YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 he has just spent this offseason proving that it doesnt matter how long you sign him for. the second that he or his agent feel "the market has changed", or he is better than what he is earning, or previously signed contract is worthless. why bother? and you cant do the "never works in the NFL again" route. there is a players union. they would never stand for it. at this point, we cant even bench him for the next 3 years or else the Union would be all over the FO. Maybe... At this point it might be cheaper to bench him even than the lawsuit. So does that mean he is going to report? Because the Bills don't need to do anything with him other than recoup his salary and signing bonus if he doesn't. If he doesn't report soon, I would put off negotiating with him for two years. And if he still doesn't report, I trade him halfway into season that third season. He will be going into what his 7th season at that point and be label disgruntled. As much as it hurts the Bills, it will kill Peters chance of making any serious money. Although he will probably make more money or already has made more than I in my lifetime. Which is why I resent that whole thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 I agree with your edit. I think Peters is going about it all wrong. But what do you want the Bills to do?They can't bench him for 3 years. Should they trade him? I think they should at least negotiate with him and see what kind of deal they can get. If they can live with it, great, if not, then they don't really have many options but to either play hardball and hope he caves or, eventually, trade him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 I agree with your edit. I think Peters is going about it all wrong. But what do you want the Bills to do?They can't bench him for 3 years. Should they trade him? nothing more than they are doing now. they honestly cant do much more than they have. for the good of the franchise/business as a whole. what i would like to see happen from the Bills is this: when Peters finally shows, collect on all of the fines from missing camp. do not re-sign him this year. do not rush him back into the starting lineup until he is really ready. (even if it is week 9) if he plays at the same level as last year, have a new contract ready immediately at the end of the season. or, if Chambers/Walker/Bell work out ok, trade him for a 1st round pick (worst case scenario). Peters/Parker are trying to hold the team hostage. the team is doing the only thing they can and "not negotiating with terrorists" (for lack of more descriptive term) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 I think they should at least negotiate with him and see what kind of deal they can get. If they can live with it, great, if not, then they don't really have many options but to either play hardball and hope he caves or, eventually, trade him. Could be they know his demands and they are too high. One thing I will bet on is that they will not trade him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cody Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 and you would blame the Bills for trying to protect it's future interests more than 2 guys you just stated are dumb and arrogant? i dont get it. so the FO is supposed to cave to every stupid player and agent? I expect the smarter individuals to make the smarter decisions. I expect arrogant and stupid people to remain arrogant and stupid. As far as the Bills' future interests, they set the precident when they re-did Schobel's deal with 3 years left. People can say Schobel earned it and Peters hasn't. People can say, new GM new rules. And I won't argue. But can we really blame Peters for wanting the same treatment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Could be they know his demands and they are too high. One thing I will bet on is that they will not trade him. No, they will not trade his sorry stupid ass, but he will enjoy an exciting new career outside of professional football... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Now this is getting ridiculous. The Bills are acting like the incompetent Darcy Regier and Peters's lack of communication is immature. Unless they are secretly having discussions this deal should have gotten done last winter. Darn, another Buffalo Team's important part being left out to insure the team won't make the playoffs. The Bills have communicated by opening training camp and giving Peters a place to show up to work as is certainly stipulated somewhere in the contract or other team communications. Peters is the one who failed to live up to his end of the standard agreement to show up for work and refuses to explain why. If I stop showing up for work, it's not my company's job to hunt me down. It's their job to find a replacement for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 I expect the smarter individuals to make the smarter decisions. I expect arrogant and stupid people to remain arrogant and stupid. As far as the Bills' future interests, they set the precident when they re-did Schobel's deal with 3 years left. People can say Schobel earned it and Peters hasn't. People can say, new GM new rules. And I won't argue. But can we really blame Peters for wanting the same treatment? we have no idea what went on with the Schobel camp behind closed doors. all we know is that he skipped 4 VOLUNTARY work-outs. for all we know he and his agent had contact with the FO the entire time. and yes, i can blame Peters for wanting the same treatment when he has not had nearly the same career. but thats just me. im not saying the Bills are completely without fault here somewhere. Simply that, given the situation, there isnt much more they can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastMode54 