jax bill backer Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 im seeing a lot of trade Peters posters and im getting kind of annoyed... First of all you dont trade your best o-linemen even if he is self centered. But second of all, this would make the bills franchise look really bad... If this happened this would be exactly like the drury briere situation... it says that when you start off avereage and player and work your way up to a probowler than basically we cant pay you... so then really who would want to play for the bills because when I get there and play hard and make the pro bowl they cant pay me.....cheap cheap ralph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 You know that signing Drury or Briere would have the Sabres over the salary cap, right? They're not so much cheap as rule-abiding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizell Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 it would all depend on what we'd get in return for Peters. If we could fill several needs (pass rush, SLB, tight end maybe) at the cost of weakening one position (LT) then it'd probably put us in a good light... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVUFootball29 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 im seeing a lot of trade Peters posters and im getting kind of annoyed... First of all you dont trade your best o-linemen even if he is self centered. But second of all, this would make the bills franchise look really bad... If this happened this would be exactly like the drury briere situation... it says that when you start off avereage and player and work your way up to a probowler than basically we cant pay you... so then really who would want to play for the bills because when I get there and play hard and make the pro bowl they cant pay me.....cheap cheap ralph How would trading a player be the same as letting 2 players sign elsewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jax bill backer Posted January 28, 2009 Author Share Posted January 28, 2009 How would trading a player be the same as letting 2 players sign elsewhere? i meant not signing them to long term deals........sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jax bill backer Posted January 28, 2009 Author Share Posted January 28, 2009 You know that signing Drury or Briere would have the Sabres over the salary cap, right? They're not so much cheap as rule-abiding. not if they would of traded vanek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 im seeing a lot of trade Peters posters and im getting kind of annoyed... First of all you dont trade your best o-linemen even if he is self centered. But second of all, this would make the bills franchise look really bad... If this happened this would be exactly like the drury briere situation... it says that when you start off avereage and player and work your way up to a probowler than basically we cant pay you... so then really who would want to play for the bills because when I get there and play hard and make the pro bowl they cant pay me.....cheap cheap ralph On this one I totally agree with you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fixxxer Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 If we had drafted Brandon Albert last year, the notion of possibly trading Peter would be at least reasonable. Without a solid back-up plan, this is a dumb idea. And no, Chambers or a rookie LOT are not viewed as solid back-up plans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Not as bad as giving a huge contract to a Tackle who gave up the most sacks of any Left Tackle in the NFL-and not by any slim margin either. I say make him play under his current contract, and if he shows up on time and has a season resembling 2007, then give him a new contract up there with the best in the game, but he would have to show that 2007 was no fluke first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dog14787 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 not if they would of traded vanek Letting go of Drury and Briere both was a crushing blow to the Sabres. I lost allot of faith and respect for ownership and have since stopped watching the Sabres through the regular season even though I love hockey. If I could pick them up locally I would probably still be watching them, I'm just not going to dish out extra money to watch a team that's a shell of its former self, especially when it could have been avoided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherman Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 What would the Patriots or Steelers do? Would they cave to the player or would they make the player live up to their contract or trade them? The Patriots have let plenty of players go through the years and still been successful. The last few years the Steelers had a situation with one of the best guards in football, Alan Faneca. This year they are in the Super Bowl. The bottom line is teams are always talking and if the right offer is made then go for it. If not stick to your guns and make the player perform under their current contract. If someone make the right offer don't worry about trading "your best player". The Patriots traded "their best WR" and got two #1 draft picks for Dion Branch. The Cowboys rebuilt a franchise because they traded Herschel Walker and made some good moves on draft day. Hell we gave Jacksonville two #1 picks for Rob Johnson because the Jags were not afraid to trade what many in the NFL thought was going to be a very good qb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jester43 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 You know that signing Drury or Briere would have the Sabres over the salary cap, right? They're not so much cheap as rule-abiding. if they would have extended either of them when they had the chance it wouldn't have been a problem. idiot darcy smallballed them right out of the playoffs...same as ralph has done to the bills,. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 You know that signing Drury or Briere would have the Sabres over the salary cap, right? They're not so much cheap as rule-abiding. The sabres could have signed one of them though ... they blew it though because of their stance of not want ing to pick between the two and getting the deal done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazed and Amuzed Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 We don't need to trade Peters for our franchise to look bad... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVUFootball29 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 We don't need to trade Peters for our franchise to look bad... +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 im seeing a lot of trade Peters posters and im getting kind of annoyed... Understand .. I am annoyed also but please can we move on to another topic ... this one has been worn out ... nothing new here .... some think Peters is a Jack and he should be traded ... others think we will get a plethora of picks for him so let him go and finally some think the whole idea is stupid. Personally I hope this is the last Peters thread until he is either given a new contract by the Bills or if the Bills are stupid enough to trade him away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Personally I hope this is the last Peters thread until he is either given a new contract by the Bills or if the Bills are stupid enough to trade him away. lol...good luck with that hope... Honestly, the Bills played it right in the offseason and not caving to his poor approach to the situation. If the Bills cave than every agent and player is going to see their eyes light up and know they can muscle us. However, Peters did report eventually and the Bills said if he showed up and played they would continue talks with him on his contract. So now, the Bills need to keep their word and work with him like they worked with Evans. The wrinkle here is this...Peters overall play in 08 was not nearly as dominant as his season in 07. Lets be honest...Peters only had one dominant season worthy of the contract he wants. He had played good in seasons past, and they payed him based on the good play...now he wants to be paid as a dominant player where he has only showed that one season and failed to put together a good follow up to that. So, given the number of sacks he gave up this year, I wonder if the FO still sees him worth what Peters wants since Peters did not play to that level this year. This could have a major factor in negotiations. 1. Will Peters demand a contract worthy of his 07 play or more reasonable one factoring in his 08 season? 2. Will Buffalo still see him as highly as Peters regards himself and think he is worth as much as Peters wants? I think we are in for a dangerous standoff here and this is long from being resolved. I actually expect Buffalo to offer him a reasonable offer which Peters will balk at because he wants HUGE money and we may be in store for another hold out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poeticlaw Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 im seeing a lot of trade Peters posters and im getting kind of annoyed... First of all you dont trade your best o-linemen even if he is self centered. But second of all, this would make the bills franchise look really bad... If this happened this would be exactly like the drury briere situation... it says that when you start off avereage and player and work your way up to a probowler than basically we cant pay you... so then really who would want to play for the bills because when I get there and play hard and make the pro bowl they cant pay me.....cheap cheap ralph Your putting way to much stock into a sham that is the probowl. He is not a probowl player and should be there and being a lowly fan I understand you might not believe me but if you listened to all the experts reporting on the prowbowl who should have been in and who didnt deserve to be there Jason peters was stated as being one who didnt deserve to b in it. Trading Peters would not make our francise look bad it will make them look good the inmats are not going to control the asylum. Peters was already given an upgrade contract before the 2007 season the very next season he wants to rework his deal and holds out for one hurting the team by being selfish. Trading him would send the message honor your deal and respect your team. You can ask for renegotions but not at the expense of your team. he wrote his only ticket out if that is what happens. Personally I am all for it the line didnt miss a beat the first two games of the season he is replaceable dont be a fool to think hes not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 im seeing a lot of trade Peters posters and im getting kind of annoyed... First of all you dont trade your best o-linemen even if he is self centered. But second of all, this would make the bills franchise look really bad... If this happened this would be exactly like the drury briere situation... it says that when you start off avereage and player and work your way up to a probowler than basically we cant pay you... so then really who would want to play for the bills because when I get there and play hard and make the pro bowl they cant pay me.....cheap cheap ralph Yeah but don't you get it? He leaves the seat up when he pees. Really, we can't have that. We can't possibly win a super bowl with a player like that. He absolutely has to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Your putting way to much stock into a sham that is the probowl. He is not a probowl player and should be there and being a lowly fan I understand you might not believe me but if you listened to all the experts reporting on the prowbowl who should have been in and who didnt deserve to be there Jason peters was stated as being one who didnt deserve to b in it. Trading Peters would not make our francise look bad it will make them look good the inmats are not going to control the asylum. Peters was already given an upgrade contract before the 2007 season the very next season he wants to rework his deal and holds out for one hurting the team by being selfish. Trading him would send the message honor your deal and respect your team. You can ask for renegotions but not at the expense of your team. he wrote his only ticket out if that is what happens. Personally I am all for it the line didnt miss a beat the first two games of the season he is replaceable dont be a fool to think hes not. Okay, lets say he didn't deserve to go to the pro bowl. Did he deserve to go last year? How many guys on our roster have deserved to go the pro bowl, ever? Hmmm? Who give a $@#$ if he shouldn't have been in the pro bowl, he is the best lineman on the team at the moment. We are not going to get better by losing our best players. All this whiny Barbie didn't get a date to the prom weeping over team chemistry and inmates and the asylum is soap opera BS. The guy can play. He is not under suspension, has never had a drug, legal or steroid problem. Clearly, you don't like the guy but I don't think that is really a good criteria upon which to judge his playing ability. Get rid of him and now we have yet another position on the team, a key position a that, we have to fill with a FA or draft pick just to stay as good as 7-9. funny how the only people complaining about how what a rotten team player he is are the fans, not the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts