If I am Ralph I am looking for a way to cave to Peters

[Steely Dan]

The "no extension without showing up to camp" meme has been debunked, the team's position is and has been: no extension this year, period. That is why they didn't negotiate with him in February, long before camp or in any of the months since and before camp started. If they were willing to give him a new deal this year, I see no reason why they wouldn't have started those negotiations in February of this year as they did with Schobel in February of 2007. In that case, they actually approached Schobel first even though he had 3 years left on his then current contract. Despite that good faith on the part of the team, Schobel skipped out of the first 4 practices in March of 2007 to send the team a message of what was to come if they didn't get the deal done. It was (save for a few details), and before camp so holding out never became an issue for him.

 

As for the injury, Peters was checked out by the team doctors after the surgery. This was confirmed by Brandon himself so whatever the results of the surgery were, they are well known to the team. I have yet to see anyone post a single example of a sport's hernia ending a career.

 

 

IIRC, Schobel's contract wasn't done til after he showed up at a Bills OTA.

[Mickey]

As has been mentioned numerous times, the probability he has a catastrophic injury and refused to communicate on this basis is a conspiracy theory. It's too bad enough around here have bought into. The only thing left now is for the National Enquirer to run an article confirming Peters is now the Elephant man and isolated in a room to hide it. Can anyone imagine a player concealing an injury during contract negotiations? It's impossible, and would permanently harm any agent doing so.

I heard that when they operated on that sports hernia, they found that he was carrying the alien baby of Andy Dick.

 

 

Seriously, contracts have these things called "contingency clauses" some of which might read along the lines of "Player will, prior to _________, undergo any and all physical examinations and/or diagnostic procedures requested by the Team Doctors and if, in the opinion of said Team Doctors, the player is physically unable to perform herein, the contract and all compensation due to player hereunder is revoked, void, a nullity as set forth in and pursuant to paragraph________."

 

That would pretty much cover that and render pointless about 1,800 posts or so hereabouts over the last 3 weeks using the mysterious and unknown effects of a sports hernia as reason enough for the team to have screwed itslef out of an all pro left tackle for, who knows? 2 games? 3 games? Only time will tell.

[Mickey]

IIRC, Schobel's contract wasn't done til after he showed up at a Bills OTA.

Negotiations started before, continued while he skipped and afterwards, culminating in a deal that was done in time to get him in to camp.

 

The team hasn't negotiated with Peter at all, not before he held out, not in between OTAs and not now, a week before the opener.

 

With a magnifying glass big enough you can find some differences between the two, no two situations are ever exactly alike but these two are certainly close enough for a fair comparison to be made. The subtle differences, imho, don't justify the vastly different treatment.

 

What accounts for it, in my opinion, is Brandon thinking that Levy made a mistake with Schobel that he isn't going to make with Peters.

[cody]

What accounts for it, in my opinion, is Brandon thinking that Levy made a mistake with Schobel that he isn't going to make with Peters.

 

Who do we trust more, Brandon or Levy?

[Mickey]

The blocking performance tonight was a plucky effort with a few successful plays to point to.

 

However, the performance tonight shows how like most NFL teams we are in very extremely bad shape if we have to depend on the OL back-ups to be starters.

 

The injury last week to fill-in back-up at LT Walker merely demonstrated that even if one choose to judge his play adequate at LT (a judgment with some validity based on the OL showing some strength on run plays at points in the first three games) one needs to overlook that not only is Walker playing out of his best position, but that his back-up Chambers is not starter material.

 

Add into that the problem that not only has our starting QB been knocked out of the OL but his back-up JP was also forced out of the line-up by injury. Now tonight Hamdan actually looked pretty good, but it was clear the Lions had identified the blitz as the preferred D against a 3rd string QB blocked for by 2nd and 3rd string OL players. Not only did the pressure game produce two safeties in less than a half of play, but our disaster QB saw his blocking wither under the rush and we confronted a double disaster leading to the Bills who could have made this game at least competitive had to essentially not play football at the end of the game. Our main goal was clearly to allow JP to escape with his life.

 

The sad thing is that I think Ralph will once again prove to be a businessman rather than a sportsman do the curmudgeonly thing and refuse to show Peters the money.