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 per rotoworld NFL Network's Jaime Dukes said on Total Access Sunday night that Bills OT Langston Walker "may have a broken arm." The Bills initially said Walker's X-rays came back negative. However, Adam Schefter reported that Dick Jauron said the injury "does not look good." This would be a massive loss for Buffalo, figuratively and literally. They could be hiding a more serious injury so as not to lose leverage against Peters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 per rotoworld NFL Network's Jaime Dukes said on Total Access Sunday night that Bills OT Langston Walker "may have a broken arm." The Bills initially said Walker's X-rays came back negative. However, Adam Schefter reported that Dick Jauron said the injury "does not look good." This would be a massive loss for Buffalo, figuratively and literally. They could be hiding a more serious injury so as not to lose leverage against Peters as long as Peters is sitting at home, there is no leverage lost. once you throw down the gauntlet of "no talks until you report", you have to go on as if Peters himself were on the IR too. now, if Peters sees this injury and comes riding in to save the day, then maybe. but first step, either way, is Jason Peters showing up for work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 per rotoworld NFL Network's Jaime Dukes said on Total Access Sunday night that Bills OT Langston Walker "may have a broken arm." The Bills initially said Walker's X-rays came back negative. However, Adam Schefter reported that Dick Jauron said the injury "does not look good." This would be a massive loss for Buffalo, figuratively and literally. They could be hiding a more serious injury so as not to lose leverage against Peters That's stupid. How do you hide a broken arm? When he misses half the season people will start to wonder, ya' think? I see we are putting more stock in people guessing what's wrong with Walker's arm than what the Bills actually say. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastMode54 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 I'll be convinced once he is out there practicing. Also, I can't believe that its being reported in the Adam Schefter article that Peters would be willing to sit out the season. He's under contract for 3 more years. Someone has to budge, don't they. At least some conversation. I understand the Bills are taking a hardline stance here, and i don't disagree. But there isn't anything lost in having dialogue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 I'll be convinced once he is out there practicing. Also, I can't believe that its being reported in the Adam Schefter article that Peters would be willing to sit out the season. He's under contract for 3 more years. Someone has to budge, don't they. At least some conversation. I understand the Bills are taking a hardline stance here, and i don't disagree. But there isn't anything lost in having dialogue sitting the entire season would be better than him showing up week 9. (since he has until week 10 to report and get credit for the season) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 sitting the entire season would be better than him showing up week 9. (since he has until week 10 to report and get credit for the season) I think you are right about that,... but then the draama continues. Noice, this sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Rotoworld continues reporting conjecture by passing along the following purely speculative statement by some "analyst" from NFL network. NFL Network's Jaime Dukes said on Total Access Sunday night that Bills OT Langston Walker "may have a broken arm." The Bills initially said Walker's X-rays came back negative. However, Adam Schefter reported that Dick Jauron said the injury "does not look good." This would be a massive loss for Buffalo, figuratively and literally. They could be hiding a more serious injury so as not to lose leverage against Peters Fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastMode54 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Fixed. sure it's speculation, but isn't that exactly all we do here all day long, is speculate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 sure it's speculation, but isn't that exactly all we do here all day long, is speculate but thats his point. their "reporting" is no better than our retard rollercoaster... the difference is they get paid and are supposed to provide professional journalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Back to Walmart, Jason - Walker's fine... Bullet dodged on Walker injury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 if they think chambers can start at RT and bell is a future stud, i could see our FO trading peters for 2 firsts. a top tier tight end and a stud lineman taken in the first will improve our team if our line isn't that far off without peters. as important as the oline is, it is not like the dline where you need a total stud to be the focal point, you need a squad of guys all on the same page playing with toughness and smarts. i'd rather have peters than not, but he's not the only guy on earth who can do his job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 if they think chambers can start at RT and bell is a future stud, i could see our FO trading peters for 2 firsts. a top tier tight end and a stud lineman taken in the first will improve our team if our line isn't that far off without peters. as important as the oline is, it is not like the dline where you need a total stud to be the focal point, you need a squad of guys all on the same page playing with toughness and smarts. i'd rather have peters than not, but he's not the only guy on earth who can do his job. Here we go again. Go get'm Mickey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts