Peters Situation Could Get Scary

[patmoran2006]

http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/story/368294.html

The last two lines of this story scare me the most..
"Tennessee last month signed its top, young left tackle, Michael Roos, to a six-year, $43 million deal, averaging $7.1 million a year. Roos is not considered Peters’ equal."

[patmoran2006]

I see this becoming a very bad situation.

On one hand.. He still has three years left on his contract. On the other hand, in regards to his peers at left tackle, he is GROSSLY underpaid.

I think its going to take between 8-10 million per year to extend him and prevent a very ugly situation that could become a distraction to the team.

And anyone who says let him sit out can forget about the playoffs.. Because you're crazy if you think this offense is going anywhere with Chambers starting.

As greedy as the players sound in these things, I tend to side with them more. The NFL is the only major sport where contracts are NOT guarenteed. They can be cut or asked to take severe paycuts when they don't live up to their contract. So why shouldn't they go after more upfront money when they've clearly outpeformed their contract.

If Michael Freekin Roos can get $7.1 per year, and couple that with Peters being our best linemen, but only the third highest paid OL on this team, and this could get real ugly.

And I dont buy the "honor the contract" statement. Like I said, team owners don't.. They cut and force paycuts to players all the time.. It's a business unfortunately, and Peters is a hot, and irreplacable commodity right now, especially only being 26 years old.

[patmoran2006]

another peice by Allen Wilson from Today's Buffalo News..

http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/story/368290.html


It was a beautiful day at Ralph Wilson Stadium on Wednesday. The sun was shining and the players were going through their paces on the field. From the looks of things all would seem to be well in the Buffalo Bills’ world.
But it isn’t.

This has hardly been an uneventful offseason for the Bills. They have dealt with accusations that rookie wide receiver James Hardy wielded a firearm and running back Marshawn Lynch’s prolonged silence about his possible involvement in a hit-and-run incident. Even the team’s public address announcer is in legal trouble.

And then there’s the matter of Jason Peters. The All-Pro left tackle decided against gracing the Bills with his presence throughout the 13 days of voluntary workouts and he was a no-show at the first day of a three-day mandatory minicamp Wednesday.

Peters wants a new contract, and he’s staying away until he gets one. Coach Dick Jauron was surprised by Peters’ absence. He shouldn’t have been.
Holdouts are a common occurrence in the NFL, especially during the spring. Peters not being here right now is really not that big a deal. The Bills know when — or if — he shows up he will be in shape and ready to play.

However, the Bills can’t let this thing drag into training camp. What might have happened with Hardy and Lynch was out of the Bills’ control. But they can determine how long Peters is out.

Look, I get that Peters still has three years left on a contract he signed in 2006 and the Bills are under no obligation to give him another red cent.
But if the Bills really believe they are ready to make a serious push toward becoming a playoff participant, they need their best players on board.
Peters is one of the Bills’ best players and clearly the best offensive lineman they’ve got. But the best offensive lineman on a team shouldn’t be the thirdhighest paid at the position

[Romes]

It looks like the Bills are gonna play hardball on this one. I would think that if there were contract re-negotiations taking place Peters would be there.

[Buckets]

another peice by Allen Wilson from Today's Buffalo News..

Look, I get that Peters still has three years left on a contract he signed in 2006 and the Bills are under no obligation to give him another red cent.
But if the Bills really believe they are ready to make a serious push toward becoming a playoff participant, they need their best players on board.
Peters is one of the Bills’ best players and clearly the best offensive lineman they’ve got. But the best offensive lineman on a team shouldn’t be the thirdhighest paid at the position


Doesn't Peters have an obligation to his team and team mates? What does he have to say? Has he been in contact with the Bills in regard to contract negotiations? Have the Bills rejected any possibility of renegotiation?

Maybe if he were to come out publicly and let us know what he is expecting we wouldn't be so pissed about his being a no show.
Obviously his not being in camp is a very public statement but how about some details?