 

One certainly needs to run this sport like a business (though avoiding signing Peter is still strangely judges to be a precedent when quite frankly few if any Bills (unfortunately) are going to be able to make a case that their case is similar to that of a Pro Bowler who started at a UDFA base salary. Unless this future FA is seen as a top quality player at his position AND his position is as difficult as LT to fill AND his base salary even with the extension is so small as not to even remotely to be an accurate statement of the players worth IF there were a free market, there simply is no precedent set by giving Peters a big raise in exchange for agreeing to be a Bills for life (and passing a physical before the contract is good.

 

What used to be a sport that also happened to be a business is now a business that also happens to be a sport.

 

This is one vote for Ralph choosing to be a sportsman rather than a businessman as his first priority. He cannot ignore the fiscal impacts on the team, but we have sufficient cap room that he can sign Peters to a rich deal and though the team's profit will be effected, it seems pretty clear we can both show Peters the money and still maintain a reasonable fiscal stance for the team.

Getting flamed, as I am sure you anticipated.

 

As long as I have been on this board, I don't think I have ever seen the majority side with a player against the front office in a contract dispute. It is axiomatic that any player looking for more money is a crybaby, greedy, selfish bastard.

 

Guaranteed, if Evans doesn't get a deal signed, around here it will be because he was asking for too much, the team was smart not to give in, the team had no choice because the demand was over the top, he isn't really that good, he had a weak year last year, we need that money for other positions, etc, etc.

[Lurker]

What accounts for it, in my opinion, is Brandon thinking that Levy made a mistake with Schobel that he isn't going to make with Peters.

You're showing your Bills history naiveté if you think Brandon has any influence in the path they're following with Peters....

[Mickey]

Who do we trust more, Brandon or Levy?

I go with Marv, by a long shot. That might be why Schobel is in uniform and ready to go and why Peters is not.

 

To be fair to Brandon, he hasn't had time in the job to develop a record of trusworthiness. Mouthing off about Peters and that "track record of silence" crap wasn't the way to build that record but I think he learned from it as he has been quiet since then. Must be hard, first year in the big job and has to deal with a difficult situation.

[Mickey]

You're showing your Bills history naiveté if you think Brandon has any influence in the path they're following with Peters....

Ralph was there when they followed a much different path with Schobel and he is there now. The difference is Brandon and Marv. No way to know for sure where every one in the organization stands but for now, unless you have an explanation for why Ralph would treat the two situations so differently when they are so similar, I think the better guess is that Levy is not Brandon and vice versa.

[Bmwolf21]

As for the injury, Peters was checked out by the team doctors after the surgery. This was confirmed by Brandon himself so whatever the results of the surgery were, they are well known to the team. I have yet to see anyone post a single example of a sport's hernia ending a career.

If that's the case, and the team did check him out after the surgery and it was termed a success, isn't it even a little possible that there have been problems that have popped up since? The team doesn't know anything about what he's done since the surgery. Has he committed himself to his rehab? What kind of off-season conditioning did he do? Are there any residual problems that have cropped up since the surgery that the team is unaware of, like problems with painkillers, or other injuries they didn't know about?

[Lurker]

unless you have an explanation for why Ralph would treat the two situations so differently when they are so similar

Simple. Ralph just shucked out a signing bonus two years ago to a guy he feels should honor that contract. Ralph's not been cheap since the mid-80s and will play up for guys he likes. But he's still stubborn and old school and won't be held up by an agent or player he thinks is in the wrong.

[cody]

I go with Marv, by a long shot. That might be why Schobel is in uniform and ready to go and why Peters is not.

 

To be fair to Brandon, he hasn't had time in the job to develop a record of trusworthiness. Mouthing off about Peters and that "track record of silence" crap wasn't the way to build that record but I think he learned from it as he has been quiet since then. Must be hard, first year in the big job and has to deal with a difficult situation.

 

I've had more opportunities to talk with Brandon.

I've never talked with Levy, I only met him once.

 

I am surprised that Brandon drew a line in the sand so early in the contract dispute. As people have insinuated, Ralph may have had a lot to say about it.

 

Peters wanting a new contract in 2008 was not part of Brandon's plan. In life, things do not always go according to plan. How Brandon handles this situation will say a lot about how he handles adversity.

[Fan in Chicago]

The "no extension without showing up to camp" meme has been debunked, the team's position is and has been: no extension this year, period.

 

This is the second time you have said this in separate threads. 'Debunked' implies there is definitive proof of that statement. Where, pray, did you see any evidence to make such a statement ? It is clear what your position on the Peters issue is, but you are inventing facts here.

[Lurker]

This is the second time you have said this in separate threads. 'Debunked' implies there is definitive proof of that statement. Where, pray, did you see any evidence to make such a statement ? It is clear what your position on the Peters issue is, but you are inventing facts here.

"Brandon wouldn't rule out the possibility of negotiating a new deal but only if Peters begins taking part in team functions.

 

"It's difficult to have discussions with someone that's not here and has not elected to participate in what we're trying to do," Brandon said. "Jason's a big part of what we're trying to do. But if he's not here, then we'll work around it and move on."

 

--------------

 

"Brandon appeared to express a willingness to discuss a new contract with Peters provided he reported to camp and was practicing with the rest of his teammates.

 

"I think we have a proven track record of trying to get guys done and extending guys out," said Brandon. "There's a long line of guys that we've done it with, but it's very difficult to have those conversations when the individual is not participating in your work."

[Mickey]

This is the second time you have said this in separate threads. 'Debunked' implies there is definitive proof of that statement. Where, pray, did you see any evidence to make such a statement ? It is clear what your position on the Peters issue is, but you are inventing facts here.

Not exactly, I have posted the links many, many, many times and I am not going to do it again Mr. Lazy.

 

The articles have said that the team insists that he play this year under his existing contract. The quotes from Brandon state flatly that they want him to "honor the committment" he made to the team 2 years ago. All they have ever said with regard to negotiating a new deal is that they would "never say never". The team went to Schobel themselves in February 2007 and started negotiating a new deal. Not so with Peters.

 

On top of all the articles and quotes to the contrary, when challenged, not one person has produced a quote from Brandon that the team would in fact give him a new deal this year if, gosh durn it, he would only come to camp. Not one.

Query: As often as people have posted the meme that the team would negotiate a new deal this year if he only came to camp has been posted, how many times have you challenged the poster to produce proof? How many times have you accused them of inventing facts?

 

Just thought I'd ask.

[MarkyMannn]

If I'm the Bills Peters sees no extension until AFTER 2008 only if he has another Pro Bowl year. There are too many questions about Peters history, health, and work and team ethic to throw huge money at this guy.

 

In another thread here I saw someone post Matt Light gets $4.5 mil/year. How can Peters expect twice that amount?

[The Senator]

While the original premise of the thread is ridiculous - "If I am Ralph I am looking for a way to cave to Peters" - it's turned into another repetitive thread rehashing all the crap that's already been said in countless other threads, ad nauseum.

 

Bucky Gleason summed things up very nicely in this mornings Buffalo Snooze...

 

"The Bills are prepared to play the entire season without him no matter their record or the stability of their offensive line or the health of their quarterbacks. It has become increasingly apparent over the past several weeks that management is holding its ground while the standoff with Peters drifts into the backdrop.

 

"It's one thing when overpaid athletes get little sympathy from fans, but Peters isn't getting much from his teammates, either. They're not saying much publicly, but behind the scenes they're questioning his common sense and timing. The guy has the potential to make $12 million over the three years he has remaining on his contract.

 

"If anybody should have a beef, it's Lee Evans. He's accomplished more in his first four years than any receiver in Bills history. Rather than gripe about money, he's intent on making a stronger case for himself. By golly, the two sides are talking about an extension that would make Evans a very wealthy man.

 

"See how it works?

 

"For all the criticism they'll take for refusing to budge if the losses mount, management opens itself to be ripped royally if they succumb to Peters' demands. The guy hasn't even given them the decency of returning a phone call, let alone make progress. This is a time in which the Bills should take a stand.

 

"After all, the Bills hold all the cards. They don't need to set a precedent by reworking Peters' deal because he overestimates his importance. The Bills lost plenty with him in the lineup in his first four seasons. They can certainly lose without him.

 

"Peters already has come calling for more money three times. Each time, it has been in the months after he hired a new agent. It's not a coincidence. Less than a year into their relationship, Parker and Peters have this much in common: Neither is making a penny off Peters' current deal."

 

Link

 

As most Bills fans feel, along with most of the media, and now most of Peters' teammates as well, it's time to write this greedy, gluttonous, injured, selfish bum out of this season's plans.

