For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

[HHURRICANE]

For those who don't understand the damage of not re-signing Peters to a new deal let me give you my thoughts:

1) If we trade Peters the best we are looking at is maybe a 1st and a 3rd. That's the absolute best case. This year we got McKlevin and Ellis. Does McKlevin and Ellis = Peters? No.

2) The liklihood that a team is willing to give a 1st round pick that's top 5 and the Bills are willing to negotiate the enormous contract for a top 5 is shall we say less than 2%.

3) Usually when a team trades a top player, like Stroud, it's because they have another player that is pushing the position. When did Kirk Chambers not suck?

4) Who is out there that sin't quite as good as Peters but better than Chambers? What's his contract going to be? Are we saving that much money?

5) Peters is not a lazy bum. He's a hard worker who actually enjoys being a Bill. The players respect him. The sad part is that the team treats it's FAs better than the players they actually sign out of college.

I watched our o-line suck monkey balls for years. We finally have a solid line. Add a Birk to the Center psoition and maybe we have on of the best lines in football.

Bruce Smith was our greatest Bill ever and he was 5 times the pain in the butt that Peters is. People forget that Bruce missed a Superbowl because of a "virus".

If you don't want to be a loser than you keep the best players you have. Like it or not he is the Bills best player.

[acehole]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

It begs other questions...

Can we find another Gem in the late rounds and develope him?

Are we a contender next year or are we not?

What is the offer?

The answer is if we dont want to meet his number which I suspect we don't.... Yes...even though it may hurt our team short term.

The answer is we are not a contenders...and we may not be for 1-3 years.

So yea a first and a second start to look good to a team that gets most of its talent from the draft....and we can trade down and turn those into 3-5 guys potentially and if the guy doesnt want to be here or play for scraps then yes.....get what you can for him.

I hope we keep him he is a great story for us.

But reality is reality.

For those who don't understand the damage of not re-signing Peters to a new deal let me give you my thoughts:

1) If we trade Peters the best we are looking at is maybe a 1st and a 3rd. That's the absolute best case. This year we got McKlevin and Ellis. Does McKlevin and Ellis = Peters? No.

2) The liklihood that a team is willing to give a 1st round pick that's top 5 and the Bills are willing to negotiate the enormous contract for a top 5 is shall we say less than 2%.

3) Usually when a team trades a top player, like Stroud, it's because they have another player that is pushing the position. When did Kirk Chambers not suck?

4) Who is out there that sin't quite as good as Peters but better than Chambers? What's his contract going to be? Are we saving that much money?

5) Peters is not a lazy bum. He's a hard worker who actually enjoys being a Bill. The players respect him. The sad part is that the team treats it's FAs better than the players they actually sign out of college.

I watched our o-line suck monkey balls for years. We finally have a solid line. Add a Birk to the Center psoition and maybe we have on of the best lines in football.

Bruce Smith was our greatest Bill ever and he was 5 times the pain in the butt that Peters is. People forget that Bruce missed a Superbowl because of a "virus".

If you don't want to be a loser than you keep the best players you have. Like it or not he is the Bills best player.

[bigbub2352]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

We have so much cap space according to Chris Brown 25 mil under cap
You sign this guy and make the problem go away, we have way to many other wholes to fill
Sick of developing talent for the rest of the league and signing the wrong players all the time like Denney and Schobel

[acehole]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

We have so much cap space according to Chris Brown 25 mil under cap
You sign this guy and make the problem go away, we have way to many other wholes to fill
Sick of developing talent for the rest of the league and signing the wrong players all the time like Denney and Schobel

Good pionts for sure...but we are the Buffalo Bills.

We dont really make sense here.....

[madness]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

I really don't think Peters is going anywhere. There's too many holes on this team to worry about another one. I also think Ralph is going to try to plug as many holes as he can so there won't be any excuses for Jauron next year. Trading Peters would be a step back, not forward.

[RockStar36]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

Why are there 8 million threads about Peters getting traded? Who said he was going to be traded? Last time I checked, he is under contract. The Bills FO also told him that they are willing to re-negotiate at the end of the season. The off-season is a long process. Why don't we let this rest for a few weeks.

[Tatonka]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

11.5 sacks given up. 3 that could have absolutely killed our ****ty qb.

yeah.. make him the highest paid player on the team.

[Tatonka]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

11.5 half sacks was the number that langston walker gave up his last year in oakland when everyone said he sucked ass... fyi.

[patmoran2006]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

He'll be dealt with this offseason. He'll be offered a new deal, its a question of whether he accepts.

I would draw a hard line with him. He DEFINITELY deserves a raise, LT is a premium position and like it or not, he's one of the top half-dozen LT's in the league, not to mention young and just hitting his prime.

But if he thinks he's getting/deserves a $9-10 million per year deal, he'll end up getting traded before that happens in Buffalo.

And I dont think he deserves $9 million per year either, btw.

[HHURRICANE]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

Why are there 8 million threads about Peters getting traded? Who said he was going to be traded? Last time I checked, he is under contract. The Bills FO also told him that they are willing to re-negotiate at the end of the season. The off-season is a long process. Why don't we let this rest for a few weeks.

Because even the local paper is concerned that they won't be able to come to terms with him.

[patmoran2006]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

11.5 sacks given up. 3 that could have absolutely killed our ****ty qb.

yeah.. make him the highest paid player on the team.

While I agree with your sentiment, you watched all the games, and Peters was HIGHLY scrutinzed.. And the sacks given up stat mUST be flawed. I dont remember giving up anything close to 13 sacks.

Maybe a DE lined up near him, stunted up the middle or something and got the QB and it does on Peters.. I dont know the formula.

But your smart enough to know as well as I there was no way Peters gave up 11. 5 sacks. I can think of 4-5 games where he was utterly dominant.

Id say 7-8 is a more likely number.

its kind of like tackles.. If you go to bills.com, yahoo sports or nfl.com you'll get a different number of tackles for every defender.

[Tatonka]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

i know he didnt give up 11.5 sacks all on his own.

i do know that he played average to below average in a lot of games.. and you dont make a player the highest paid player on your team if he plays average at all at any time.

peters is not worth the money he thinks he is. and he has grown cocky and his head has swelled up. he thinks he is much better than he actually is.. he is not walter jones in his prime. he is not anthony munoz. he is a sometimes dominant, sometimes average, lazy OT.

[Tatonka]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

and let me say this. i dont think he needs to be traded. and i agree he should get paid more.. but like pat said, not anywhere close to 9 mill a year.

i offer him in the range of 5years 40 mill, and if he scoffs at it.. let him rot for 2 years.

[patmoran2006]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

i know he didnt give up 11.5 sacks all on his own.

i do know that he played average to below average in a lot of games.. and you dont make a player the highest paid player on your team if he plays average at all at any time.

peters is not worth the money he thinks he is. and he has grown cocky and his head has swelled up. he thinks he is much better than he actually is.. he is not walter jones in his prime. he is not anthony munoz. he is a sometimes dominant, sometimes average, lazy OT.

Agreed. I said aint no way he's worth $9-10 million per year and I'd deal him before paying him that much.

But two clear facts remain.

1- In comparison to other LT's around the league, he's grossly underpaid.. To be only the third highest paid OL on your own team is a joke (in more ways than one), which leads to two.

2- He may not be as good as he thinks he is (agreed), but he is clearly the best OL on THIS team.

he deserves a raise. but not $9-10 million per year.

[HAMMER]

Re: For those who don't understand the damage by not re-signing Peters.

Peters doesn't deserve a raise, he gave up too many game changing sacks and his attitude sucks.