With Butler Signed, Priority Must Be Peters

by Brian Galliford on Jun 26, 2008 12:31 AM EDT in Opinion

Butler the third lineman on long-term deal (Photo Source)

Well, this isn't exactly what we had in mind, front office executives of the Buffalo Bills. But kudos.

On Wednesday, the Bills made a significant move in locking up one of their young offensive linemen with a long-term contract. No, it wasn't Pro Bowl left tackle Jason Peters, who missed every spring workout in a contract dispute. Instead, it was third-year starting right guard Brad Butler who received the contract extension; like the Bills did with Peters in 2005 - before he ever made the switch from right to left tackle - the Bills have locked up one of their young, budding stars on the line for the foreseeable future.

Terms of Butler's new deal were not disclosed; these things usually are made public in some fashion given time, so we'll continue to search for terms of the contract and will report them here when available.

Although Rotoworld sees this Butler signing as a clear indication that he was a "bigger priority" than Peters, that's not necessarily true. In fact, it's far more likely that Butler was merely the easier priority at this point in time; it's much easier to sign a player to a contract extension if that player wasn't necessarily expecting it, and if the player isn't holding out for a new deal.

Regardless of the order of priority, re-signing Butler was an excellent move for the Bills to make at this juncture. Not just because Butler is a superb young run blocker with the potential to become a long-term mainstay at right guard. Not just because with tackle experience, Butler could also move outside in a pinch. No, this was a great move because it gives the Bills three solid linemen - Butler, guard Derrick Dockery and tackle Langston Walker - who will be Bills at least for the next four years. Continuity along the offensive line is rare in today's NFL, and the Bills will have 60% of their current starting line for a significant chunk of time.

But now, Butler's out of the way. To that end, 60% of the line is out of the way. There's mounting pressure now on the organization - if there wasn't already - to get a new deal for Peters done. Principles matter not in this issue - whether Peters should be asking for a new contract is now beside the point. The Bills have a good thing going on their line. If they lose Peters for even a few training camp practices, they're risking undoing all the good they've done by inking their other three linemen to long-term deals.

The time to act is now - with a month to go before training camp starts, expect the Bills to do plenty of negotiating over the next month. Not only is Peters holding out, but WR Lee Evans and LB Angelo Crowell are expecting new deals as well (both are free agents after the 2008 season). The team still has seven rookies to sign to new deals, including two - CB Leodis McKelvin and WR James Hardy - who are expected to play significant roles as rookies. That's ten contracts at a maximum that may be handed out relatively soon.

But in terms of long-term importance, Peters takes the prize. Franchise left tackles don't grow on trees, but the Bills got theirs in the form of an undrafted free agent tight end with a dash of elbow grease. I'll reiterate: whether Peters should be asking for an extension is now beside the point. He's the best offensive player on this team, and if the Bills let him sit out to prove their point, it hurts them on multiple levels. Get him signed. When that happens, the line is set to be a solid one for a long time.

0 recs | Comment 23 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The last paragraph is so true.

I know I’m not willing to do the work, and I might not even be capable of doing so anyway. But, I have a “what if” question I’m hoping someone can answer. Let’s assume they will extend Peters before training camp to a boatload of money. Doesn’t matter if it’s 8, 9, 10 a year whatever. Let’s just assume that it long term (5/6 years).

Would this put the Bills in position as having the most continued OL in the NFL over the course of the next four years (assuming Walker just plays out his contract, and assuming Butler’s extension is at least that?) I would think that having 4 of 5 quality OL guys locked up for at least the next four years together would be the envy of OCs everywhere.

by krytime on Jun 26, 2008 1:33 AM EDT 0 recs

Not quite

The Giants just signed Snee for a six-year extension. They’ve also signed extensions to their LT and LG this offseason, so the entire Giants line is signed through 2012. Now that is continuity.

Snee signed for a six-year, $43.5 million extension, with $24 million of that in the first three years. He’s the same age as Peters, and both are the best player on their line, even if Snee is a guard. So I’d say this kind of money is being considered…

by Krenn on Jun 26, 2008 9:28 AM EDT up 0 recs

Has Peters even officially asked for a new contract yet? Seems like a whole lot of silence going on.

And it could be ominous. As we all know the last we all saw of on the training field was him limping into the training room.

by Thronsen on Jun 26, 2008 6:15 AM EDT 0 recs

Jauron more clever than smart? Don't think so.

Unless Jauron is way more clever than smart, Peters’ issue is money, not injury.

With a player that valuable, I would assume the Bills would know one way or the other, even if the coach supposedly hasn’t talked to Peters. Bet you one of the front office guys has talked to one of Jason’s guys and they pretty much know what the score is, even if they don’t want to let the public know up front. The Bills are typically very closed-mouth about contract negotiations until the deal is done, which is a good policy – not to negotiate in the press – but drives me crazy.

Royal, Evans, Spencer Johnson were all hurt and made it to camp for individual drills or at least a dip in the jacuzzi in the training room.

I think Peters injury is a sports hernia and I read that the recovery time for that is pretty quick.
What is a sports hernia, anyway?

by Defensewinsgames on Jun 26, 2008 9:04 AM EDT up 0 recs

sports hernia

Is a series of small tears in the lower abdominal muscles. These tears can allow the internal organs to shift a little bit which causes pain in the stomach and groin.

It is called a “sports” hernia because the tears occur due to repetive movements. Soccer, hockey and tennis players regularly experience groin pain from constantly twisting and turning. Peters probably suffered the injury from getting up out of his stance so many times as well as twisting his body around while blocking.

Treatment is typically rest and recovery time varies depending on how severe the tears are. An offseason should be more than enough time for somebody who didn’t require surgery.

by kaisertown on Jun 26, 2008 12:40 PM EDT up 0 recs

Why is the front office putting themselves in binds like this?

For the second straight year we have a Pro Bowler wanting a new deal with many years on his contract. Last year Schobel, this year Peters.

It’s a strong possibility that Schobel wanted more money because of the excessive deal that was given to Kelsay. The front office basically gave Schobel the ammunition to ask for a new deal.

Now we have a similar situation brewing. Butler was given a new deal with 2 years left on his deal. Peters can now argue that in any negotiations.

Seems to me the FO sets itself up a little bit for these contract squabbles. Anyone else see that?

BTW, I like the Butler resigning though. Good young player that’ll be around for a long time. I just don’t know that right now was the best time to do it…

by Kurupt on Jun 26, 2008 10:55 AM EDT 0 recs

the holdout

Is it really all that important for the Bills to get Peters signed before training camp starts? I don’t see what long term damage can be done by playing hard ball with Peters and getting his asking price down. I would rather the Bills give Peters a 6 year 50 mil contract on August 20th than see them sign him for 7 years 70 mil tomorrow.

Holdouts are common in the NFL. Players know that this is a business and nobody is going to get their feelings hurt if Peters, with three years left on his contract, doesn’t get a new one before training camp starts. Peters doesn’t need the practice, he played with the same center and left guard last season as he will this season.

Other than the Bills not getting Peters signed at all (which obviously would be a catastrophe), what specifically could go wrong if the team lets this drag out awhile?

by kaisertown on Jun 26, 2008 12:42 PM EDT 0 recs

Do extensions even matter anymore

After this whole deal with Peters refusing to honor his contract how can I be asked to get excited about Butlers deal? Seeing what happened with Peters, and if Butler keeps getting better and eventually turns into a top guard, why should I think he won’t just hold out in a few seasons and demand more money like Peters?

McKelvin and Hardy - rookies of the year

by poz on Jun 26, 2008 1:14 PM EDT 0 recs

Exactly.

The world has changed on us, Poz. The deal is: if the player outperforms his contract, he and his agent have every right to renegotiate, no matter how much time is left on the contract. Training camp holdouts are one tactic of negotiation, essentially a one-man strike. Not so different from a CEO holding his board hostage for a big raise when the company does well.

If the player performs below what the contract envisioned when he and the team signed, the reality is the team can bench him, trade him or cut him with zero notice. Of course, even without incentives, NFL players are very well paid bench-warmers, and even guys who end a poor career still make excellent money while playing, by the average working man’s standards. I get your point that it’s hard to have a lot of enthusiasm for a guy like Butler who very likely just became a millionaire, and may be an even wealthier man in a couple of years if he does well.

But I don’t understand the reference to Peters ``refusing to honor his contract.’’ The game (that is, the contract game) has changed. There is a lot of money in pro football, each year more money gets put on the table by fans like you and me, and these guys all want a piece of that gigantic pie. So do their agents, their lawyers, and their personalized mechandise promoters.

Get used to it.

by Defensewinsgames on Jun 26, 2008 2:05 PM EDT up 0 recs

Sure but...

I am used to it, which is why I’m not getting excited about Butlers deal. But just became the game has changed doesn’t mean Peters isn’t honoring his contract. Sure everybody wants a piece of the pie but considering that Peters has so many years left and the team showed their faith in him when he was struggling to even make a roster I think he is picking a very weasel-like time to hold out. Instead of waiting one more year to demand another contract from the team that stood by him and molded him into the Pro Bowler that he is, he is holding out in a year when he knows that Evans and Crowell are must signs orthey will be gone. He is taking advantage of the fact that Buffalo is in a bind to up the ante and the pressure and force them into making a move. That’s my opinion.

McKelvin and Hardy - rookies of the year

by poz on Jun 26, 2008 2:52 PM EDT up 0 recs

Don't you think

that there are move players than usual wanting new deals on long term contracts. Are players worried about the CBA? With the rookies getting huge contracts with so much guaranteed money, the vets seem to want more guaranteed money too. The only way they can get it is through a new deal. It reminds me of that scene in Oceans 11 where the lights come back on and everyone is grabbing as many chips as they can!!!

by Joe P. on Jun 26, 2008 5:01 PM EDT up 0 recs

Peters best offensive player?

I think that’s overstating things a bit. Peters is a good LT and better than anyone Buffalo can plug into his spot this season (stop-gap) or after this season (long term) via free agency. However, sports writers seem to like to perseverate on the occasional lesser known players as though to make themselves seem smarter than casual football fans. Peters is good, not great. Great players don’t give up on plays and Peters sometimes does. If you disagree go back and watch Lynch’s long TD run against Cincy. He had to break a tackle in the backfield because Peters didn’t even try to block the RDE…since he knew the play was going off RT.

by Ron From NM on Jun 26, 2008 6:44 PM EDT 0 recs

Pro Bowl?

To get to the Pro Bowl a LT stuck on a losing team in Buffalo wouldn’t garner many fan votes. Doesn’t that mean that opponent coaches and players thought that Peters was great enough to represent the AFC in the Pro Bowl?

McKelvin and Hardy - rookies of the year

by poz on Jun 26, 2008 7:10 PM EDT up 0 recs

Pro Bowl

Wasn’t Peters invited to the Pro Bowl after one or more other LTs backed out? I may be misremembering as I’ve had something of a long week….

Just to be clear, I’m not suggested that Peters sucks nor am I suggesting that Buffalo shouldn’t come to an arrangement with Peters that recognizes that he has outplayed his contract. He is a good LT and those are hard to find. He’s just not a lock for Canton.

by Ron From NM on Jun 26, 2008 11:15 PM EDT up 0 recs

Great players don’t give up on plays? Tell that to Randy Moss. What matters is talent and consistency. Peters is immensely talented and has gotten exponentially more consistent in a very short time span. That makes him a great player. Plus, in the fight for “best offensive player” on the team, he doesn’t exactly have much competition.

So yes… Peters is not only the Bills’ best offensive player, he’s one of the best left tackles in the league.

by Brian Galliford on Jun 26, 2008 7:35 PM EDT up 0 recs

Lynch or Evans or Peters

If you could only have one on your team which would you pick? I’d probably go with Lynch.

by Ron From NM on Jun 26, 2008 11:12 PM EDT up 0 recs

I’d definitely choose Peters out of those three. Serviceable running backs aren’t overly difficult to find, and Evans is a tad overrated in my book. Franchise left tackles are only slightly less rare than franchise quarterbacks. I’d take Peters in a heart beat.

by Brian Galliford on Jun 27, 2008 6:27 AM EDT up 0 recs

ditto on that..

by krytime on Jun 27, 2008 8:55 AM EDT up 0 recs

I don't consider Randy Moss a great player...

....specifically because he gave up on far too many plays for most of his career. He’s a great talent but that isn’t the same as being a great player.

by Ron From NM on Jun 26, 2008 11:17 PM EDT up 0 recs

really?

doesn’t being the best player at your position for almost a decade make you a great player?

by kaisertown on Jun 27, 2008 12:09 AM EDT up 0 recs

Well then the problem clearly is the definition of “great player” here. :)

by Brian Galliford on Jun 27, 2008 6:25 AM EDT up 0 recs

You know what else doesn't grow on trees?

Three years of your prime. Jason Peters has no leverage and I really could care less about his contract situation until after Evans is locked up. He gambled by signing an extension early and he lost by outgrowing his contract. Peters needs to get in line and ultimately, he will. Next year makes sense to re-negotiate an even longer contract for Buffalo’s best tackle, but this year? It’s Evans before all else. Let’s get one thing right before this horrendous offseason ends…And while we’re at it- have Bills fans exaggerated Jason Peters to some extent (article suggestion?)? Don’t get me wrong, he’s good and his potential to get better is really exciting. But face it- LT, C, and QB are probably the most important positions on offense and our offense has sucked since Peters entered the lineup. This fact is certainly not his fault, but it appears that Peters is not nearly as good as his superb reputation is at this point. If we can look critically at a very good player like Lee Evans and where he has some definite shortcomings, why is Peters a sacred cow? All and all, they’re both probably lower 1st tier, upper 2nd tier types at their position who might excel with a better supporting cast. A bad offense like Buffalo won’t get better without either of these cogs, but the difference is that Evans can leave in 2009 and Peters can in 2011.

Never forget 56-10. Revenge.

by SuperFan82 on Jun 26, 2008 9:17 PM EDT 0 recs

Peters could also leave this summer

Sure, Peters can leave in 2011. He could also leave, figuratively speaking, this summer. Take training camp off, sit out the preseason, take the first three games off, or demand to be given a new contract or else be traded. Any number of uncomfortable scenarios.
He could be a huge distraction at the very time when this team could actually be coming together for the first time in at least five years.
The Bills have got talent from three consecutive good drafts, several good players coming back from injury, a young quarterback with upside coming into his own, young players at the skill positions with promise, a consistent businesslike coaching staff. I could go on.
Take care of Peters and get down to the business of gelling as a competitive football team.

by Defensewinsgames on Jun 26, 2008 9:30 PM EDT up 0 recs