 

Or, as Bucky concludes...

 

"You want to sit, Jason? Sit.

 

"Everybody else is getting ready for the season."

 

Or, in Senatorial terms, "EAT SCHITT, Peters."

 

19 and 0 baby!!!

 

GO BILLSSS!!!!

 

PosLUSZny!!!!!

[Mickey]

"Brandon wouldn't rule out the possibility of negotiating a new deal but only if Peters begins taking part in team functions.

 

"It's difficult to have discussions with someone that's not here and has not elected to participate in what we're trying to do," Brandon said. "Jason's a big part of what we're trying to do. But if he's not here, then we'll work around it and move on."

 

--------------

 

"Brandon appeared to express a willingness to discuss a new contract with Peters provided he reported to camp and was practicing with the rest of his teammates.

 

"I think we have a proven track record of trying to get guys done and extending guys out," said Brandon. "There's a long line of guys that we've done it with, but it's very difficult to have those conversations when the individual is not participating in your work."

 

"...appeared to express a willingness..." Well that seals it, Brown giving his opinon based on what? You left out the part where they said "never say never". Yes, they extended other guys, so what? That is not a commitment to negotiate a new deal this year, and if they wanted to do that they could have started negotiating with Peters 6 months before camp as they did with Schobel last year. But we don't really have to guess at what they "appear to express", lets look at all that has been said.

 

Here is a round up of what we have in the public record on these issues:

 

From the ESPN article everyone was raving about:

 

"They also have made it known to Peters' agent, Eugene Parker, they're not willing to renegotiate 2008, insisting any additional money will be paid next year forward." ESPN

 

Okay, so much for that. There is much more but this is the article the Peters haters have been drooling over as having bee so wonderfully reseached and well written. They just ignore the part of it that shows the team insists on Peters being the most underpaid OT in the league for another year.

 

Brandon on Peters:

 

"...we made a commitment to Jason two years ago and we expect him to honor that commitment..."

"...its difficult to have discussions with someone that is not here..."

"...again, we expect Jason to be here and to honor his commitment as the organization made a substantial commitment to him two years ago..."

"...Jason was in I believe to have a quick check up coming off his surgery..."

 

WGR Tape of interview with Brandon on Peters

 

From that tape, it is clear they want him to honor his deal from two years ago, ie, no new deal, he even said it twice and pointed out that the commitment the team made was "substantial". It also puts the lie to so many posts hereabouts that the team has no idea how the surgery went because there has been zero contact with the team. The guy came in for a check up with the team doctors after the surgery. Lastly, the comment about it being difficult to have "discussions with someone not here" is patent BS. Parker has a cell phone, I am sure Brandon and the team can reach him anytime they want. Peters isn't returning calls because his agent is the guy to speak to, not him. That is why they hired him. The notion that physical absence from camp is some sort of logistical bar to negotiating a deal is Bozo level foolishness.

 

More from Brandon on Peters:

 

"Brandon said Peters’ absence from all offseason activities at Ralph Wilson Stadium has been puzzling because he has been unable to get a read on the situation, primarily because he hasn’t spoken to Peters and has had only brief discussions with the player’s agent, Eugene Parker."

 

"Brandon said the bulk of the discussions with Parker have centered on Hardy’s deal and not Peters’ impending holdout."

 

D&C Article

 

From the above, all those posts about there being no contact with the team are total BS. There has been contact, in fact, there has been more than one discussion with Parker (it says discussions). Also note that "bulk of" is not the same as "all of" thus, they did speak about Peters. Have they been brief? Sure but "brief" is not the same as "none". It also doesn't take long for the team to tell them no new deal this year and for Parker to tell them to call if they change their minds.

 

Then there was this from Chirs Brown, note that the assertion is Brown's opinion, not a quote from the team:

 

It appears the Bills are not opposed to discussing a new deal, but Brandon would like to see Peters in person to begin such talks. "It's difficult to have discussions with someone that's not here and has not elected to participate in what we're trying to do," said Brandon.

 

Brown on Peters

 

This is just a repeat of the line quoted in the D&C from which Brown reaches his own opinion as to what it means. It is the same BS line about it being somehow "difficult" to have a discussion with someone not in the room with you. I'll personally chip in a few tin cans and really long string from Brandon's office to Parker's.

