The Bills show resolve by not caving in to meet Peters' demands

[madness]

These are high times at St. John Fisher College, home of the Bills' training camp. The defense, bolstered by the additions of DT Marcus Stroud, OLB Kawika Mitchell and CB Leodis McKelvin, is swarming around the practice field, looking nothing like the undersized, slow-footed unit that was perpetually undermanned a season ago.
The offense, under the direction of new coordinator Turk Schonert, is using a more up-tempo, passing-friendly system — one that couldn’t look more different than the plodding, deliberate style that was showcased under former offensive boss Steve Fairchild.
But no positive developments under the sticky, Upstate New York sun can rid the team of the monstrous shadow that looms over every passing play, team meeting or meal. It’s a 6-6, 340-pound, All-Pro shadow, the type that as simply won’t go away by the team’s insistence that it’s focusing on task at hand.
Despite Bills Chief Operating Officer Russ Brandon dubbing the situation a “road map of silence,” it’s no secret that star OLT Jason Peters is MIA at camp in search of a new contract. And by accounts of anyone who bothered to watch the Bills play a season ago, he’s deserving of it. Given the retirement of Ravens perennial Pro Bowler Jonathan Ogden and the rapidly aging, injury-plagued latter years of fellow Pro Bowl fixtures Orlando Pace of St. Louis and Walter Jones of Seattle, Peters stands as the best offensive tackle in the league. He’s a nimble, fleet-footed former collegiate tight end who’s as equally adept at neutralizing the AFC’s cache of speedy sack specialists as he is plowing the road for emerging RB Marshawn Lynch in the running game.
Yet Buffalo is holding its ground in the front office just as well as Peters does on the gridiron. And for this, Brandon and Co. have sent a clear message to Bills fans that it has the savvy, resolve and good sense to restore the luster to a once-proud franchise that has been on a lengthy postseason hiatus (since 1999). For as good Peters is, the Bills are smart for strong-arming him.
Dealing with contractual holdouts is tricky business. It’s easy to say that clubs should always take a hard-line stance and not cave in to demands, because ultimately, the men signing the checks hold the upper-hand over those cashing them. But in reality, dealing with holdouts require a balancing act of managing egos, keeping the salary cap in check, analyzing talent and worth to team, as well as the overall financial standing of the organization.
The Bills’ front office took all these into consideration when opting not to cave into Peters’ demands, and still needed a healthy amount of intestinal fortitude to do so. Brandon, along with vice president of pro personnel John Guy and vice president of college scouting Tom Modrak, are new in their power posts. Upon the retirement of GM Marv Levy, a Buffalo icon for his former coaching accomplishments, owner Ralph Wilson promoted the aforementioned trio to form a de facto iron triangle when it came to personnel decisions, rather than appoint a single general manager. But Brandon, whose background is more in tune with calculators and pencils than stopwatches and shoulder pads, wasn’t intimidated, and for this, the Bills are better off.
Peters has three years left on a deal due to pay him a little more than $3 million per year. Such a deal makes him the third highest paid lineman on the team, after the club went trigger-happy by doling out $74 million to solid but unspectacular OG Derrick Dockery ($49 million) and OT Langston Walker ($25 million) a year ago. The fact that there’s that much time remaining to renegotiate before Peters hits the open market certainly affords the team valuable time to see what direction the club is heading.
But the issue is deeper than the time he has left on the deal. The Bills also know Peters as a person. He’s a polite, soft-spoken, team-first guy who they know won’t go all Terrell Owens on them. The fact that the public hasn’t heard so much as a whisper of complaint out of Peters isn’t surprising to those who know him best. In fact, there’s a line of thinking from sources close to the team that Peters never wanted to hold out in the first place, and that everything’s being orchestrated by his agent, Eugene Parker. It only stands to reason that eventually, Peters is bound to override his overzealous agent’s advice, and report.

...

Even if there’s little doubt that a holdout player eventually will show up, elite skill-position players such as quarterbacks, running backs and wide receivers take precedence in contractual stalemates over linemen. As important as the left tackle position is, having a stud in place there doesn’t fundamentally alter the entire offensive system. On the other hand, if T.O. — or the Rams’ Steven Jackson this season — was out of camp for a lengthy period of time, the team would have to adjust its offense to account for the absence. What have the Bills done in response to Peters’ holdout? Simply switched Walker from the right side to the left side, and inserted Kirk Chambers at right tackle.
The Bills have spoken, and spoken wisely. Now the onus is on Peters to cut his losses — up to $15,000 per day — and do the only reasonable thing left to do: Show up.

http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL/AFC/AFC+East/Buffalo/Features/2008/sohn080608.htm

[yordad]

Peters is 6'4. But, it is a good read. It is like they are playing chicken. Screw it, I say they just play rock paper scissors.

1. Lee
2. Crowell
3. Peters

[Crisis]

peters is 6'4

[madness]

echo :snicker:

[coastal]

Fantastic article... the problem in this situation isn't Jason Peters... it's his ****ing agent.

[Philagape]

How many wins is resolve worth?

Caving in to Peters means caving in to a much better chance of winning. That's a good thing to cave in to.

[yordad]

How many wins is resolve worth?

Caving in to Peters means caving in to a much better chance of winning. That's a good thing to cave in to.Winning what? Now compare that to the long term ramifications of losing Lee, Crowell, and a dozen other up and comers that will eventually want extensions years before their contract is over.

[justasportsfan]

If Peters wants a raise ,the bills should cave in and give him $1 raise and hour. Maybe that will open the doors for communication.

[Philagape]

Winning what? Now compare that to the long term ramifications of losing Lee, Crowell, and a dozen other up and comers that will eventually want extensions years before their contract is over.

Unless they're also All-Pros at an extremely vital position and grossly underpaid with a ton of cash to spend, they'll have no ramifications that compare to winning anything.

[Ebenezer]

How many wins is resolve worth?

Caving in to Peters means caving in to a much better chance of winning. That's a good thing to cave in to.
The Bills could show all the good faith they want but if he doesn't have the professionalism to contact his employer and to show that he is even to close to playing shape then the Bills owe him nothing.

[yordad]

Unless they're also All-Pros at an extremely vital position and grossly underpaid with a ton of cash to spend, they'll have no ramifications that compare to winning anything.Phil, I don't got out of my way to disagree with you, but it seems to happen a lot. Most is just opinion though, so it is bound to happen. I just want to point out that I still think disagreement is the spice of posting. And, if it is possible to enjoy disagreeing, you are a joy to disagree with because your opinions are generally well thought out, and you have good football knowledge. You help to provide a well thought out dissenting opinion.

But, for the sake of clarifying, lets look at a couple things (mostly educated guess and opinion)...

1. What do you think the chances of Peters holding out into the season if we don't rework his contract at all this year.

2. How many games do you think he will miss if we don't rework his contract at all this year.

3. Do you think he will eventually cave to a promise of reworking his contract next year?

4. If you are correct on you above guess, how many games do we win not offering to renegotiate?

5. How many games do we win if we do renegotiate and Peters misses no time?

6. Do you think extending him this year will limit our ability to extend Lee?

7. Do you think extending him this year will limit our ability to extend Crowell?

8. How important do you think Lee is on a scale from 1 to 10? Crowell? Peters?

9. Do you think showing weakness in this matter will make other players and agents think they smell blood, whether or not they have top notch credentials?

10. Will it set a precedent that says "if you go to the probowl, just hold out, we will give you more cash"?

[patmoran2006]

Winning what? Now compare that to the long term ramifications of losing Lee, Crowell, and a dozen other up and comers that will eventually want extensions years before their contract is over.
Are you ****ing kidding me?

WE as much or MORE cap than any of the 31 other teams in the NFL.. WE can redo Peters and extend Crowell and Evans EASILY and still have plenty of chump change left.

If we redo Peters we lose Evans and Crowell? Are we not under the cap by like over $30 million dollars?!?!

[yordad]

Are you ****ing kidding me?

WE as much or MORE cap than any of the 31 other teams in the NFL.. WE can redo Peters and extend Crowell and Evans EASILY and still have plenty of chump change left.

If we redo Peters we lose Evans and Crowell? Are we not under the cap by like over $30 million dollars?!?! Cash to cap counts guaranteed money up front, correct? How much guaranteed money do you think Peters will want? 30 million? One player, 30 million. One player who we have the presence of mind to extend only two years ago ALREADY.

When was the last time Lee or Crowell was extended? How much guaranteed would they want, IYO?

[Ebenezer]

Phil, I don't got out of my way to disagree with you, but it seems to happen a lot. Most is just opinion though, so it is bound to happen. I just want to point out that I still think disagreement is the spice of posting. And, if it is possible to enjoy disagreeing, you are a joy to disagree with because your opinions are generally well thought out, and you have good football knowledge. You help to provide a well thought out dissenting opinion.

But, for the sake of clarifying, lets look at a couple things (mostly educated guess and opinion)...

1. What do you think the chances of Peters holding out into the season if we don't rework his contract at all this year.

2. How many games do you think he will miss if we don't rework his contract at all this year.

3. Do you think he will eventually cave to a promise of reworking his contract next year?

4. If you are correct on you above guess, how many games do we win not offering to renegotiate?

5. How many games do we win if we do renegotiate and Peters misses no time?

6. Do you think extending him this year will limit our ability to extend Lee?

7. Do you think extending him this year will limit our ability to extend Crowell?

8. How important do you think Lee is on a scale from 1 to 10? Crowell? Peters?

9. Do you think showing weakness in this matter will make other players and agents think they smell blood, whether or not they have top notch credentials?

10. Will it set a precedent that says "if you go to the probowl, just hold out, we will give you more cash"?
Good points...great job. Here is another.

11. He was extended and given a raise once. Will this become a yearly event?

[patmoran2006]

Phil, I don't got out of my way to disagree with you, but it seems to happen a lot. Most is just opinion though, so it is bound to happen. I just want to point out that I still think disagreement is the spice of posting. And, if it is possible to enjoy disagreeing, you are a joy to disagree with because your opinions are generally well thought out, and you have good football knowledge. You help to provide a well thought out dissenting opinion.

But, for the sake of clarifying, lets look at a couple things (mostly educated guess and opinion)...

1. What do you think the chances of Peters holding out into the season if we don't rework his contract at all this year.
From what we know, who knows? I wouldnt bet against it though.

2. How many games do you think he will miss if we don't rework his contract at all this year.
See #1

3. Do you think he will eventually cave to a promise of reworking his contract next year?
If we're going to "promise to rework his contract next year", why not do it this year? What sense does that make? We have oodles of cap room right NOW, why even flirt with not having your best player in uniform when you don't need to? It's not like we'd have to cut players or not extend others to make room for his salary.

4. If you are correct on you above guess, how many games do we win not offering to renegotiate?
If you're asking the question that if Peters doesnt play in 2008, what will our record be, I would say we'd be extremely fortunate to match last year's 7 win total.. He's THAT good.

5. How many games do we win if we do renegotiate and Peters misses no time?
I think with a better offense, which Peters is more vital than any other single player, we can win 10 games for sure.

6. Do you think extending him this year will limit our ability to extend Lee?
Not at all.> Go look at our cap page.

7. Do you think extending him this year will limit our ability to extend Crowell?
Not at all. .Go look at our cap page (again).. You are aware of our cap and cash to cap standing, correct?

8. Do you think showing weakness in this matter will make other players and agents think they smell blood, whether or not they have top notch credentials?
Potentially yes.. Lots of great teams take hard stances with players, but treat elite players differently. As NE39 said earlier this week; take the Patriots.. How many times did they not cave in to players wanting more money. But what happened when he's elite like Seymour.. Dude got PAID.

9. Will it set a precedent that says "if you go to the probowl, just hold out, we will give you more cash"?
If the precedent is scrubs like Jonas Jennings is making more than $2 million per year or guys slowing down and old like Orlando Pace are more than doubling what you make, then yes.. Conversely, if a team pays a guy like a Pro Bowler, and that player doesn't produce anymore because of age and/or injury Spikes or example, will that team NOT cut you? It's a business and just like in any sport, when you're an elite player who's so clearly underpaid, you hold more cards.

[patmoran2006]

Bottom line is both parties are wrong in ways.

But what matters most in sports and especially business is the result. If the Bills show "resolve" and don't cave in to Peters; it's going to come at the expense of having a product on the field that is not nearly as good.

But nobody seems to see the point I do.. And that point is: Old Man Ralphie doesn't give two ****S.. He's already got his money, and the stadium is almost sold out for the season. Why is he going to spend millions more when he technically doesn't have too, and the games are pretty much sold out.. Bottom line; THAT is what he cares most about.. LOL, and you guys don't agree with that?

[patmoran2006]

Cash to cap counts guaranteed money up front, correct? How much guaranteed money do you think Peters will want? 30 million? One player, 30 million. One player who we have the presence of mind to extend only two years ago ALREADY.

When was the last time Lee or Crowell was extended? How much guaranteed would they want, IYO?
Perhaps another 70 FREEKIN million in extra revenue to Ralph may make him want to make spending what is necessary to keep his core in tact worth it?

Put it this way.. WOuld you be able to argue reasonably that Peters, Evans and Crowell are right now the three best players on this football team?

I sure as hell would. Lynch and Poz and a few others may join the discussion in time; but as of right now, We have three clear-cut best players on this team; one is holding out, and two are in the final year of their contracts.

Lock them three up, and FA doesn't have to be an issue on this team for a few years at the least.

[yordad]

Perhaps another 70 FREEKIN million in extra revenue to Ralph may make him want to make spending what is necessary to keep his core in tact worth it?

Put it this way.. WOuld you be able to argue reasonably that Peters, Evans and Crowell are right now the three best players on this football team?

I sure as hell would. Lynch and Poz and a few others may join the discussion in time; but as of right now, We have three clear-cut best players on this team; one is holding out, and two are in the final year of their contracts.

Lock them three up, and FA doesn't have to be an issue on this team for a few years at the least.
Everyone + Pat,

Cash to cap counts guaranteed money up front, correct?

[patmoran2006]

Everyone + Pat,

Cash to cap counts guaranteed money up front, correct?
Are you going to count the Toronto money upfront too then?

is the Toronto expirement NOT designed to keep the Bills not only in Buffalo, but also "viable" ???

HOw is the team gonig to be "viable" when our best free agents ANNUALLY walk away from the team and we have to draft their replacements, year after year?

and how are we viable when a stud, elite, 26-year old PRO BOWL left tackle is making less than half of what the market value for a player of his ability and position are making?

HIs extension was given two years ago, and that's when he was a developing left tackle. Since then, he became ON the field, not by "rep" arguably as good as any LT in the NFL.

Pay the ****ing guy what he deserves.

[Philagape]

Phil, I don't got out of my way to disagree with you, but it seems to happen a lot. Most is just opinion though, so it is bound to happen. I just want to point out that I still think disagreement is the spice of posting. And, if it is possible to enjoy disagreeing, you are a joy to disagree with because your opinions are generally well thought out, and you have good football knowledge. You help to provide a well thought out dissenting opinion.

But, for the sake of clarifying, lets look at a couple things (mostly educated guess and opinion)...

1. What do you think the chances of Peters holding out into the season if we don't rework his contract at all this year.

2. How many games do you think he will miss if we don't rework his contract at all this year.

3. Do you think he will eventually cave to a promise of reworking his contract next year?

4. If you are correct on you above guess, how many games do we win not offering to renegotiate?

5. How many games do we win if we do renegotiate and Peters misses no time?

6. Do you think extending him this year will limit our ability to extend Lee?

7. Do you think extending him this year will limit our ability to extend Crowell?

8. How important do you think Lee is on a scale from 1 to 10? Crowell? Peters?

9. Do you think showing weakness in this matter will make other players and agents think they smell blood, whether or not they have top notch credentials?

10. Will it set a precedent that says "if you go to the probowl, just hold out, we will give you more cash"?

For 1,2,3, I don't know because I don't know his agent that well.

4, 5. In a season like this, one game could be the difference between playoffs or no playoffs, so if Peters makes a difference for one win, he's worth it. One sack on a crucial drive could make or break the season.

6, 7. If there's a year to get a lot done as far as multiple extensions, this is it. It's hard to imagine another year that has such a combination of a lot money to spend and not a lot of other major players to worry about. I can't guess specifics.

8. I prioritize Evans and Peters far ahead of Crowell. He's not as good at what he does as they are, and his position is less crucial. He's replaceable.

9, 10. Like I've said many times, Peters is unique in at least four different factors: All-Pro, crucial position, grossly underpaid, lots to spend. That sets a precedent only for others who meet those factors, and the Bills should make that clear if they decide to extend Peters now. If others who don't meet those conditions try to hold out, then screw them.

Let me also be clear in that I think Peters should report. It should be a race to see who caves first. Whatever it takes to end this.

[patmoran2006]

As far as Evans and Crowell; you better hope they are extended now or they're gone soon.. Sure, Evans MIGHT get franchised for one year like Clements did, but he'll be gone after that.

If a Bill who's valuable hits FA, he's as good as gone. In fact, name me a Buffalo Bill in recent years who's been a key player to this team that's hit free agency and we resigned him? Last one I can think of was Eric Moulds more than 2/3 of a decade ago.

[Philagape]

HIs extension was given two years ago, and that's when he was a developing left tackle. Since then, he became ON the field, not by "rep" arguably as good as any LT in the NFL.

Pay the ****ing guy what he deserves.

Actually, he was a RT when he signed his last contract.

[Philagape]

11. He was extended and given a raise once. Will this become a yearly event?

Only if he makes a career leap comparable to going from a prospect RT to an All-Pro LT. That's quite a leap, so I'd have to imagine no.

[clumping platelets]

He's coming off a sports hernia injury and surgery. Bills medical staff have not been able to determine how well he's healed. Bills FO and coaches have no clue to his conditioning level. So some you want to just throw money at him without knowing the above information? Thank goodness you guys are not the GM :phew:

1) Peters reports
2) Gets medically evaluated
3) conditioning evaluated
4) Peters works with the team
5) Peters' contract addressed in Nov/Dec/or before next offseason

Otherwise his :moon: can rot

[Ebenezer]

He's coming off a sports hernia injury and surgery. Bills medical staff have not been able to determine how well he's healed. Bills FO and coaches have no clue to his conditioning level. So some you want to just throw money at him without knowing the above information? Thank goodness you guys are not the GM :phew:

1) Peters reports
2) Gets medically evaluated
3) conditioning evaluated
4) Peters works with the team
5) Peters' contract addressed in Nov/Dec/or before next offseason

Otherwise his :moon: can rot
:goodpost:

[Philagape]

Obviously, a medical exam must come first. That should go without saying.

[Ebenezer]

Obviously, a medical exam must come first. That should go without saying.
Then it is on Peters to put up...until then there is zero reason to complain about the Bills actions (or lack thereof). Next.

[yordad]

Are you going to count the Toronto money upfront too then?

is the Toronto expirement NOT designed to keep the Bills not only in Buffalo, but also "viable" ???

HOw is the team gonig to be "viable" when our best free agents ANNUALLY walk away from the team and we have to draft their replacements, year after year?

and how are we viable when a stud, elite, 26-year old PRO BOWL left tackle is making less than half of what the market value for a player of his ability and position are making?

HIs extension was given two years ago, and that's when he was a developing left tackle. Since then, he became ON the field, not by "rep" arguably as good as any LT in the NFL.

Pay the ****ing guy what he deserves.I am not entirely sure, but I think I have identified the source of your frustration. No offense, but I don't think you are as familiar with cash to cap as you think you are.

If the Bills make 100 times the money they do now, it doesn't matter. If they implement cash to cap, and use it all the way to the cap, they will spend the same amount of money as everyone else. The Toronto income does not increase the cap space ( I really hope you weren't trying to say it did).

With a cap in place, in the end, every team will spend the same amount, provided they spend all the way to the cap.

If the Bills extend Peters, and give him the 30 + million guaranteed money he wants, the Bills will not amortize (spread it out over the length of the contract) and mortgage the future. Their choices are, count it against the cap this year, or count it against future years. Either way, at some point it is all counted against the cap, so every team spends the same. It is just a matter of spending future cap dollars now, or waiting til the future to actually spend it.

By this method, the Bills will never have dead cap space, and never be in "salary cap hell". The only way to kill your cap space is to not spend it at all.

Being that the Bills are 30 million under the cap, if they give Peters his 30 million, Crowell and Evans get nothing. There will be nothing left for them because all 30 will count against the cap this year.

Get it? If not, or if you think I am wrong, feel free to read this (http://www.buffalobills.com/news/news.jsp?news_id=4621). It is straight from the source, and I have been wrong before.

For this reason, the Bills simply cannot afford to extend a player who is ALREADY extended. They have that money tied up already, and they are talking to Evans, who had the decency to show up.

Peters probably isn't showing up or talking out of shame. Shame on him for trying to screw the team, his temamates and the fans! Fork that.

[yordad]

Only if he makes a career leap comparable to going from a prospect RT to an All-Pro LT. That's quite a leap, so I'd have to imagine no.He can take it up with the agent who worked his first deal. No one made him sign then.

[Philagape]

Then it is on Peters to put up...until then there is zero reason to complain about the Bills actions (or lack thereof). Next.

The Bills can say, "Sure, we'll pay up IF you're medically cleared."

Jeez, that was easy.

[Philagape]

Being that the Bills are 30 million under the cap, if they give Peters his 30 million, Crowell and Evans get nothing. There will be nothing left for them because all 30 will count against the cap this year.

Under cash to cap, when can the Bills EVER give out 30 million up front? And where did it say he wants that much (in a way the Bills would count all this year)?

[clumping platelets]

Obviously, a medical exam must come first. That should go without saying.


Does he not need to report first then? :shakeno:

[clumping platelets]

Bills do not exclusively use "cash to cap"

[yordad]

Under cash to cap, when can the Bills EVER give out 30 million up front? And where did it say he wants that much (in a way the Bills would count all this year)?When can the Bills give out 30 million? When they have thirty million in cash to cap. When will they? My guess is next year if Peters shuts up and plays.

How much do you think Peters wants? I read it somewhere, but it was speculation. And to me, it sounds like valid speculation. Feel free to add your speculation, I would be interested in hearing what you figure the figures will be.

Again, I could be interpreting something wrong. I am kind of waiting for clump to chyme in.

[yordad]

Bills do not exclusively use "cash to cap"If Peters signed something crazy like a 7 year, 70 million deal with 30 million guaranteed, how much do you speculate would go against this year's cap?

[Philagape]

Does he not need to report first then? :shakeno:

See above. There's lots the Bills can say first to entice him, with a medical stipulation.

[Philagape]

When can the Bills give out 30 million? When they have thirty million in cash to cap. When will they? My guess is next year if Peters shuts up and plays.

How much do you think Peters wants? I read it somewhere, but it was speculation. And to me, it sounds like valid speculation. Feel free to add your speculation, I would be interested in hearing what you figure the figures will be.

Again, I could be interpreting something wrong. I am kind of waiting for clump to chyme in.

That would require much looking up stuff, and I'm at work

[clumping platelets]

See above. There's lots the Bills can say first to entice him, with a medical stipulation.


so you would cave in to his demands? You then set up the team for the same problem with multiple players for years to come :shakeno:

[clumping platelets]

If Peters signed something crazy like a 7 year, 70 million deal with 30 million guaranteed, how much do you speculate would go against this years cap.


$10 million cap hit


HUGE guaranteed money is rarely all paid in the first yr of a contract

[yordad]

$10 million cap hit


HUGE guaranteed money is rarely all paid in the first yr of a contractSo you speculate it would be completely amortized over the life of the deal? How is that cash to cap at all?

I read this on BB.com (link above)...

"As an example, if a free agent player was signed to a five-year contract with a $5 million signing bonus, the guaranteed money would count only $1 million towards the salary cap because the signing bonus is amortized over the life of the deal. But the Bills view that as a $5 million dollar expenditure this year because they have chosen to deal in real cash dollars."

[clumping platelets]

$10 million cap hit can be broken down in many ways

$9 million roster and $1 million salary = $10 million cap hit and $10 million "cash to cap"

$7 million roster bonus, $1 million salary, and $12 million signing bonus (spread over 6 yrs) = $10 million cap hit and $20 million "cash to cap"


Many ways to massage the numbers

[Philagape]

so you would cave in to his demands? You then set up the team for the same problem with multiple players for years to come :shakeno:

How many times do I have to answer the precedent issue before people stop asking me?

[yordad]

$10 million cap hit can be broken down in many ways

$9 million roster and $1 million salary = $10 million cap hit and $10 million "cash to cap"

$7 million roster bonus, $1 million salary, and $12 million signing bonus (spread over 6 yrs) = $10 million cap hit and $20 million "cash to cap"


Many ways to massage the numbersMan, apparently I'm lost. Wouldn't that be amortizing? I was under the impression they would back load the salary, and count all the bonuses up front.

[clumping platelets]

"Cash to cap" does not mean an end of amortizing signing bonuses. It only means that the Bills (and many other teams) put a limit on their spending for players that's approx. equal to their adjusted salary cap. For the Bills, that would be just slightly less than $130 million.

All the major deals the Bills have given out have had a mixture of roster and signing/option bonuses

[clumping platelets]

How many times do I have to answer the precedent issue before people stop asking me?


One more time because I get :dizzy: reading each post :D

[yordad]

Many ways to massage the numbersDoes that mean they could realistically Extend Crowell, Evans, and Peters without compromising their policy? Or, if you are free (because this may require a somewhat extensive response), to what lengths would their policy have to be compromised? And, to your knowledge, how does that compromising of the policy compare to past recent years' compromises?

I know I am asking a detailed opinion, so you might be apprehensive or hesitant (or too busy)to give it, but what do you think it would take to extend all three, and how would you project that to effect our current and future cap situation?

[patmoran2006]

bottom line is if they dont extend Crowell and Evans its because they can't agree on a deal or they dont' want to.

As for Peters, it's pretty simple. If they don't redo his deal, its because they will choose not too.

What's more obvious than anything is that finance isn't an issue on ANY of this.. Its the Bills brass determining what they are worth versus what the player and their agent(s) thinks.

[clumping platelets]

Does that mean they could realistically Extend Crowell, Evans, and Peters without compromising their policy? Or, if you are free (because this may require a somewhat extensive response), to what lengths would their policy have to be compromised? And, to your knowledge, how does that compromising of the policy compare to past recent years' compromises?

I know I am asking a detailed opinion, so you might be apprehensive or hesitant (or too busy)to give it, but what do you think it would take to extend all three, and how would you project that to effect our current and future cap situation?

Simple answer is :nod:

I'm at work, so the rest will hafta wait :rockon:

[clumping platelets]

bottom line is if they dont extend Crowell and Evans its because they can't agree on a deal or they dont' want to.

As for Peters, it's pretty simple. If they don't redo his deal, its because they will choose not too.

What's more obvious than anything is that finance isn't an issue on ANY of this.. Its the Bills brass determining what they are worth versus what the player and their agent(s) thinks.


Very true but that doesn't mean the Bills FO needs to cave in to Peters or his agent without Peters' participation

[coastal]

Ever stop and think that the Bills don't have the operating cash on hand for a big payout?

They may already have cash on hand earmarked for Lee Evans at this point and have to wait for additional income (TV or ticket) to come in.

Sure, they can always get a line of credit, but the juice on millions of $$$ adds up quickly.

I think people readily forget that this is a business and there is a difference between operating income and what is shown on an income statement.

[clumping platelets]

They can structure a contract to accomodate cash flow issues

[coastal]

They can structure a contract to accomodate cash flow issuesI realize that, but the Bills may have already commited themselves to a certain business plan that elliminates the possiblity of a big payout to Jason until either well into the year, or even after it.

I can guarantee that whatever plans are in place that cash flow is part of that equation.

My point was that this situation is not as simple as...

good football player = new contract.

Or do I need some sort of a stamp before I can start talking about the business aspects of the NFL and the Bills?

[Philagape]

Almost all signing bonuses are given out during the offseason, so I would think NFL teams are prepared for it. I can't imagine it depends on future income. Plus, there's revenue sharing too. I assume the system is set up so offseason expenses don't depend on the upcoming season.

[coastal]

Almost all signing bonuses are given out during the offseason, so I would think NFL teams are prepared for it. I can't imagine it depends on future income. Plus, there's revenue sharing too. I assume the system is set up so offseason expenses don't depend on the upcoming season.You are probably more than correct and I think it would therefore be a safe bet that Jason wasn't in this past offseason's plans and that is where this all started.

[clumping platelets]

I realize that, but the Bills may have already commited themselves to a certain business plan that elliminates the possiblity of a big payout to Jason until either well into the year, or even after it.

I can guarantee that whatever plans are in place that cash flow is part of that equation.

My point was that this situation is not as simple as...

good football player = new contract.

Or do I need some sort of a stamp before I can start talking about the business aspects of the NFL and the Bills?


This situation is simple:

New agent wants to be paid.

Until Peters' agent negotiates a new deal, he doesn't get his share. Peters' present contract was negotiated by a different agent who rec'd payment for his services.

[DrGraves]

you know what the bills showed in this whole peters thing, THE BILLS ARE DUMB AS ****. you have a ton of cap space, sign your best player and get him on the field.

[clumping platelets]

you know what the bills showed in this whole peters thing, THE BILLS ARE DUMB AS ****. you have a ton of cap space, sign your best player and get him on the field.



Peters' has a contract

[Meathead]

Phil, I don't got out of my way to disagree with you, but it seems to happen a lot.
welcome

[Ebenezer]

That would require much looking up stuff, and I'm at work
that was your excuse for not answering my Sabres challenge...hard to debate with somebody who wants the debate their way but doesn't want to put time into dealing with facts.

[clumping platelets]

:popcorn:

[Ebenezer]

you know what the bills showed in this whole peters thing, THE BILLS ARE DUMB AS ****. you have a ton of cap space, sign your best player and get him on the field.
they already extended him and gave him a raise....should they cave to his demands again? not knowing that he is even healthy? and if he make the probowl and does this again next year?

[Ebenezer]

Peters' has a contract
and a good one...as you said, we have no clue if this guy is any where near training camp shape...the surgery may have been a complete botch job. until he reports, answers a phone or even sends a smoke signal there is nothing the bills can do....how many employers would beg an employee, who has a contract which was extended at the employers bequest, to come back?