Peters On Pup List For a Quad Injury

[Kingfish]

Throw Kozlov and Dusty Ziegler in there as well... two more examples.

 

I get the Kozlov reference but what was the Dusty Ziegler story?

[Kelly the Dog]

All points lead to either Peters just didn't want to be in Buffalo or he/his agent completely crapped on the only team willing to give Peters his start in the NFL for what amounts to not alot of money.

IMO, all points lead to Peters wanting to be paid top 2-3 money for a LT in the league at 10 million per year for six years -- he and his agent knowing he was worth it and teams would be willing to pay it -- Peters wanting to play in Buffalo and get it from the Bills -- the Bills wanting Peters but not offering enough money, hoping that Peters would sign for less than 10 mil -- The Bills ultimately deciding that they didn't want to pay him 10 million a year which is a schitload of money, he wasn't worth it to them -- and The Bills then finding a team who would give up a #1 plus and pay Peters the 6-60, which was Philly and making the trade.

 

It all makes perfect sense, it's pretty much undeniably that's what happened except it's conjecture as to whether Peters wanted to stay in Buffalo or not. I completely believe that he did but that's just an opinion. He said he did and to me there is no reason not to believe him, especially when he said he was shocked the Bills traded him.

 

There really doesnt have to be a bad guy here. Peters wanted a ton of money, it's the going rate in the league for his talent, the Bills negotiated and wanted to sign him but their ceiling was under the 10 mil he wanted.

[nucci]

IMO, all points lead to Peters wanting to be paid top 2-3 money for a LT in the league at 10 million per year for six years -- he and his agent knowing he was worth it and teams would be willing to pay it -- Peters wanting to play in Buffalo and get it from the Bills -- the Bills wanting Peters but not offering enough money, hoping that Peters would sign for less than 10 mil -- The Bills ultimately deciding that they didn't want to pay him 10 million a year which is a schitload of money, he wasn't worth it to them -- and The Bills then finding a team who would give up a #1 plus and pay Peters the 6-60, which was Philly and making the trade.

 

It all makes perfect sense, it's pretty much undeniably that's what happened except it's conjecture as to whether Peters wanted to stay in Buffalo or not. I completely believe that he did but that's just an opinion. He said he did and to me there is no reason not to believe him, especially when he said he was shocked the Bills traded him.

 

There really doesnt have to be a bad guy here. Peters wanted a ton of money, it's the going rate in the league for his talent, the Bills negotiated and wanted to sign him but their ceiling was under the 10 mil he wanted.

Well said. Hopefully this ends the debate and we can focus on this year.

[thebandit27]

IMO, all points lead to Peters wanting to be paid top 2-3 money for a LT in the league at 10 million per year for six years -- he and his agent knowing he was worth it and teams would be willing to pay it -- Peters wanting to play in Buffalo and get it from the Bills -- the Bills wanting Peters but not offering enough money, hoping that Peters would sign for less than 10 mil -- The Bills ultimately deciding that they didn't want to pay him 10 million a year which is a schitload of money, he wasn't worth it to them -- and The Bills then finding a team who would give up a #1 plus and pay Peters the 6-60, which was Philly and making the trade.

 

It all makes perfect sense, it's pretty much undeniably that's what happened except it's conjecture as to whether Peters wanted to stay in Buffalo or not. I completely believe that he did but that's just an opinion. He said he did and to me there is no reason not to believe him, especially when he said he was shocked the Bills traded him.

 

There really doesnt have to be a bad guy here. Peters wanted a ton of money, it's the going rate in the league for his talent, the Bills negotiated and wanted to sign him but their ceiling was under the 10 mil he wanted.

 

You're spot on Kelly, but you're wasting your time.

 

I believe that--in regard to Jason Peters--posters on this board tend to fall into one of two categories:

 

1) They understand that business is business, and that both sides did what they felt was right for themselves.

 

2) They whine and gripe as though someone pissed in their cereal, and then proceed to talk about how awful a player Peters is, which all pretty much amounts to sour grapes.

