Thurman#1 Posted October 24, 2009 Posted October 24, 2009 ... without tying-up 10% of their salary cap. The Bills' actual money spent ("cash to cap") this year is around $100M. Let's see, 10 divided by 100 is...yep, 10%! Tying up 1/10th of the money spent on 1 player, especially a player who will put forth a weak effort when he feels he's not getting paid enough, is foolish. Now you're changing horses in mid-stream. You said "of the salary cap." Now you're saying "money spent." Which is it? And you say that "The Bills' actual money spent ("cash to cap") this year is around $100M." Rather than accepting your figure of $100 million, I did some research, and it turns out you're wrong. "The Bills have about $11 million in space under the cap after their recent roster cutdown, according to News figures. "That may sound like a lot, but it isn't. The Bills probably will wind up spending close to the cap limit, as they usually do. That $11 million gives the Bills enough room to sign a player or maybe two to a contract extension, if they choose to do so." http://www.buffalonews.com/452/story/789046.html The Bills don't routinely underspend the cap by $25 million. That's an urban Bills fan myth. They cut a bit off of that by cutting Walker, but not that much. Anyway, you specifically said ".. without tying-up 10% of their salary cap." Very dramatic. Not true.
C.Biscuit97 Posted October 24, 2009 Posted October 24, 2009 Peters is having a sensational year, and earning that salary. That is the bottom line. He's played in 4 games and a quarter. He's also played Carolina, TB, KC, and the Raiders. I don't if there is a Mrs. Peters but there's no possible way she fellates him as much as you do.
Doc Posted October 24, 2009 Posted October 24, 2009 I'm sure there were a few loons. There always are. But the huge majority of Eagles nation simply didn't have a problem with it. In fact, they thought it showed commitment that in spite of an injury he was willing to play if he had to. Where is the massive outcry? There simply is none, except among the haters here in Buffalo. The part you quoted was actually in reference to his PC after being traded to the Eagles. As for the lack of outcry after the Raiders game, maybe they realized that whether Peters was in there or not made no difference?
Doc Posted October 24, 2009 Posted October 24, 2009 Now you're changing horses in mid-stream. You said "of the salary cap." Now you're saying "money spent." Which is it? And you say that "The Bills' actual money spent ("cash to cap") this year is around $100M." Rather than accepting your figure of $100 million, I did some research, and it turns out you're wrong. "The Bills have about $11 million in space under the cap after their recent roster cutdown, according to News figures. "That may sound like a lot, but it isn't. The Bills probably will wind up spending close to the cap limit, as they usually do. That $11 million gives the Bills enough room to sign a player or maybe two to a contract extension, if they choose to do so." http://www.buffalonews.com/452/story/789046.html The Bills don't routinely underspend the cap by $25 million. That's an urban Bills fan myth. They cut a bit off of that by cutting Walker, but not that much. Anyway, you specifically said ".. without tying-up 10% of their salary cap." Very dramatic. Not true. I get my numbers from a guy named "Clumping Platelets," who is an amateur capologist on another website. According to him, the Bills have spent a shade under $102M this year. But looking at the numbers again, yes you're right that it's not 10%. It's 9.8%. My bad. And I'm sorry if by "the Bills' salary cap" I didn't make it clear that I meant the money they actually spent. Because they've been doing "cash to cap" for years, and will be for the foreseeable future.
Malazan Posted October 24, 2009 Posted October 24, 2009 You guys are insane. Jason Peters was already kind enough to let the Bills give him a raise before his contract expired once. Then he gave them another opportunity and didn't say one word about it. Literally, not one peep. Then after he was kind enough to come in after the Bills had played two games, one of which they barely won to reach 2-0 because he missed playing football so much and had nothing to do with a weakening bargaining position. Then he gave them another chance and even increased his weight without losing the flexibility that comes with increased muscle mass. There are very few players who are playing in the NFL willing to add fat to their build in the offseason considering the problems it causes with health. Especially after they had previously experienced injuries. Peters was more than willing to do so. Even after committing himself to the organization after he chose to come here as a free agent, they didn't void his contract and give him a raise. that's right a FREE agent. He wasn't forced here like all those people taken in the draft, he chose to do so when he had his pick of organizations offering him less money. Now you guys do nothing, but bash him. He's on a team that appreciates leadership and knows where to spend its money. The Eagles defense obviously had never won them a Superbowl so brought in Jason to be the team leader they needed after Dawkins failed year after year. You expect the general to be on the front lines? That's silly, he can't be effective there so he stays behind the lines just like Peters stays on the sideline just like Michael Vick. If you need more proof that the Eagles make the right choices, it's in their record. The bills have been 7-9 the past two years. They have been severely outclassed by the Eagles 8-8 and 9-6-1 records in both of those years. That's three entire wins better than the Bills. You can't argue with those kind of results.
The Senator Posted October 24, 2009 Posted October 24, 2009 You guys are insane. Jason Peters was already kind enough to let the Bills give him a raise before his contract expired once. Then he gave them another opportunity and didn't say one word about it. Literally, not one peep. Then after he was kind enough to come in after the Bills had played two games, one of which they barely won to reach 2-0 because he missed playing football so much and had nothing to do with a weakening bargaining position. Then he gave them another chance and even increased his weight without losing the flexibility that comes with increased muscle mass. There are very few players who are playing in the NFL willing to add fat to their build in the offseason considering the problems it causes with health. Especially after they had previously experienced injuries. Peters was more than willing to do so. Even after committing himself to the organization after he chose to come here as a free agent, they didn't void his contract and give him a raise. that's right a FREE agent. He wasn't forced here like all those people taken in the draft, he chose to do so when he had his pick of organizations offering him less money. Now you guys do nothing, but bash him. He's on a team that appreciates leadership and knows where to spend its money. The Eagles defense obviously had never won them a Superbowl so brought in Jason to be the team leader they needed after Dawkins failed year after year. You expect the general to be on the front lines? That's silly, he can't be effective there so he stays behind the lines just like Peters stays on the sideline just like Michael Vick. If you need more proof that the Eagles make the right choices, it's in their record. The bills have been 7-9 the past two years. They have been severely outclassed by the Eagles 8-8 and 9-6-1 records in both of those years. That's three entire wins better than the Bills. You can't argue with those kind of results. Well said, Jeremy - I'm not sure I could have captured the true essence of the man any better than you just did, with only one addition - you neglected to mention Peters' selfless attitude toward his teammates. Who else would have quietly sat out the first two and last two starts last season to allow Langston Walker an opportunity to play left tackle? Being the consummate teammate Peters is, I'll bet Jason even takes himself out of Monday nite's game against the Redskins, just to give King Dunlap a chance to redeem himself for his performance against the Raiders...but I'm sure he will also be more than willing to go back in the game and play - if he has to!
Bill from NYC Posted October 24, 2009 Posted October 24, 2009 Speaking of which, Dockery was the only player with whom Peters kept in-touch while he was holding-out. Perhaps both decided to mail-in the season in an attempt to get out of Buffalo? Seems plausible, although I don't know how Dockery is looking in Washington. Plausible yes and despicable if true. Worse for Dockery imo. Doc, my shirt was dirtier after watching a game last year than was Dockerys jersey. I key on these players as much as TV will allow, and I am stating point blank that he put forth little effort. Levitre is playing better as a rookie, normal growing pains notwithstanding. I can't help thinking that Peters would look good next to that interior 3, although I do know that we drafted Wood with the pick acquired for him. The bottom line is that we totally need Ots, DTs, and LBs. If we get them, we will be a good footnball team before long. If not we will continue to flounder.
Doc Posted October 24, 2009 Posted October 24, 2009 Plausible yes and despicable if true. Worse for Dockery imo. Doc, my shirt was dirtier after watching a game last year than was Dockerys jersey. I key on these players as much as TV will allow, and I am stating point blank that he put forth little effort. Levitre is playing better as a rookie, normal growing pains notwithstanding. I can't help thinking that Peters would look good next to that interior 3, although I do know that we drafted Wood with the pick acquired for him. The bottom line is that we totally need Ots, DTs, and LBs. If we get them, we will be a good footnball team before long. If not we will continue to flounder. I like the future of the O-line. I think Bell bears closer watching. But the Bills need a good QB first and foremost. As for LB's, I think they should he starting Harris and Maybin (and getting Ellis activated). At DT, it's what you see is what you get. The only guy I could have seen them taking was Ron Brace over Byrd (as you mentioned). But Brace has been inactive for the Pats the past 3 games while Byrd has played well so I don't know. I think DT is high on the list next year and I pray they give Harris and Palmer plenty of playing time this year to see what they have in them.
The Senator Posted October 24, 2009 Posted October 24, 2009 Plausible yes and despicable if true. Worse for Dockery imo. Doc, my shirt was dirtier after watching a game last year than was Dockerys jersey. I key on these players as much as TV will allow, and I am stating point blank that he put forth little effort. Levitre is playing better as a rookie, normal growing pains notwithstanding. I can't help thinking that Peters would look good next to that interior 3, although I do know that we drafted Wood with the pick acquired for him. The bottom line is that we totally need Ots, DTs, and LBs. If we get them, we will be a good footnball team before long. If not we will continue to flounder. flounder, anyone???
K-9 Posted October 25, 2009 Posted October 25, 2009 You guys are insane. Jason Peters was already kind enough to let the Bills give him a raise before his contract expired once. Then he gave them another opportunity and didn't say one word about it. Literally, not one peep. Then after he was kind enough to come in after the Bills had played two games, one of which they barely won to reach 2-0 because he missed playing football so much and had nothing to do with a weakening bargaining position. Then he gave them another chance and even increased his weight without losing the flexibility that comes with increased muscle mass. There are very few players who are playing in the NFL willing to add fat to their build in the offseason considering the problems it causes with health. Especially after they had previously experienced injuries. Peters was more than willing to do so. Even after committing himself to the organization after he chose to come here as a free agent, they didn't void his contract and give him a raise. that's right a FREE agent. He wasn't forced here like all those people taken in the draft, he chose to do so when he had his pick of organizations offering him less money. Now you guys do nothing, but bash him. He's on a team that appreciates leadership and knows where to spend its money. The Eagles defense obviously had never won them a Superbowl so brought in Jason to be the team leader they needed after Dawkins failed year after year. You expect the general to be on the front lines? That's silly, he can't be effective there so he stays behind the lines just like Peters stays on the sideline just like Michael Vick. If you need more proof that the Eagles make the right choices, it's in their record. The bills have been 7-9 the past two years. They have been severely outclassed by the Eagles 8-8 and 9-6-1 records in both of those years. That's three entire wins better than the Bills. You can't argue with those kind of results. Outstanding! LMAO! You just can't get this comedy at home. Oh wait, I AM at home. Anyway, thanks for the chuckle, Jeremy. GO BILLS!!!
Thurman#1 Posted October 25, 2009 Posted October 25, 2009 He's played in 4 games and a quarter. He's also played Carolina, TB, KC, and the Raiders. I don't if there is a Mrs. Peters but there's no possible way she fellates him as much as you do. Again with the homosexual stuff. What is it about me that brings out this kind of stuff in you haters? Again, I'm sorry to disappoint you, but first, I like girls and second, I'm married. Just go to google and I'm sure if you put in the right search terms to cover your interests you will find a lot of guys interested in giving men fellatio. And good luck to you. As for the football part of your thread, what do you want the guy to do, run across town and play in games for other teams? He has played extremely well in the games the league scheduled for him. He played so well against Julius Peppers that they finally switched Peppers to the other side to try to get some use out of him. And Peppers got a sack after he was facing the RT instead of Peters.
Thurman#1 Posted October 25, 2009 Posted October 25, 2009 If you call STANDING on the sideline while your team LOSES playing sensationally, then yeah Peters is playing sensationally. Still waiting for your reply to post 88 on P. 5, where I prove that I never said what you (again and again) said I did. Or are you going to run away again?
mob16151 Posted October 25, 2009 Posted October 25, 2009 I dunno just read the whole thread..........and wondered when this became the Eagles forum. But on a serious note this is a team that isn't going to make the playoffs. They weren.t gonna make the playoffs with Peters here either. So yea it sucks from a overall talent stand point that he left. But on the brightside at least we got decent recompensation for him. And we get to see if we have anything in Bell. And now I'm never commenting in this particular thread again.
Thurman#1 Posted October 25, 2009 Posted October 25, 2009 I guess the best we can say to each other is "we'll see how this plays out eventually." But Peters living up to that $10M/year deal is going to be awfully tough for him, given his past history. You're dead on there. We'll have to see how it plays out. But you then said "But Peters living up to that $10M/year deal is going to be awfully tough for him, given his past history." On the contrary. If he only plays as well as he has, that contract will look brilliant for Philly. If he improves, so much the better. Peters played sensationally in Buffalo every time he came to training camp. That's his history. Now he's got a fair contract and he's motivated, so I see him coming to camp every year. That would be a very good thing for Philly. Peters missed four games in five years in Buffalo. If he only continues at that rate, Philly will prove to have made a sensational deal.
Thurman#1 Posted October 25, 2009 Posted October 25, 2009 The part you quoted was actually in reference to his PC after being traded to the Eagles. As for the lack of outcry after the Raiders game, maybe they realized that whether Peters was in there or not made no difference? Sorry, what quote are you talking about? There was no quotation in the post you replied to. And jeez, you are cracking me up here with that last sentence. Not one page ago you were saying that Peters being out made the Eagles lose. Now you're saying it made no difference. Before that you said he wouldn't have made any difference if he were here in Buffalo. Could you do me a favor and decide what you want to say? Maybe we will agree. Does Peters make a difference or not?
Thurman#1 Posted October 25, 2009 Posted October 25, 2009 I get my numbers from a guy named "Clumping Platelets," who is an amateur capologist on another website. According to him, the Bills have spent a shade under $102M this year. But looking at the numbers again, yes you're right that it's not 10%. It's 9.8%. My bad. And I'm sorry if by "the Bills' salary cap" I didn't make it clear that I meant the money they actually spent. Because they've been doing "cash to cap" for years, and will be for the foreseeable future. I think I've heard of Clumping Platelets in my travels, but I can't remember specifically. Well, as I showed in my link, I get my numbers from the Buffalo News. I trust them more, frankly. And after the season started, the Bills signed McGee to an extension, so they are now spending more than the News said they were. And again, you said "10% of the cap." You keep trying to forget that, but it's what you said. The cap is $128 million, and that would put Peters at less than 8%.
Thurman#1 Posted October 25, 2009 Posted October 25, 2009 If you need more proof that the Eagles make the right choices, it's in their record. The bills have been 7-9 the past two years. They have been severely outclassed by the Eagles 8-8 and 9-6-1 records in both of those years. That's three entire wins better than the Bills. You can't argue with those kind of results. Excellent point, dude. Check the Eagles record to see if they make the right choices. Thanks for suggesting that. Let's see ... the Eagles made the playoffs this decade in: 2007 2005 (made the SB but lost) 2004 2003 2002 2001 and 2000. Seven out of nine years. And during the same period, the Bills made the playoffs in: Hmmmm. There seems to be some kind of failure in google, because I can't find any playoff appearances during the same period for the Bills. Still, I'm sure you're right. There must be some way to use this data to prove that the Eagles make worse choices than the Bills, and I'm sure you will let me know.
Thurman#1 Posted October 25, 2009 Posted October 25, 2009 I like the future of the O-line. I think Bell bears closer watching. But the Bills need a good QB first and foremost. As for LB's, I think they should he starting Harris and Maybin (and getting Ellis activated). At DT, it's what you see is what you get. The only guy I could have seen them taking was Ron Brace over Byrd (as you mentioned). But Brace has been inactive for the Pats the past 3 games while Byrd has played well so I don't know. I think DT is high on the list next year and I pray they give Harris and Palmer plenty of playing time this year to see what they have in them. Bell bears close watching all right. I'm rooting for the guy, but he has showed nothing so far.
Thurman#1 Posted October 25, 2009 Posted October 25, 2009 But the Bills need a good QB first and foremost. As for LB's, I think they should he starting Harris and Maybin (and getting Ellis activated). At DT, it's what you see is what you get. The only guy I could have seen them taking was Ron Brace over Byrd (as you mentioned). But Brace has been inactive for the Pats the past 3 games while Byrd has played well so I don't know. I think DT is high on the list next year and I pray they give Harris and Palmer plenty of playing time this year to see what they have in them. This is all reasonable. I personally would put QB and LT as co-number 1s on our needs list, though I still have hopes for both Bell and Trent. After that, DT and LB. And I'm a defense-first guy, so it hurts to put offense first, but our offense is beyond pitiful right now.
Recommended Posts