 

From the Buffalo News:

 

Brandon said the two sides barely have discussed Peters' deal. "Very briefly with Eugene," Brandon said.

 

And this:

 

Brandon did not rule out considering a new deal for Peters, but made it clear nothing is happening anytime soon.

 

"You never say never," Brandon said. "We have conversations with our guys all the time, and I think we have a proven track record of trying to get guys done and extend guys out. We've done it already this offseason with Kyle Williams and Brad Butler. We've done it with [Aaron] Schobel in the past and Terrence McGee. It's a long line of guys that we've done it with. But it's very difficult to have those conversations when the individual is not participating in your work."

 

Buffalo News take on Brandon and Peters

 

The first quote is yet another example of Brandon admitting that despite his "road map of silence" meme, he has spoken with Parker about Peters. Was it brief, I'll take his word on that but I do note that the guy who came up with "road map of silence" has in fact had a number of discussions with Parker. Again, how long does it take to say "Jason wants a new deal" and "No new deal this year"???

 

The second quote, the "never say never" line is apparently the line you are relying upon to assert that the team is willing to give him a new deal for millions of dollars more but only if he comes to camp. "did not rule out" and "Never say never" is not exactly a committment to give him a new deal now is it? Sounds like what my wife would say if I asked her to go to a hockey game or for a certain special present on my birthday. Besides, he finishes that line with the same lame justification that it is just so gosh durn difficult to negotiate with Jason not here. Presumably, Brandon has maxed out his minutes this month talking to Evans' agent so cell phones are out. It also ignores the many deals the team has made with hold outs who actually held out. McCargo, Whitner and Lynch are just a few that I can recall off the top of my head.

 

The team has never committed to giving him a new deal if he simply comes in to camp. They have done nothing more than say the equivalent of "maybe, who knows, you never can tell, stranger things have happened, etc." The stumbling block is the financial reality that Peters is worth way more than his current contract but that the Bills could conceivably get another year out of him at a bargain basement price because he has so many years left on his deal. Peters isn't going to easily accept getting paid so much less than he is worth and the team isn't going to easily part with more money for a player already under contract.

[Mickey]

While the original premise of the thread is ridiculous - "If I am Ralph I am looking for a way to cave to Peters" - it's turned into another repetitive thread rehashing all the crap that's already been said in countless other threads, ad nauseum.

 

Bucky Gleason summed things up very nicely in this mornings Buffalo Snooze...

 

 

 

Link

 

As most Bills fans feel, along with most of the media, and now most of Peters' teammates as well, it's time to write this greedy, gluttonous, injured, selfish bum out of this season's plans.

 

Or, as Bucky concludes...

 

 

 

Or, in Senatorial terms, "EAT SCHITT, Peters."

 

19 and 0 baby!!!

 

GO BILLSSS!!!!

 

PosLUSZny!!!!!

By "most of his teammates" do you mean the 2 unidentified players cited it the ESPN article?

[Lurker]

"never say never"

The way the adult world functions....

[The Senator]

"...appeared to express a willingness..." Well that seals it, Brown giving his opinon based on what? You left out the part where they said "never say never". Yes, they extended other guys, so what? That is not a commitment to negotiate a new deal this year, and if they wanted to do that they could have started negotiating with Peters 6 months before camp as they did with Schobel last year. But we don't really have to guess at what they "appear to express", lets look at all that has been said.

 

Here is a round up of what we have in the public record on these issues:

 

From the ESPN article everyone was raving about:

 

"They also have made it known to Peters' agent, Eugene Parker, they're not willing to renegotiate 2008, insisting any additional money will be paid next year forward." ESPN

 

Okay, so much for that. There is much more but this is the article the Peters haters have been drooling over as having bee so wonderfully reseached and well written. They just ignore the part of it that shows the team insists on Peters being the most underpaid OT in the league for another year.

 

Brandon on Peters:

 

"...we made a commitment to Jason two years ago and we expect him to honor that commitment..."

"...its difficult to have discussions with someone that is not here..."

"...again, we expect Jason to be here and to honor his commitment as the organization made a substantial commitment to him two years ago..."

"...Jason was in I believe to have a quick check up coming off his surgery..."