 

Really, I don't feel there's a middle ground. Either you understand the business that is the NFL, or you don't. Matter-of-fact, forget the NFL, that's business in general.

 

When an employer pays an employee, they expect the employee to do their job for that amount of money. If said employee feels that he/she can get more elsewhere to do the same job, and they place a premium on making as much money as possible while they're capable of doing that job, then they'll do what is necessary within the accepted practices in their industry to obtain the higher-paying position. Anyone that doesn't understand that, or thinks--even for a second--that it has anything to do with loyalty to the organization or its fans, simply doesn't get it. I don't mean to insult folks that think that way, but it's purely how I see it.

[Dan]

IMO, all points lead to Peters wanting to be paid top 2-3 money for a LT in the league at 10 million per year for six years -- he and his agent knowing he was worth it and teams would be willing to pay it -- Peters wanting to play in Buffalo and get it from the Bills -- the Bills wanting Peters but not offering enough money, hoping that Peters would sign for less than 10 mil -- The Bills ultimately deciding that they didn't want to pay him 10 million a year which is a schitload of money, he wasn't worth it to them -- and The Bills then finding a team who would give up a #1 plus and pay Peters the 6-60, which was Philly and making the trade.

 

It all makes perfect sense, it's pretty much undeniably that's what happened except it's conjecture as to whether Peters wanted to stay in Buffalo or not. I completely believe that he did but that's just an opinion. He said he did and to me there is no reason not to believe him, especially when he said he was shocked the Bills traded him.

 

There really doesnt have to be a bad guy here. Peters wanted a ton of money, it's the going rate in the league for his talent, the Bills negotiated and wanted to sign him but their ceiling was under the 10 mil he wanted.

Valid points. However, I contend that had Peters not held out all of the '08 off season, and played at his 2007 level all season, the FO would have been much more willing to give him the money he desired. I think the holdout and subsequent drop in production left a bad taste in the FO's mouths as it did many posters here.

 

Of course this is all opinion as well.

 

You could also interpret his shock at being traded another way. His agent was probably telling him every day not to worry, the Bills will never trade you, they'll pay up. IMO, Parker is the bad person here more so than anyone else. He's proving himself to be an agent that has no problem holding a team hostage. From the holdouts last year, to the claims regarding Crabtree this year, Parker is proving he doesn't really care about a team, a player or their career.

[Kelly the Dog]

You could also interpret his shock at being traded another way. His agent was probably telling him every day not to worry, the Bills will never trade you, they'll pay up. IMO, Parker is the bad person here more so than anyone else. He's proving himself to be an agent that has no problem holding a team hostage. From the holdouts last year, to the claims regarding Crabtree this year, Parker is proving he doesn't really care about a team, a player or their career.

An agent's job is to get his client the best deal (read: most money for longest time period) possible. He has no obligation to teams. A player knows what an agent's reputation is around the league, knows what kind of deals the guy makes, and chooses what is going to make him the most happy. Sometimes that is all about money, most often IMO it's significantly about money but also about team, city, coaches, endorsements, wife/family, etc.

 

Parker is inarguably one of the very best agents in the league based on his client list. These guys can choose anyone they want.

[Dan]

An agent's job is to get his client the best deal (read: most money for longest time period) possible. He has no obligation to teams. A player knows what an agent's reputation is around the league, knows what kind of deals the guy makes, and chooses what is going to make him the most happy. Sometimes that is all about money, most often IMO it's significantly about money but also about team, city, coaches, endorsements, wife/family, etc.

 

Parker is inarguably one of the very best agents in the league based on his client list. These guys can choose anyone they want.

I completely agree. And I would say, given Parker's recent reputation, that it says a lot about a player that hires him as their agent.

 

Look at Rosenhaus, he has exactly the same job as Parker. Yet his players rarely hold out and he still gets them lots of money. He's just as effective at his job but he seems to do it by telling his player to go play his but off while he goes and negotiates his but off. Parker, on the other hand, seems to prefer the lazier blackmail approach - I have a good player that you won't see or even talk to until you give in to whatever demands I have.

[ThereIsNoDog]

Valid points. However, I contend that had Peters not held out all of the '08 off season, and played at his 2007 level all season, the FO would have been much more willing to give him the money he desired. I think the holdout and subsequent drop in production left a bad taste in the FO's mouths as it did many posters here.

Spot on. It wasn't worth the $60M investment to find out whether last year was an aberration or the way it's going to be from now on with him.

You could also interpret his shock at being traded another way. His agent was probably telling him every day not to worry, the Bills will never trade you, they'll pay up. IMO, Parker is the bad person here more so than anyone else. He's proving himself to be an agent that has no problem holding a team hostage. From the holdouts last year, to the claims regarding Crabtree this year, Parker is proving he doesn't really care about a team, a player or their career.

The "shock" was that the Bills had the nerve to trade a supreme talent like him. Did you even once hear him say that he wanted to stay in Buffalo, in his Eagles' PC?

[vincec]

Well said. Hopefully this ends the debate and we can focus on this year.

Yeah, right.

[Coach Tuesday]

IMO, all points lead to Peters wanting to be paid top 2-3 money for a LT in the league at 10 million per year for six years -- he and his agent knowing he was worth it and teams would be willing to pay it -- Peters wanting to play in Buffalo and get it from the Bills -- the Bills wanting Peters but not offering enough money, hoping that Peters would sign for less than 10 mil -- The Bills ultimately deciding that they didn't want to pay him 10 million a year which is a schitload of money, he wasn't worth it to them -- and The Bills then finding a team who would give up a #1 plus and pay Peters the 6-60, which was Philly and making the trade.

 

It all makes perfect sense, it's pretty much undeniably that's what happened except it's conjecture as to whether Peters wanted to stay in Buffalo or not. I completely believe that he did but that's just an opinion. He said he did and to me there is no reason not to believe him, especially when he said he was shocked the Bills traded him.

 

There really doesnt have to be a bad guy here. Peters wanted a ton of money, it's the going rate in the league for his talent, the Bills negotiated and wanted to sign him but their ceiling was under the 10 mil he wanted.

 

Agreed EXCEPT where was the backup plan? Shouldn't the team have seen this potentially on the horizon after his 2008 holdout? Or perhaps sooner? How do they go into this season with half a plan at the tackle positions? How do they not manage to draft or sign at least a right tackle (my thinking is they wanted Britton, but took Byrd once the Jags picked him - but Loadholt was still on the board)? How is it possible that this front office and coaching staff, WITH THEIR JOBS ON THE LINE, go into this season so completely thin and uncertain at both tackle spots? Who is this year's Langston Walker, if Langston Walker goes down with an injury? So I guess I disagree about the "no bad guys" notion - I think that there was not a competent gameplan in place for Peters' departure, and we're going to pay the price, big time.

[Kelly the Dog]

I completely agree. And I would say, given Parker's recent reputation, that it says a lot about a player that hires him as their agent.

 

Look at Rosenhaus, he has exactly the same job as Parker. Yet his players rarely hold out and he still gets them lots of money. He's just as effective at his job but he seems to do it by telling his player to go play his but off while he goes and negotiates his but off. Parker, on the other hand, seems to prefer the lazier blackmail approach - I have a good player that you won't see or even talk to until you give in to whatever demands I have.

I agree with all that but I would argue that most fans around the league think Rosenhaus is worse than Parker and badmouth him more. I think Bills fans have a slightly different perception because of the Parker/Peters situation went on for so long. I also think Rosenhaus is a great agent (although I can't stand agents who are all lying, manipulative weasels).

[ThereIsNoDog]

I agree with all that but I would argue that most fans around the league think Rosenhaus is worse than Parker and badmouth him more. I think Bills fans have a slightly different perception because of the Parker/Peters situation went on for so long. I also think Rosenhaus is a great agent (although I can't stand agents who are all lying, manipulative weasels).

All agents are weasels, true. But who is worse is all relative. The Postons were previously the worst. And while Rosenhaus did whatever he could to get his clients more money, he never told them to holdout like Parker has. And as a result (BTW, where are the Postons these days?), Parker is the most hated agent right now. And it will probably get worse with this Crabtree thing.

[Kelly the Dog]

Agreed EXCEPT where was the backup plan? Shouldn't the team have seen this potentially on the horizon after his 2008 holdout? Or perhaps sooner? How do they go into this season with half a plan at the tackle positions? How do they not manage to draft or sign at least a right tackle (my thinking is they wanted Britton, but took Byrd once the Jags picked him - but Loadholt was still on the board)? How is it possible that this front office and coaching staff, WITH THEIR JOBS ON THE LINE, go into this season so completely thin and uncertain at both tackle spots? Who is this year's Langston Walker, if Langston Walker goes down with an injury? So I guess I disagree about the "no bad guys" notion - I think that there was not a competent gameplan in place for Peters' departure, and we're going to pay the price, big time.

I agree with that, except I wouldn't call recklessness on the part of the Bills being the "bad guy", I'd just call it being careless. I think making Walker a LT is a mistake, too, and really found it hard to believe they were comfortable with that idea. We'll see. I hope we're both wrong.

[Kelly the Dog]

The "shock" was that the Bills had the nerve to trade a supreme talent like him. Did you even once hear him say that he wanted to stay in Buffalo, in his Eagles' PC?

THAT'S something a person with a 6 wonderlic score would say. There is no reason whatsoever that Peters or any player should say in his press conference with a new team he was traded to that gave up a #1 and #3 and #4 and just paid him ten million dollars a year that he really wanted to be on his old team. Peters is no Academic All-American but he's not that dumb.

[The Senator]

Spot on. It wasn't worth the $60M investment to find out whether last year was an aberration or the way it's going to be from now on with him.

 

The "shock" was that the Bills had the nerve to trade a supreme talent like him. Did you even once hear him say that he wanted to stay in Buffalo, in his Eagles' PC?

One of the biggest concerns in IggleDom right now is the offensive line 'coming together', and how Peters injury and lack of practice will affect their O-line's performance and chemistry. (In FatBoy's defense, his isn't the only injury, but I'm sure the Eagles were expecting more for their $60M - like a guy showing up in shape maybe?)

 

To date, they still haven't been able to get their five best lineman on the field together. Sound at least a little familiar? You might say Parker did us a favor.

[Guest dog14787]

We may not have drafted Eric Wood if we didn't lose Jason Peters and I suppose there's really no reason to feel any hostility towards JP. JP's departure may help make us become a better ball club in the long run anyway in my opinion.

 

Its just hard not to take his departure personally.

[thebandit27]

One of the biggest concerns in IggleDom right now is the offensive line 'coming together', and how Peters injury and lack of practice will affect their O-line's performance and chemistry. (In FatBoy's defense, his isn't the only injury, but I'm sure the Eagles were expecting more for their $60M - like a guy showing up in shape maybe?)

 

To date, they still haven't been able to get their five best lineman on the field together. Sound at least a little familiar? You might say Parker did us a favor.

 

So tweaking a quad muscle means that a guy didn't show up in shape? Does that mean that everyone that gets hurt in camp is not in shape? If not, why not? Where do you draw the line? Or is it that you hate the fact that Peters got his way, so you'll say anything to denigrate the guy?

 

We may not have drafted Eric Wood if we didn't lose Jason Peters and I suppose there's really no reason to feel any hostility towards JP. JP's departure may help make us become a better ball club in the long run anyway in my opinion.

 

Its just hard not to take his departure personally.

 

I guess I just can't understand that feeling...he wanted to get paid. Period. It's not personal; it never was. He saw Jake Long get $30M+ guaranteed before he ever took a snap in the NFL, and believed that he deserved the same money. Obviously, other organizations (namely, the Eagles) believed that as well. He would've played here for the same money, and there's no evidence to support that he wouldn't have.

[DrDawkinstein]

I agree with that, except I wouldn't call recklessness on the part of the Bills being the "bad guy", I'd just call it being careless. I think making Walker a LT is a mistake, too, and really found it hard to believe they were comfortable with that idea. We'll see. I hope we're both wrong.

 

here is how i see it, with regards to planning our Offensive Line for 2009:

 

It was OBVIOUS that we needed to revamp the interior. first and foremost. the interior is more important than the Tackles. i now a lot of people here wont agree with me, but it's true. Center is THE MOST IMPORTANT position on the line.

 

If you have a strong interior, you can get away with "lesser thans" on the outside. See: last year's Cardinals.

Conversely, you CAN NOT get away with strong tackles and a weak interior. Offensive Line just doesnt work like that. See: the Bills for the last 2 (10?) seasons.

 

Now, given the fact that the interior is more important, AND add in that the Bills were planning on drafting and STARTING Wood and Levitre, we would be FLIPPING OUT right now if they were planning on starting 3 rookies on the line, 1 being at the crucial LT spot.

 

Plus, I believe the Bills were much higher on the mean, smart Wood and Levitre over any of the Tackle options left to them.

 

Let's forget for a second that the LT position has been blown up into this demi-god position. It's important, but you dont build your line from left to right. You build it from the middle, out.

 

Now, an argument can be made that they could have drafted a Tackle and the line would have been:

Rookie-Woods-Hanny-Butler-Walker

 

But now you are GUESSING that a rookie (non-blue chip) LT will be better next to another rookie than Langston Walker will be. I dont see it that way.

 

I think the Bills did the best they could with the situation.

[Kelly the Dog]

here is how i see it, with regards to planning our Offensive Line for 2009:

 

It was OBVIOUS that we needed to revamp the interior. first and foremost. the interior is more important than the Tackles. i now a lot of people here wont agree with me, but it's true. Center is THE MOST IMPORTANT position on the line.

 

If you have a strong interior, you can get away with "lesser thans" on the outside. See: last year's Cardinals.

Conversely, you CAN NOT get away with strong tackles and a weak interior. Offensive Line just doesnt work like that. See: the Bills for the last 2 (10?) seasons.

 

Now, given the fact that the interior is more important, AND add in that the Bills were planning on drafting and STARTING Wood and Levitre, we would be FLIPPING OUT right now if they were planning on starting 3 rookies on the line, 1 being at the crucial LT spot.

 

Plus, I believe the Bills were much higher on the mean, smart Wood and Levitre over any of the Tackle options left to them.

 

Let's forget for a second that the LT position has been blown up into this demi-god position. It's important, but you dont build your line from left to right. You build it from the middle, out.

 

Now, an argument can be made that they could have drafted a Tackle and the line would have been:

Rookie-Woods-Hanny-Butler-Walker

 

But now you are GUESSING that a rookie (non-blue chip) LT will be better next to another rookie than Langston Walker will be. I dont see it that way.

 

I think the Bills did the best they could with the situation.

The Bills were looking for a tackle in the draft at #8. I pretty much know it for a fact. It would be impossible to prove, but I'd bet anyone that if any of the three tackles taken ahead of the Bills in round one were available, we would have taken that guy over Maybin. They also loved Wood, and for good reason. There were tackles available at 28 but they obviously felt Wood was a much better choice than any tackle and already that appears to be true. The same thing with Levitre. They liked him and decided none of the tackles that were still available were better than him at G, so they took him. If they had a tackle rated ahead of Levitre on their board, I can almost guarantee they would have taken him.

[The Senator]

We may not have drafted Eric Wood if we didn't lose Jason Peters and I suppose there's really no reason to feel any hostility towards JP. JP's departure may help make us become a better ball club in the long run anyway in my opinion.

 

Its just hard not to take his departure personally.

I agree completely. And I don't take Peters' departure personally - I take it gleefully, for the exact reasons you stated.

 

What I take personally is his quitting on the team and the fans last season (actually, at the end of the 2007 season).