Mickey Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 It's a game of "who will blink first". Are the Bills prepared to go into the season with Walker at LT? Do they take that chance with Edwards health? What if Chambers (or whoever the backup ends up being) sucks big time and losses start piling up? Will Peters crack? Will he be able to sit out indefinitely or will not being around football drive him nuts? Bingo in the fireside room. Exactly correct. Is Peters willing to miss a game paycheck? Is the team willing to lose this guy for a few games maybe for good? I dunno. I wish the team would save me from the drama and sign him. Others wish Peters would save us the drama and show up and play under his existing contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 That is one way it could go. Another is that he sits for the season or until the team figures he is worth more to them in a trade than sitting home accumulating fines. When the smoke clears, he will have a titanic contract from some new team which makes those fines a joke. We will have some face saving extra picks. Edwards will be on IR by week 6, JP by week 10. Oh, and we will have sent a message to rookies that they better hold out for a great initial first deal since they can't count on an extension if they make the pro bowl and veteran free agents will not bother booking a visit to western NY come February. The team will have proven that they are as tough in the negotiation room as the team is weak on the field. You do not make a team better by losing its best players. Certainly not. I'm just wondering if the mentality that "there are lots of lineman around the NFL, there is no need to spend money on them" and "you just line up 5 fat guys to get in people's way" is still alive and well in the front office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 How many times have we seen a player in the league hold out, get a new contract, then get hurt. At this point I don't blame the Bills if they do not renegotiate this year, or at least not until Peters has played a few games and looks to be the same player he was last year. If what the Bills are saying about the situation is not true, why hasn't Parker talked to the media to share Peter's side of the story? He should have come in to camp, and gave the Bills a chance to renegotiate as they did with other players, who came in. What Peters did makes no sense. Unless he is still hurt? They didn't do that with Schobel, they went to him and his agents in February of 2007 conceding from the get-go that they had to give him a new deal. Peters was checked out medically by the team after his surgery and certainly, any new deal would have the same contingencies regarding the players medical condition that they all have. His absence from camp is not the problem. The team isn't lying about renogitaing if he comes in, fact is, they never even made that claim. That is the one being made on this board but if you go back to what the team has actually said, and I have posted those quotes over and over, they made it clear that they insisted that he honor the deal he made 2 years ago. The Bills have had a chance to negotiate a new deal for him, they could have done it or at least started to do it in February. All they have to do right now is call Parker and ask for a meeting, I guarantee Parker will answer the phone and be at that meeting, early, and with new pens. Why hasn't Parker talked to the media? Because it is the respectful, smart move to make. He wants to make a deal with the team, not win a popularity contest here at TSW. The fans have no say in this so why seek their support? Why call a press conference and embarass Brandon or anyone else in the front office? That will only harm Peters' cause. The agent's job is to get the team to want Jason more than they want the money he is asking for. Ticking them off and turning Peters into a supersized Chad Johnson or T.Owens would be counterproductive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 Certainly not. I'm just wondering if the mentality that "there are lots of lineman around the NFL, there is no need to spend money on them" and "you just line up 5 fat guys to get in people's way" is still alive and well in the front office. Good Gawd, I hope not. Is Dusty Ziegler available? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 Hope you don't think I'm too presumptuous, but I fixed your fix... I know I'm but I fixed it for you. I might suggest that you get out of Jason's pants. He's acting like a little baby. Sorry....big baby. You gotta understand, Jason Peters is the team. The entire !@#$ing team. Without Jason Peters, the other 52 guys might as well pack it in and just stay home. They all suck, unless Jason Peters is on the field. If you don't agree with that, you are a fanboy, and you don't know anything about football. Guys like Mickey, Bill, et al understand what you apparently cannot comprehend - Peters not only deserves a new contract this season, but every season. No, strike that - he should get a new contract after every down. Besides, it's written right there in the NFL bylaws for all to see - "Sec.1.Article 3 - Under no circumstances shall another player ever be allowed to earn more than Jason Peters." Stadium Wall rule #1: Whatever player is holding out is the best player on the team and we're doomed without him and we're idiots for not paying him a gazillion dollars and Ralph is cheap. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 Certainly not. I'm just wondering if the mentality that "there are lots of lineman around the NFL, there is no need to spend money on them" and "you just line up 5 fat guys to get in people's way" is still alive and well in the front office. sure it is, thats why we went out and spent so much money bringing in almost an entire Oline of well-paid players... anyways, this entire argument comes down to 2 sides: 1 that wants to cave to Peters and succeed this season (although it can be argued that it is now too late to pull this off since he will now possibly be a good month out from performing at his typical level), and the otehr side which is looking out for the team/franchise as a whole (this side is more looking towards the future and not worried about how Peters being out may effect this season) the conclusion? neither is right and everyone is a jackass. Parker, Peters and the Bills FO. you guys just need to decide who is hurting the team more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazed and Amuzed Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 Stadium Wall rule #1: Whatever player is holding out is the best player on the team and we're doomed without him and we're idiots for not paying him a gazillion dollars and Ralph is cheap. PTR In this case it might be true though. Peters plays a position that can trigger either great success or great failure. He may not be the best player on the team but he definitely is a MAJOR key to our season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastMode54 Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 In this case it might be true though. Peters plays a position that can trigger either great success or great failure. He may not be the best player on the team but he definitely is a MAJOR key to our season. I think he is the key to a successful season offensively Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 With all the comparisons going on between the current situation and others, I can't help but look at what's changed since last year at OBD when Schobel got his deal. First, Brandon's handling GM duties in as COO. It's obvious he's one of the few that Ralph trusts, so much so that RW promoted someone from within who's not a classic GM type. At this point, I've got to believe Brandon, like anyone new to a management position, wants to prove himself in a job that some didn't understand why he was elevated to. Second, the Bills, like any business, probably had a figure in mind for what they wanted to pay players this year. It's certainly takes into account what they paid to their picks, and free agent signings. I really don't believe a mega deal to Peters fits into their plans for 2008 and paying Peters didn't fit into it because he's got those 3 years left on the current contract You have to wonder if he's going to wait until a regular season game when teams begin planning much more in depth, or just calls it quits after the pre-season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 Stadium Wall rule #1: Whatever player is holding out is the best player on the team and we're doomed without him and we're idiots for not paying him a gazillion dollars and Ralph is cheap. PTR No, just the guys who make the pro bowl. Just the guys who are considered, by their peers, to be among the top 5 in the entire league at their position. Oh, and just the guys playing a position that is universally considered to be critical if we are to believe salaries for LT's and their draft positions league wide. That same absurd extension could be, just as weekly, applied to your side of the argument. Rule #1: Players who make the pro bowl aren't worth keeping, we don't need the, and if we simply paid them the going rate for their position and skill levels, the team would fold. Just answer me these questions: Did Peters make the pro bowl? Yes or no. Did he make the pro bowl deservedly? Yes or no. Is LT considered by many to be the most important position on the line when you have a right handed QB? Yes or no. Does Jason play LT? Yes or no. Is his salary below that of other pro bowl LT's? Yes or no. If below, is it significantly below? Yes or no. Do you believe pay should be based on performance? Yes or no. Do you agree that there is no other player on the team who made the pro bowl at a critical position who is significantly underpaid? Yes or no. Do you agree that there hasn't been more than two or three players, including Peters, over the last 8 years if not more who fit the criteria described in the last question? Yes or no. If you answered "yes" to all of the above, then we agree on the basic facts and that paying Peters this year doesn't exactly support your petulant point that all those who support that outcome think we should pay every disgruntled player a "gazillion dollars". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 sure it is, thats why we went out and spent so much money bringing in almost an entire Oline of well-paid players... That's like saying someone isn't miserly because once in a decade or two he buys a piece of toast with his cup of coffee. Of course, I realize every situation is different. The Bills are not universally skinflints (though they used to have that rep) in all situations. On the other hand, as an organization, they have had many stumbles in putting together and retaining an above average OL. Besides, I'm not convinced that I should praise them for spending the going free agent rates (read: excessive contracts) to fill positions that they have not been able to develop in house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 With all the comparisons going on between the current situation and others, I can't help but look at what's changed since last year at OBD when Schobel got his deal. First, Brandon's handling GM duties in as COO. It's obvious he's one of the few that Ralph trusts, so much so that RW promoted someone from within who's not a classic GM type. At this point, I've got to believe Brandon, like anyone new to a management position, wants to prove himself in a job that some didn't understand why he was elevated to. Second, the Bills, like any business, probably had a figure in mind for what they wanted to pay players this year. It's certainly takes into account what they paid to their picks, and free agent signings. I really don't believe a mega deal to Peters fits into their plans for 2008 and paying Peters didn't fit into it because he's got those 3 years left on the current contract You have to wonder if he's going to wait until a regular season game when teams begin planning much more in depth, or just calls it quits after the pre-season. You could be right. Certainly having Marv in there when they extended Schobel and Brandon when the Peters issue came up could tell us all we need to know why the situations are being handled so differently. I think you accurately describe the team's dilemma. It is the flip side of what happens when good fortune shines on you and a player unexpectedly and spectacularly outperforms his contract. You would think that would be a good thing. Lot of teams would love to have that problem. I imagine the Patriots had to cross that bridge when an unheard of 6th round draft pick was named the Super Bowl MVP. I only hope we have these problems every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 I think he is the key to a successful season offensively And I thought I was the only one carrying Jason's love child. Haven't you heard? Wanting the team to get one of our best players on the field is tantamount to an admission that you have spent way too much time in Jason's pants. So stay away from him girlfriend, there are already 6 or 7 of us baby momma's ready to give birth to a pro bowler haunting the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1billsfan Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 With all the comparisons going on between the current situation and others, I can't help but look at what's changed since last year at OBD when Schobel got his deal. First, Brandon's handling GM duties in as COO. It's obvious he's one of the few that Ralph trusts, so much so that RW promoted someone from within who's not a classic GM type. At this point, I've got to believe Brandon, like anyone new to a management position, wants to prove himself in a job that some didn't understand why he was elevated to. Second, the Bills, like any business, probably had a figure in mind for what they wanted to pay players this year. It's certainly takes into account what they paid to their picks, and free agent signings. I really don't believe a mega deal to Peters fits into their plans for 2008 and paying Peters didn't fit into it because he's got those 3 years left on the current contract You have to wonder if he's going to wait until a regular season game when teams begin planning much more in depth, or just calls it quits after the pre-season. This situation has disaster written all over it. Peters knows, as do all Bills fans, that it's only a matter of WHEN, not IF, Edwards gets crushed and spends an extended period of time on IR if in fact Walker is his blind side protector. The Bills will be roundly criticized, and rightly so, for being pennywise and pound foolish. Especially when there will be that invisible man Kelsay still cashing in his 5.7 million worth of checks for '08. Don't worry Bills fans, his high motor will be able to overcome any effect of the loss of Edwards. This team absolutely loves to shoot itself in the foot. Keep sticking to your guns Brandon, just be warned that the light at the end of the tunnel you see in an oncoming train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLFan Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 That is one way it could go. Another is that he sits for the season or until the team figures he is worth more to them in a trade than sitting home accumulating fines. . There is zero probability he sits for the season or the Bills trade him. That is just hysteria. I am disappointed as anyone that this situation is occurring, but Peters has no leverage and will show up. The alternative is career suicide and bankruptcy. Unfortunately, because he has chosen this route, the team will not be as good as they could have been, even if he shows up now. For that he should be rewarded? I do not think so, but others clearly do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 That's like saying someone isn't miserly because once in a decade or two he buys a piece of toast with his cup of coffee. Of course, I realize every situation is different. The Bills are not universally skinflints (though they used to have that rep) in all situations. On the other hand, as an organization, they have had many stumbles in putting together and retaining an above average OL. Besides, I'm not convinced that I should praise them for spending the going free agent rates (read: excessive contracts) to fill positions that they have not been able to develop in house. You mean like taking a TE and training him and turning him into a LT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ1 Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 This situation has disaster written all over it. Peters knows, as do all Bills fans, that it's only a matter of WHEN, not IF, Edwards gets crushed and spends an extended period of time on IR if in fact Walker is his blind side protector. The Bills will be roundly criticized, and rightly so, for being pennywise and pound foolish. Especially when there will be that invisible man Kelsay still cashing in his 5.7 million worth of checks for '08. Don't worry Bills fans, his high motor will be able to overcome any effect of the loss of Edwards. This team absolutely loves to shoot itself in the foot. Keep sticking to your guns Brandon, just be warned that the light at the end of the tunnel you see in an oncoming train. Like Peters, and only Peters, could prevent a crushing blindside hit on Edwards. Give me a freaking break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 There is zero probability he sits for the season or the Bills trade him. That is just hysteria. I am disappointed as anyone that this situation is occurring, but Peters has no leverage and will show up. The alternative is career suicide and bankruptcy. Unfortunately, because he has chosen this route, the team will not be as good as they could have been, even if he shows up now. For that he should be rewarded? I do not think so, but others clearly do. It's no doubt very tempting and enticing to Peters to come back with his tail between his legs, give back several game checks to pay back his accumulated fines, and basically have less than nothing to show for any of the trouble. (Well, he would get to be the poster boy of the "Don't Fuhk with the Brandon" campaign.) After all, he should be grateful that the Bills care to employ him and realize that being paid well below market value, and getting his teeth kicked in for trying to force a pay hike, is only fair and just. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 You mean like taking a TE and training him and turning him into a LT Have they paid him? How many other Pro Bowlers have they developed in the last decade at the 5 positions? 5 positions is a lot of opportunity. Nearly 50% of the offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 Have they paid him? If he's done playing now...about 5 1/2 mil a year the last two years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts