Thurman#1 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 So your saying that if you sign a contract and think worth more even before reach the halfway point of that contract, its OK to hold out? If they caved to him at the point he originally started his holdouts, they would have had half their team hold out. Very few teams will give anyone a raise with more than 2 years left in their contract, if any. Lots of teams do that, actually, give new contract with more than two years.. Including the Bills, who did it with - now I can't remember who it was, but either Evans, Kelsay, Denney or Schobel. One of them. And yeah, it's OK to hold out. That's why players do it. They're in a much more restrictive environment than we are. If we don't like our contract and management won't negotiate, you quit and go to another company that will pay you what you're worth. It's the American way. But football players can't do it, based on the fact that the NFL is a monopoly and teams get exclusive rights to you. So, yeah, it's OK to hold out. But there are bad consequences as well as good ones, so you'd better be ready for both. In Peters' case, he got what he was worth, so it worked out for him. Teams have a right to give a guy a contract and then switch him to a position where the pay is much higher. They have a right to insist that he play under the contract. But there are bad consequences as well as good ones, so you'd better be ready for both. In the Bills case, they made Peters furious, and it didn't work out for them, having to trade Peters before they had a good replacement plan. Let's just hope that Bell develops fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrudginglyOptimistic Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 So your saying that if you sign a contract and think worth more even before reach the halfway point of that contract, its OK to hold out? If they caved to him at the point he originally started his holdouts, they would have had half their team hold out. Very few teams will give anyone a raise with more than 2 years left in their contract, if any. The problem with your theory is that the Bills in fact did cave from Peters and other Bills players perspective. Peters goal was pretty clearly to get paid double digits in millions of dollars. He might have liked it if he got this from the Bills, but his actual goal was to holdout of voluntary practices and camp to force the Bills to treat him like an FA. That is exactly what he got. If your thought is correct then it follows that half the Bills should hold out. Don't you see this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 The problem with your theory is that the Bills in fact did cave from Peters and other Bills players perspective. Peters goal was pretty clearly to get paid double digits in millions of dollars. He might have liked it if he got this from the Bills, but his actual goal was to holdout of voluntary practices and camp to force the Bills to treat him like an FA. That is exactly what he got. If your thought is correct then it follows that half the Bills should hold out. Don't you see this? Remember that at the time pro bowl tackle peters was watching the purse strings open to bring in mediocre linemen. He was going to get a big contract sooner or later. The Bills had the choice of renegotiating early and avoiding all of the drama and didn't. Now...I don't mind if underpaid probowl caliber bills hold out when they see mediocre new people signing for outrageous sums. A decision that a wise GM should have made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbuckley9091 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Remember that at the time pro bowl tackle peters was watching the purse strings open to bring in mediocre linemen. He was going to get a big contract sooner or later. The Bills had the choice of renegotiating early and avoiding all of the drama and didn't. Now...I don't mind if underpaid probowl caliber bills hold out when they see mediocre new people signing for outrageous sums. A decision that a wise GM should have made. Peters was very good in 2007, Peters was awful last year, I'm glad he's gone... Our line was playing really well last year to start the season...until Peters fat-ass came in and ruined it... I re-watched Bell in the pre-season game against Bears...he looked pretty good actually... Is the Bills front office totally clueless?......yes Are the Patriots going to destroy us?.....yes Are we going to miss the playoffs again?...yes Will I watch every game and hope that I'm wrong about all this?....yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 So let's see if I have this straight:Pro-Bowl LT demands contract equivalent to overpaid but adequate RT. Trade Pro-Bowl LT. Move overpaid but adequate RT to LT, where he's now overpaid and inadequate. Cut overpaid and inadequate LT. Start 2nd-year player with no experience at LT. Back him up with a guard you cut three days ago. And oh yeah...don't forget to fire your OC first. Is this a joke? No, really...is somebody just !@#$ing with us? WHY DIDN'T YOU sh-- heads JUST SIGN PETERS???? Well when you put it that way.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Has anybody offered Losman a $100,000,000 contract? Case closed. Why don't you buy yourself a donut and go try to sell it for $10,000, see if you get any takers. You might learn something about market value. Peters got market value for a player as good as he is. If you are going to open your mouth and be a smartass then at least know what the hell you are talking about... The dude wrote "Have you ever heard the saying something is worth EXACTLY what you pay for it?" to say that Peters is worth every dollar he demanded. My response is that his statement is completely and totally false. Javon Walker isnt worth the $55 million contract Oakland gave him, and everyone knew it when he signed it. So is Javon Walker a $55 million WR because Al Davis paid him that? NO, so get the hell out of here with these rediculous statements already... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I'm sorry, but you're flat out wrong here, there's no other way to put it. He had already come down from $13 mill, so when you say he wasn't coming down, you're just factually wrong. Oh, that's the whole reason for preseason and training camp? Really? That's funny, then, isn't it, that the Bills announced in the first week of camp that they had named the starters the o-line this season. If Bell had outplayed Walker months ago, or even weeks ago, he would have been promoted at that time. This is terribly disturbing, because if Walker was so bad that he had to be cut, then waiting so long means that Bell couldn't clearly outplay a guy not even worth keeping as a backup right up till 6 days before the season. This is, at best, indicative of some kind of screw-up. Let's hope that Bell does well, but indications are not good. It sounds like even if he succeeds, it will take a while. Geezus you are dense...Bell OBVIOUSLY did not our play Walker months ago...but he DEVELOPED (have you ever heard of that word before) into a better LT after going through the ENTIRE offseason and preseason. And if you believe for one instance that the O Line was "set" months ago and the the coaches dont plan on using preseason and practice performances to adjust the lineup, then you would be the dumbest person on this board. Real football isnt like Madden on our Xbox where player ratings stay pretty close to what they were when you started your new franchise in preseason... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rstencel Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 The problem with your theory is that the Bills in fact did cave from Peters and other Bills players perspective. Peters goal was pretty clearly to get paid double digits in millions of dollars. He might have liked it if he got this from the Bills, but his actual goal was to holdout of voluntary practices and camp to force the Bills to treat him like an FA. That is exactly what he got. If your thought is correct then it follows that half the Bills should hold out. Don't you see this? They did after he reached the 2 years left on his contract, not the first year where he did the hold out. That would be the point that contract reached a point makes sense to redo, but the bad blood was already there by that point. The Bills didn't cave, they did exactly what they said they would do before he held out. They told him they would consider renegotiating next year, but not before then, and they didn't negotiate till that year. Don't get how you come to the theory that teams shouldn't renegotiate a contract that was just signed the year before, means that half the Bills should negotiate? I am not sure you are reading my post with this reply cause it does not make any sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rstencel Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 Lots of teams do that, actually, give new contract with more than two years.. Including the Bills, who did it with - now I can't remember who it was, but either Evans, Kelsay, Denney or Schobel. One of them. And yeah, it's OK to hold out. That's why players do it. They're in a much more restrictive environment than we are. If we don't like our contract and management won't negotiate, you quit and go to another company that will pay you what you're worth. It's the American way. But football players can't do it, based on the fact that the NFL is a monopoly and teams get exclusive rights to you. So, yeah, it's OK to hold out. But there are bad consequences as well as good ones, so you'd better be ready for both. In Peters' case, he got what he was worth, so it worked out for him. Teams have a right to give a guy a contract and then switch him to a position where the pay is much higher. They have a right to insist that he play under the contract. But there are bad consequences as well as good ones, so you'd better be ready for both. In the Bills case, they made Peters furious, and it didn't work out for them, having to trade Peters before they had a good replacement plan. Let's just hope that Bell develops fast. The difference in that is that these were rookie contracts, and they already had re-signed him to an extension since he signed his rookie contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 There are still three players starting that have never played in an NFL game. Its a bold strategy Cotton lets see if it pays off I mean they won't have any regular season game tape to go off of so they are the wildcard bitches! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts