Bills LT Peters Continues Holdout, to be Fined
The Buffalo Bills' three-day mandatory mini camp began Wednesday with their best offensive player purposely missing the action.
Pro Bowl left tackle Jason Peters, who earlier this month missed voluntary workouts in a not-so-subtle attempt to prove his displeasure over his contract, has now extended his holdout to the team's mandatory workouts. For his actions, Peters will be fined for each day he misses mini-camp practices; the left tackle could be out $8,638 by week's end.
Peters is dissatisfied with a five-year, $20.1 million deal he signed in 2006, a mere half a season after Peters broke into the starting lineup as the team's right tackle. Scheduled to make $3.25 million in 2008, Peters is attempting to leverage his 2007 Pro Bowl berth into a contract that will make him the highest-paid lineman in Buffalo. Currently, left guard Derrick Dockery and right tackle Langston Walker - both signed to lucrative deals last off-season - make more than Peters.
Said head coach Dick Jauron:
"Jason is not here so he will be fined. I am surprised by it. I thought Jason would be at our mandatory minicamp, but it's a decision he's made and he'll be fined."
In Peters' absence, newly promoted offensive coordinator Turk Schonert may be prepared to make drastic moves to replace his best lineman. That preparation may include giving the 6'8", 366-pound Walker reps on QB Trent Edwards' blind side. Walker has never played the position at the NFL level, but Schonert confirmed that playing Walker at LT is a serious consideration at this point:
“We’ve got to be prepared like [Peters is] not going to be here, and that’s the way we’re going to operate in training camp. Hopefully, we’ll see him soon, sooner rather than later, but we’ve got to plan like he’s not here, because he’s not.”
The messy gets messier in Buffalo. If push comes to shove - and it just might - the Bills have to pay the man. Without Peters, Buffalo's offense goes from mediocre to pitiful, especially if RB Marshawn Lynch misses any time. At some point, the team needs to take measures to keep its best players on the field - especially offensively. Trent Edwards isn't going to do any growing if his RB is suspended and his LT is voluntarily sacrificing paychecks, after all.
0 recs |
16
comments
Read Related
Comments
Since the coaches
seem to be tapping Walker on the shoulder, then I say Walker.
by Joe P. on Jun 11, 2008 9:10 PM EDT 0 recs
Really? You’re not petrified by the thought of having a guy who constantly needed help on the right side last year protecting Edwards’ blind side? I know I am…
Ron From NM’s answer to this poll question intrigues me…
by Brian Galliford on
Jun 11, 2008 9:13 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I agree,, Walker on the left side scares me as well. I voted for Murphy because he might have the athleticism to play over there I know he has no experience, but of the 3 choices, he at least might have the physical ability to pull it off. You never know, they may turn him into an all-pro too. But hopefully they will get something done with Peters and it won’t come to having to find a replacement.
by fletcherjd on
Jun 11, 2008 10:16 PM EDT
up
0 recs
If they think Fowler is good enough,
then why would Walker be any different? If they really want the best LT, then stop dancing with Peters and pay the man!!! Stupid is as stupid does.
by Joe P. on
Jun 11, 2008 10:44 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Sounds like Chambers
got the nod a LT today. It really doesn’t matter to me. With Fowler in the line up, we can’t afford a drop off at another O-line position. None of these players can play at Peter’s level this season. The drop off in talent + lack of continuity = crappy offense again in 2008.
by Joe P. on
Jun 11, 2008 11:07 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I held my nose....
....and voted for Chambers. He didn’t do horribly in limited action, but there’s not enough data to suggest that he’d be anything more than a stop-gap.
by Ron From NM on
Jun 11, 2008 11:22 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Peters deserves it
Jason Peters is one of the few high level players who’s Id say deserves a better contract than he has. I say this is one of the player we should just give in to and give em the money he deserves
"Where else would you rather be than right here, right now?"
by ArenZimm on Jun 11, 2008 9:19 PM EDT 0 recs
Punt
Is there a 4th choice for the poll?
Neither Chambers nor Murphy has a track record on which we can judge them. One of them might make everyone say, “Jason Who?” That’s just not the smart way to bet…
Walker will almost certainly have even greater need for assistance on the left side than he has needed on the right. Teams typically put their best pass rusher against the left tackle. Walker is a big guy and isn’t at his best when faced with speed rushers….the kind of guys RDEs he’d face at LT. Besides, this is a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Peters and Dock form a solid left while Butler and Walker form a solid right. (You’ll note I didn’t say spectacular for either side of the line.) If Buffalo has a drop off at any of the positions currently manned by those 4 guys the running game will be a shambles. Defenses will be free to cheat towards the side with the two starters. After all, the Bills can’t run up the middle so long as Fowler (or Preston for that matter) is the starting center so the run has to go either right or left. If one side has a good lineman and some guy it’s a good bet the Bills will run the other way. If Buffalo does move Walker to LT look for Butler to spend a lot of time pulling—leaving Fowler and whomever to try to at least get in the way of the backside pursuit.
Maybe this is wishful thinking but I really don’t see the worst case happening. Peters doesn’t have a tremendous amount of leverage. Buffalo can just sit on his contract for the next several years (particularly since Peters wouldn’t be getting paid if he didn’t play) while Peters gets older. As we’ve discussed with Bentley, Peters won’t hit the free agent market for a couple of years. Who is going to throw stupid money at an ingrate malcontent who has spent the past couple of years sitting on his hands? My guess is that Peters makes his point, the Bills forgive however much in fines he racks up and some new incentive clauses are added to his contract.
This does, by the way, throw into stark relief just how screwed Buffalo is if Peters, Dock, Butler or Walker gets injured.
by Ron From NM on Jun 11, 2008 11:20 PM EDT 0 recs
great point about right defensive ends
Here is the list of all the RDEs (and OLBs in 3-4 defenses) the Bills will have to face this season.
Seattle – Daryl Tapp
Jax – Reggie Hayward / Derrick Harvey
Oakland – Derrick Burgess
St. louis – Chris Long
Arizona – Bertrand Berry / Chike Okafor
San Diego – Shawne Merriman / Shaun Phillips
Miami – Jason Taylor/Joey Porter
NY Jets – Calvin Pace/Vernon Gholston
New England – Mike Vrabel/Adalius Thomas
Cleveland – Kamerion Wimbley
Kansas City – Tambi Hali (I’m assuming KC will move him over to the right side)
San Francisco – Manny Lawson / Tully Banta-Cain
Denver – Jarvis Moss / Elvis Dumervil / John Engleberger
That is a pretty impressive list of speedy pass rushers. The Bills will have no choice but to put whoever the best pass blocker is at left tackle if Peters doesn’t play. I also just realized that the Bills will play 9 of their games against 3-4 defenses this season. That doesn’t include Arizona which I guess technically plays a 4-3, but uses 3-4 personnel quite often.
by kaisertown on
Jun 12, 2008 1:38 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Pay the Man!!!
Its def. not good when your best player holds out of mandatory events. Dont you think the head coach should have at least tried to get a hold of Peters some time during the offseason, I mean he is one of the best LT in the entire league, and just entering his prime and still getting better, dont you think it would be prudent for the head coach to atleast speak to him once. On the other hand the fact that the Bills took a chance with him and molded him into a probowler, its seems pretty selfish to take the road that he currently is. I know NFL contracts are not guaranteed, what happens if he gets injured? The Bills renewed Schobels contract despite him having a few years left on his contact, so that he would make more than Kelsay, then why cant Peters be compensated for his contribution, he is clearly the best OL on the team and should be paid accordingly, its a double edged sword, and i hope this will be resolved sooner than later, what would this do in terms of team chemistry and attitude towards the front office from the players perspective. PAY THE MAN before he becomes disguntled and chooses not to return to Buffalo.
by Hassanali181 on Jun 12, 2008 2:51 AM EDT 0 recs
Fines
Brian, I thought that he could only get fined the $8,000+ for missing the 3 days, not $8k for each of the days.
by gatornation on Jun 12, 2008 10:00 AM EDT 0 recs
You’re correct. That’s my mistake, I misread the article. They can fine him that amount for missing one or all – so if they fined him $8K yesterday, they can’t technically fine him for the next two days.
by Brian Galliford on
Jun 12, 2008 11:15 AM EDT
up
0 recs
What?
You mean this guy is earning $3.25 million this coming season and he can’t wait his turn behind Lee Evans and Angelo Crowell? What in the world is wrong with Peters? I’ll tell you – he’s being selfish. Yes, he went to the Pro Bowl, and yes, he has a world of upside and talent, I’m not debating that at all.
Peters signed a contract in 2005 that was apparently good enough for him then. Is it too much to ask that he wait a season before getting into a messy contract dispute with the team? Or is he selfish enough to risk disrupting the team chemistry that the Bills have been attempting to recapture for the first time in about 15 years? I’m sorry if $3.25 million ain’t enough for Jason to live on for one year. I’d sure take it in a New York minute if it was me. That’s probably more than I’ll earn in my whole career, Mr. Peters. Let’s get a little perspective here. When is enough money enough?
My suggestion: suck it up, play lights out this season, and then you can start making a case for a new contract after Lee and Angelo are taken care of.
Get the Bills back to the big game!
by Blitz on Jun 12, 2008 11:59 AM EDT 0 recs
Well
He can respond by saying he’s the better player, which he is, by FAR. He’s been an All-Pro and to the Pro Bowl, which neither Evans nor Crowell has done.
I don’t see anything wrong with him wanting to secure his long term future (though he should have done that already with his last deal) and getting a deal that is fair for his talent/production level. I just don’t like that he’s skipping OTA’s to do so.
I wish that Jauron and the FO would reach out to him. It sounds as if there has been ZERO communication at this point. Maybe they should make it clear to him that they want to get Evans’ deal done first before re-doing his deal, as his contract will be up after the year. I just don’t know if he wants to hear that he wouldn’t be the top priority and I can kind of understand that.
~K
by Kurupt on
Jun 12, 2008 12:05 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I can certainly agree
that the FO should clarify their position if they haven’t done so already. I think they’re a litlle skittish about restructuring Peter’s deal with the CBA situation becoming uncertain in 2 more years. All the same, a restructuring wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing. To complain about the contract he signed in 2005 with 2 years left on it just kind of reminds me of the kid who budges in front of you in the lunch line when you’ve been patiently waiting. So far, Evans and Crowell have been pretty good about keeping their contract situations discreet and private (as much as that is possible in this day & age). I don’t think it’s fair to them for someone else to be wanting more money when it’s their turn.
Get the Bills back to the big game!
by Blitz on
Jun 12, 2008 2:40 PM EDT
up
0 recs
they reworked schobels contract to avoid any dispute between him and Kelsays contract that he received, then why cant they rework Peters’s contract dont you think he noticed that and is probably expecting the same, He has outperformed his entire line and is the most valuable player on the team, why will they not renegotiate.
by Hassanali181 on Jun 12, 2008 3:22 PM EDT 0 recs

