[Dr. Lecter]

Peters really can't hold out for the season. Anytime he holds out will not count against his deal, so he will just be losing time on his career and the ~4 million he is due to receive this year.


Fact is he needs to realize that the Bills have two players they need to get signed first (Evans and Crowell) because those two are entering the last year of their deals. What is most disappointing is that in recent year the Bills have extended players like Moorman and Schobel before the deals were up. So they have shown a willingness to do so (especiallly for Pro Bowl players), without a guy missing manditory team activities.

If he wants a new deal, I am fine with that and understand it. But man-up, come into camp and let nature take its course. Let the Bills get the two top priotities done and see where they are money wise and then they can get you hooked up long term.

His approach is leaving a bad taste in my mouth, even if his idea is not.

[Turf]

The Bills are nuts not to ink him aggressively. You can't even find or trade for a good LT even if you wanted to pay him. You don't walk out your front door and go gee today I'll buy a LT. Look how they overpayed for what they have now. He's more important than Evans or Crowell. You simply don't let your all pro linemen walk, ever. Remember Wilford going to Pittsburgh? The beginning of the end.

[acehole]

matt murphy...

that is the bills style

we will never build a winner.

[patmoran2006]

Doesn't Peters have an obligation to his team and team mates? What does he have to say? Has he been in contact with the Bills in regard to contract negotiations? Have the Bills rejected any possibility of renegotiation?

Maybe if he were to come out publicly and let us know what he is expecting we wouldn't be so pissed about his being a no show.
Obviously his not being in camp is a very public statement but how about some details?
It goes both ways.

Didn't the Bills have an obligation to Eric Moulds? He was under contract on a deal he signed. The Bills forced him to take a pay cut and when he wouldn't, they simply traded him away.

That's my point. .When a contract is too much (that the team signed) or a player UNDERPERFORMS he can get cut or have to give up money.. So when he clearly outperforms his worth as Peters certainly has, why doesnt he have the right to get a better deal?

[Dr. Lecter]

BTW, also from Wilson's article (for whatever it is worth)

The Bills need to get this deal done, and I suspect they will. Negotiations of this kind take time.

For now, the Bills will proceed without Peters. He’ll be fined, but I don’t think he will mind digging into his pocket as long as the Bills put some dead presidents back in it.

[gr8slayer]

Hey, if you want to keep elite talent you have to pay elite talent. This is a reality that the Bills have always struggled with for some reason.

[Philagape]

Here's the flip side to the "he-has-three-years-left" issue: The longer the Bills wait, the more they'll have to pay. That News article said the salary cap has gone up 36 percent since 2005. If the Bills sign him now, they may get him at a bargain compared to what he'll want in 2-3 years.

Now may be the only time the Bills can afford him.

[gr8slayer]

Here's the flip side to the "he-has-three-years-left" issue: The longer the Bills wait, the more they'll have to pay. That News article said the salary cap has gone up 36 percent since 2005. If the Bills sign him now, they may get him at a bargain compared to what he'll want in 2-3 years.

Now may be the only time the Bills can afford him.
:bf1:

[Bill Brasky]

Peters really can't hold out for the season. Anytime he holds out will not count against his deal, so he will just be losing time on his career and the ~4 million he is due to receive this year.


Fact is he needs to realize that the Bills have two players they need to get signed first (Evans and Crowell) because those two are entering the last year of their deals. What is most disappointing is that in recent year the Bills have extended players like Moorman and Schobel before the deals were up. So they have shown a willingness to do so (especiallly for Pro Bowl players), without a guy missing manditory team activities.

If he wants a new deal, I am fine with that and understand it. But man-up, come into camp and let nature take its course. Let the Bills get the two top priotities done and see where they are money wise and then they can get you hooked up long term.

His approach is leaving a bad taste in my mouth, even if his idea is not.
:bf1: he should also show us he can play a full season w/o getting injured. if they are going to dump 8-10 million/year into their LT i'd like to feel comfortable knowing he's going to give us more than 10-12 games every year. he was also undrafted - passed up by 31 other teams. he can honor his contract and wait his turn in line to get paid just like every one else.

that being said, i can understand his resentment. how would you guys feel if your co-workers were getting paid twice as much for essentialy less responsibilty?

[Philagape]

Plus, in 2-3 years is when we'll see Whitner, McCargo, Lynch, Poz, Edwards, etc., come up.

This summer is a unique opportunity, and a team has to take advantage of its opportunities to be successful. Don't be the Sabres.

[Pinkerton Security]

give him more than roos. he deserves it, IMO. i normally dont like guys wanting to re-do their deals but peters has been stellar and hasnt done anhything but be awesome.

[gr8slayer]

Plus, in 2-3 years is when we'll see Whitner, McCargo, Lynch, Poz, Edwards, etc., come up.

This summer is a unique opportunity, and a team has to take advantage of its opportunities to be successful. Don't be the Sabres.
Clump might have to step in and correct me but based on my calculations we have the money to pay Evans, Crowell, and Peters right now.

[jamze132]

Yeah he's under contract with a good deal but he wants a better one. I think he does deserve a better deal considering he is one of the best up and coming LTs in the NFL. So pay him. If we wait and wait, he will refuse to re-sign with us after his contract and we are back at square one.

HOW OFTEN DOES ONE OF THE BEST LTs IN THE NFL FALL INTO YOUR LAP? PAY THE ****ING GUY AND MOVE ON!

[Philagape]

I think Peters making his stand now is better for the Bills than it is for him. The Bills should pounce.

[Ickybaluky]

Here's the flip side to the "he-has-three-years-left" issue: The longer the Bills wait, the more they'll have to pay. That News article said the salary cap has gone up 36 percent since 2005. If the Bills sign him now, they may get him at a bargain compared to what he'll want in 2-3 years.

Now may be the only time the Bills can afford him.

Of course the flip side to that is they could sign him to a big-money deal now and in 2-3 years when they can't afford him he does the same thing again and holds out for more money.

[gr8slayer]

The Buffalo News speculates that Jason Peters is looking for between $8 million and $11.5 million per season in a contract extension. Ralph Wilson is rolling over in his grave. The Bills are in an uncomfortable spot of setting the left tackle market for a player with three years left on his deal. Of all the holdouts this summer, this one is the most unpredictable.

[OpIv37]

If this were the Patriots, they'd trade him for a first round pick and find out the guy on the bench behind him was better anyway.

But we're not the Patriots- we're the Bills. So, we'll either pay him and then he'll mail it in after he gets his huge payday, or we'll trade him for a 3rd round pick and find out that Kirk Chambers and Matt Murphy can't play LT.

[Philagape]

Of course the flip side to that is they could sign him to a big-money deal now and in 2-3 years when they can't afford him he does the same thing again and holds out for more money.

Then we'll get 2-3 years out of him, and if he holds out or leaves then, it won't be because the Bills could have paid him but didn't. He has more of a case now than he would then, and the Bills have more opportunity now than they will then.

[Oaf]

I wonder if he'd be willing to wait a bit if we told him we needed to resign Evans, then Crowell because their contracts are literally almost gone. He'd need to see that those two were integral parts to being a playoff contender and wait till we get those two extended. If I'm not mistaken, we'd still have space for him.

Maybe we could do the deal when the regular season started.

[The Answer]

If the reports are true about Peters asking for 8-11 million a season than we need to trade this doushe right now because he's definiltey smoking crack if he thinks that one above average season warrants that kind of payday.

Good riddance you ungrateful loser!

~The Answer

[Turf]

If the reports are true about Peters asking for 8-11 million a season than we need to trade this doushe right now because he's definiltey smoking crack if he thinks that one above average season warrants that kind of payday.

Good riddance you ungrateful loser!

~The Answer

And there my friends, is the Buffalo fan loser mentality in a nutshell. How many times have I seen this type of response to an athlete in Buffalo. A bum, loser, a douche, whatever. Keep my tickets at $30 a piece please.
And you wonder why we lose.

[Buffalogic]

What is Peters' going to do honestly? Quit friggen whining about making 3.5 million and play the game. His only other option is to sacrifice that money and sit out the whole year. That is unrealistic and preposterous. Peters' is fighting a battle he can't win, so just shut up and get into training camp.

I'd be shocked if he isn't at training camp.

[shelby]

He deserves the money. Pay him.

[YardRat]

I agree with shelby. Peters has earned the status of being the highest paid offensive lineman on the team, and he should be.

Peters is a much bigger priority than either Evans or Crowell, IMO. Wide recievers and LB's can be replaced much easier than LT's.

[Dr. Lecter]

I agree with shelby. Peters has earned the status of being the highest paid offensive lineman on the team, and he should be.

Peters is a much bigger priority than either Evans or Crowell, IMO. Wide recievers and LB's can be replaced much easier than LT's.

The biggest difference is that two of those players are entering the last years of their contracts and one is not. The comparison is not a simple LT vs. LB or WR issue.

[Night Train]

Crowell is not a bigger priority than Peters. He's about 2 levels below Evans & Peters.

You spend the $$ on Evans & Peters. Crowell can be replaced, if he wants big $$.

[LifetimeBillsFan]

I posted this before (http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showthread.php?p=2464719#post2464719 ), but it is worth noting yet again that, according to what C.Brown posted on his blog a couple of weeks ago, there are some aspects of the CBA that are going to make these negotiations with Evans, Crowell and Peters extremely difficult even though the Bills appear to have plenty of money available at this point:

"HOW CBA COULD AFFECT EVANS EXTENSION: Since I was asked on Fan Friday this week and several others asked me by email about the potential impact of the CBA opt out by the owners on a Lee Evans contract extension I was provided with some additional information concerning the CBA opt out's potential effect on an Evans deal. Assuming that an extension for Lee Evans would be more than three years in length there would be new restrictions as to how the contract can be formulated.

First, if there is any guaranteed salary in year 3 (2010) or beyond that guaranteed salary would be reallocated to capped years (2008, 2009) and presumably count against the cap in those years. Half of any guaranteed salary in any league year beyond 2012 will also be reallocated to capped years.

In essence that kind of accounting would limit the Bills' flexibility in 2008 and 2009 in terms of cash on hand to spend on other players, so they would likely avoid putting guarantees in any part of the deal beyond the second year.

Second, the 30% increase rule restricts salary increases from 2009 to 2010. For example: a player with a $500K salary in 2009 would be limited to annual salary increases of $150K ($500K x 30%) beginning in 2010.

This would limit the Bills from sharply increasing his salary in the back half of the contract, although the Bills typically don't resort to that tactic as much as other clubs.

Third, and probably most important, a team can include only three veteran team incentives in a player contract covering 2009 and beyond. These incentives must also be coupled with a playtime requirement. Previously, clubs were limited to eight team incentives and no playtime requirement.

This would limit both parties from finding areas where more money can be earned by Evans based on performance. Based on the above I would assume that an incentive or escalator for making the Pro Bowl would be prohibited since it is not tied to playtime. And that is an incentive commonly found in player contracts who have the potential to make the Pro Bowl.

Suffice to say there will be some more hurdles to clear when it comes to ironing out a contract extension for Lee Evans that both sides feel is fair. Under these new negotiating parameters it will likely take a lot longer for each side to figure out what is a fair and equitable deal.

The purpose of these restrictions is to make it difficult so that the owners and the Players Association get back to the bargaining table to reach a new labor pact. But for the interim it's not doing the Bills and Evans any favors..."
http://buffalobills.com/blog/index.jsp?post_id=3524

I'm certainly no expert in how NFL contracts work, etc., but it seems to me that one reason that Peters wants to get a deal now is that there are restrictions on salary and bonuses that will be restricting how much he can get. And, those same restrictions are really complicating matters and going to make it difficult for the Bills to come up with numbers that will satisfy Evans and Crowell, too.<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->