 

WGR Tape of interview with Brandon on Peters

 

From that tape, it is clear they want him to honor his deal from two years ago, ie, no new deal, he even said it twice and pointed out that the commitment the team made was "substantial". It also puts the lie to so many posts hereabouts that the team has no idea how the surgery went because there has been zero contact with the team. The guy came in for a check up with the team doctors after the surgery. Lastly, the comment about it being difficult to have "discussions with someone not here" is patent BS. Parker has a cell phone, I am sure Brandon and the team can reach him anytime they want. Peters isn't returning calls because his agent is the guy to speak to, not him. That is why they hired him. The notion that physical absence from camp is some sort of logistical bar to negotiating a deal is Bozo level foolishness.

 

More from Brandon on Peters:

 

"Brandon said Peters’ absence from all offseason activities at Ralph Wilson Stadium has been puzzling because he has been unable to get a read on the situation, primarily because he hasn’t spoken to Peters and has had only brief discussions with the player’s agent, Eugene Parker."

 

"Brandon said the bulk of the discussions with Parker have centered on Hardy’s deal and not Peters’ impending holdout."

 

D&C Article

 

From the above, all those posts about there being no contact with the team are total BS. There has been contact, in fact, there has been more than one discussion with Parker (it says discussions). Also note that "bulk of" is not the same as "all of" thus, they did speak about Peters. Have they been brief? Sure but "brief" is not the same as "none". It also doesn't take long for the team to tell them no new deal this year and for Parker to tell them to call if they change their minds.

 

Then there was this from Chirs Brown, note that the assertion is Brown's opinion, not a quote from the team:

 

It appears the Bills are not opposed to discussing a new deal, but Brandon would like to see Peters in person to begin such talks. "It's difficult to have discussions with someone that's not here and has not elected to participate in what we're trying to do," said Brandon.

 

Brown on Peters

 

This is just a repeat of the line quoted in the D&C from which Brown reaches his own opinion as to what it means. It is the same BS line about it being somehow "difficult" to have a discussion with someone not in the room with you. I'll personally chip in a few tin cans and really long string from Brandon's office to Parker's.

 

From the Buffalo News:

 

Brandon said the two sides barely have discussed Peters' deal. "Very briefly with Eugene," Brandon said.

 

And this:

 

Brandon did not rule out considering a new deal for Peters, but made it clear nothing is happening anytime soon.

 

"You never say never," Brandon said. "We have conversations with our guys all the time, and I think we have a proven track record of trying to get guys done and extend guys out. We've done it already this offseason with Kyle Williams and Brad Butler. We've done it with [Aaron] Schobel in the past and Terrence McGee. It's a long line of guys that we've done it with. But it's very difficult to have those conversations when the individual is not participating in your work."

 

Buffalo News take on Brandon and Peters

 

The first quote is yet another example of Brandon admitting that despite his "road map of silence" meme, he has spoken with Parker about Peters. Was it brief, I'll take his word on that but I do note that the guy who came up with "road map of silence" has in fact had a number of discussions with Parker. Again, how long does it take to say "Jason wants a new deal" and "No new deal this year"???

 

The second quote, the "never say never" line is apparently the line you are relying upon to assert that the team is willing to give him a new deal for millions of dollars more but only if he comes to camp. "did not rule out" and "Never say never" is not exactly a committment to give him a new deal now is it? Sounds like what my wife would say if I asked her to go to a hockey game or for a certain special present on my birthday. Besides, he finishes that line with the same lame justification that it is just so gosh durn difficult to negotiate with Jason not here. Presumably, Brandon has maxed out his minutes this month talking to Evans' agent so cell phones are out. It also ignores the many deals the team has made with hold outs who actually held out. McCargo, Whitner and Lynch are just a few that I can recall off the top of my head.

 

The team has never committed to giving him a new deal if he simply comes in to camp. They have done nothing more than say the equivalent of "maybe, who knows, you never can tell, stranger things have happened, etc." The stumbling block is the financial reality that Peters is worth way more than his current contract but that the Bills could conceivably get another year out of him at a bargain basement price because he has so many years left on his deal. Peters isn't going to easily accept getting paid so much less than he is worth and the team isn't going to easily part with more money for a player already under contract.

So what? Who, with the obvious exception - you, gives a flying !@#$ what Jason !@#$ing Peters feels happy about?

 

Be a man, Jason. Honor your contract. Or is your word absolutely worthless?