THE GASH STATION Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 I can't believe Bill Form NYC hasn't hi-jacked this thread into why we should be paying Peters yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 So after about 3 weeks he comes in looking homeless and malnourished.......trying to report and the bills brass are holding the doors not letting him into the biulding. "Nope....I dont see nuthin......did you hear anything? Nope I didn't either" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Let him sit for 10 games per year over the next 3 years, end-up broke because he had to payback the Bills every cent they ever gave him, then franchise him and trade him to some cellar dwellar. I was okay up until this point, because he's now going to miss games. What a richard, and a retarded one at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 I really hope we don't trade him. If we just let him rot, even if its for 3-4 years, he has no choice but to eventually come crawling back. Why would the Bills do that? Wouldn't a bevy of high draft picks be of more use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Let him sit for 10 games per year over the next 3 years, end-up broke because he had to payback the Bills every cent they ever gave him, then franchise him and trade him to some cellar dwellar. I was okay up until this point, because he's now going to miss games. What a richard, and a retarded one at that. What would that accomplish compared to trading him for a raft of high picks? Isn't the CBA over in 2010? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Why would the Bills do that? Wouldn't a bevy of high draft picks be of more use? Only if you don't want a franchise LT on your team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 In all fairness to Clayton, not every NFL fan (his base) reads every thing, every day, on the front of TSW, so what he says might actually be news to some people...why is everyone so cranky? We would be pissing and moaning about all of the coverage the Bills don't get by ESPN...the Peters thing is Buffalo's biggest football news... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Only if you don't want a franchise LT on your team. You said you hope they let him sit even if it's for 3-4 years and when someone asks you why wouldn't they just trade him for draft picks you answer "only if you don't want a franchise LT on your team." So you'd rather have a franchise LT on your team that doesn't play or practice than draft picks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 What would that accomplish compared to trading him for a raft of high picks? Isn't the CBA over in 2010? I would accept no less than 2-1st rounders for a guy who is an all-pro caliber LT in his prime. However given this idiotic move, I doubt anyone would give up even a 1st, plus the $10-11M a year and huge signing bonus I'll bet he wants, and having to worry that a couple years down the line he start whining/holding-out for another huge payday. I say keep him on the roster, extract every cent you gave him, and let him learn the hard way the stupidity of his actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChasBB Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 I agree the Bills have the power in the situation. Hes gonna start sweating when the fines start and the checks dont come in. I can just hear those phone calls between he and his agent---where the agents life is being threatened. At what point would the Bills go after his signing bonus money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 At what point would the Bills go after his signing bonus money? From what I've read, after the first missed game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 I can't believe Bill Form NYC hasn't hi-jacked this thread into why we should be paying Peters yet. Dude, why make it personal? Peters isn't in camp. Evans doesn't have a new contract. These are things that will not help the Bills. Teams suffer when they lose their best players. As a Bills fan, you should already know this. The Peters situation sucks, and no.....I don't suspect that he is entirely at fault. If you in fact do, so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 You said you hope they let him sit even if it's for 3-4 years and when someone asks you why wouldn't they just trade him for draft picks you answer "only if you don't want a franchise LT on your team." So you'd rather have a franchise LT on your team that doesn't play or practice than draft picks? Did you read the entire post? As long as we don't trade Peters, he will eventually come crawling back to us. Its only a matter of time. Is that point even arguable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 The Peters situation sucks, and no.....I don't suspect that he is entirely at fault. If you in fact do, so be it. He is entirely at fault for him not being with the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted September 2, 2008 Share Posted September 2, 2008 Did you read the entire post? As long as we don't trade Peters, he will eventually come crawling back to us. Its only a matter of time. Is that point even arguable? He might come "crawling back" but he can cause major problems and distractions along the way if he chooses. Having a disgruntled player in the locker room is not a good thing - it would be better simply to trade him away than deal with those issues. It would also be better to simply trade him away than to let him rot "for 3-4 years" as well (though I agree - it would be foolish of him to do so as no team will give him a huge contract if he hasn't played significant time in a season or two.) It seems to me all the posters clamoring to "let him rot" are more interested in retribution than in helping the Bills win football games. As a Bills fan the only thing I'm interested in is the Bills winning football games, period. Whatever it takes to improve the team - whether it's coming to an extension with Peters or trading him away- is what I'd like to see them do. Letting him sit for 10 games each season doesn't help the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 He might come "crawling back" but he can cause major problems and distractions along the way if he chooses. Having a disgruntled player in the locker room is not a good thing - it would be better simply to trade him away than deal with those issues. It would also be better to simply trade him away than to let him rot "for 3-4 years" as well (though I agree - it would be foolish of him to do so as no team will give him a huge contract if he hasn't played significant time in a season or two.) It seems to me all the posters clamoring to "let him rot" are more interested in retribution than in helping the Bills win football games. As a Bills fan the only thing I'm interested in is the Bills winning football games, period. Whatever it takes to improve the team - whether it's coming to an extension with Peters or trading him away- is what I'd like to see them do. Letting him sit for 10 games each season doesn't help the team. Trading him away for picks who might not pan out doesn't necessarily help the team. Teaching an ingrate and showing other players on the team that the Bills mean business DOES help the team. And the rest of the team has moved-on without Peters. He can return and make all the noise he wants. I doubt anyone will listen to him after the garbage he's pulled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE GASH STATION Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Dude, why make it personal? After reading the thread I just thought you would be chiming in soon just couldn't help myself there. Outside of busting balls..I admire the way you stick to your guns on the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 I agree the Bills have the power in the situation. Hes gonna start sweating when the fines start and the checks dont come in. I can just hear those phone calls between he and his agent---where the agents life is being threatened. I'm really po'd at Peters. This guy should kiss the ground at Ralph every day to a team that took a TE on his way out and helped convert him to a Pro Bowl LT. To hold out now and in this way is a disgrace. Unless he comes back crawling and full of apologies, let him sit his butt down for the next 3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Why would the Bills do that? Wouldn't a bevy of high draft picks be of more use? Like bread, pro bowl players who don't play for 3+ years tend to go stale. What would that accomplish compared to trading him for a raft of high picks? Isn't the CBA over in 2010? The CBA may expire but contracts do not, Perry Mason. Only if you don't want a franchise LT on your team. In order to be considered a franchise LT, one needs to actually play some games in the NFL. Sitting out camp and stuffing your face with Wendy's triples doesn't earn you that title. Despite what Mickey thinks, being a Pro Bowler is not a lifetime award. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Like bread, pro bowl players who don't play for 3+ years tend to go stale. The CBA may expire but contracts do not, Perry Mason. In order to be considered a franchise LT, one needs to actually play some games in the NFL. Sitting out camp and stuffing your face with Wendy's triples doesn't earn you that title. Despite what Mickey thinks, being a Pro Bowler is not a lifetime award. PTR I would also add that at the present time while Peters is under contract......he isn't with this team. So I would very much like "to have a franchise LT on the team" If we actually have one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts