever, ago. Our current line is an embarrassment! Some of them may turn out great eventually but this is the problem. EVENTUALLY. Good teams bring along their practice squad and rookie players and inject them into the system when appropriate. We scrapped everything in on of the worst cut off you nose to spite you face situations I can think of an we are now suffering. Good teams no how to build a good line an have quality development depth waiting in the wings. WE blew it all up overnight and are playing at least 3 if not 4 guys that should still be second teamers hoping to contribute in 2010 or 2011. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 I'm pretty sure what he meant was that we used the Philly pick we got for FatBoy to draft Eric Wood. You knew that's what he meant, too, no? But your last sentence - what language is that? Yes I was point out the fact that Wood may indeed be good someday, perhaps even very soon, it does nothing to fix our gaping hole at LT. Bell could be good some day, but TODAY, he can't remember the snap count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flbillsfan#1 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 I'm pretty sure what he meant was that we used the Philly pick we got for FatBoy to draft Eric Wood. You knew that's what he meant, too, no? But your last sentence - what language is that? Yeah, he KNOWS I meant Wood took a roster spot with a pick they received for Peters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 LINK? Not to mention if we had paid him after 2007 like we should have for a better bargain than what he eventually wanted in 2009 we would be happy as clams right now. Of course there's no saying he would not have held out for more money after renegotiating in 2007, right? He was happy as a clam when he renegotiated the first time, too. We as fans weren't clam-like, though as he went on to be one of two holdouts in the NFL last year. All the great players in the league...and he was one of two not to show up to camp. There's no telling what would have happened, and we're more than one jason peters away from being respectable on offense anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDaDdy Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Of course there's no saying he would not have held out for more money after renegotiating in 2007, right? He was happy as a clam when he renegotiated the first time, too. We as fans weren't clam-like, though as he went on to be one of two holdouts in the NFL last year. All the great players in the league...and he was one of two not to show up to camp. There's no telling what would have happened, and we're more than one jason peters away from being respectable on offense anyway. Yes he was happy as a well paid RT clam Everyone conveniently forgets he signed his last contract with us as a RT and was then promptly moved to LT. But people want to justify their hate. Hey, it's pop warner football not a business that the NFL is. Players should play for free just for the fun of it! It screws with some people's heads but this is a business. How many times do people have to hear it from players, coaches, GMs, owners and aware fans before they understand it. If someone else is willing to pay you for your skills you take that money. If your current employer, also known as a team, is not willing to pay you what another employer is, also known as another team, you leave for the better job. It's the American way baby. It's called capitalism. Love it or leave it. Imagine if you and I had to sign contracts to work with our employer? A company brings us along and rewards our performance with an assistant manager job and pay grade and then shortly there after fires our manager and give us all of their responsibilities. Instead of giving us the corresponding pay raise, they ask us to handle all of a managers responsibilities for a few years but do it at an assistant managers pay. You would tell your employer where they could go and what they could "do" to themselves and find an employer that appreciated you for your worth and market value skills. Most of us with any brain and ambition would do the same thing in their PROFESSION of choice!!!! Don't vilify the guy because his chosen profession is a professional sport!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 The only reason Peters did not hold out two years is because he was TRADED. He would have held out again this year. He did not want to sign with the Bills unless they were willing to break the bank which they were not willing to do. And you know this because you're his mother? Or are you Karnak the magician? Or are you in reality just guessing based on your opinion of Peters, which is negative? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted October 14, 2009 Share Posted October 14, 2009 Peters said so at the time. Peters did NOT want market value. He wanted to be paid as the BEST LT in the NFL (which he isn't).............which he also said at the time. Look it up. No, you look it up. Go get any book on negotiating. They tell you to ask for more than you expect to get. Once that has penetrated, go look at how the negotiations actually went. First, Peters asked to be paid as the best LT in the NFL. Then when the Bills raised their offer, Peters lowered his offer, to well below Long's salary. At least if you use the "look it up" thing, have a clue what actually happened. He wanted market value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts