Several Bills Unsigned as Camp Prepares to Open
Twist this potential fact around in the old caboose for a moment: when the Buffalo Bills report to St. John Fisher College for 2008 training camp tomorrow, the team could be dealing with the absences of six holdouts. Repeat if necessary, but there should be impact the first time you read it.
If the Bills' lack of (public) movement on the signing front remains par for the course, Buffalo will likely be without star left tackle Jason Peters and five rookies for the start of summer practices.
Peters' situation has been well-documented - after skipping both voluntary and mandatory spring practices in a clear contract dispute, Peters was fined, but there has been no word on movement around a new deal. In fact, we've heard rumblings - and we freely admit that they're to be filed under the "rumor" category at this point - that the Bills are willing to play hard ball with Peters, who signed a five-year extension (worth $15 million) in July of 2006. Buffalo's willingness to extend Peters - who, at the time of his signing, had not yet made the switch to left tackle (Mike Gandy held that role at the time) - is believed to be a large factor in the team's stance.
The Bills set a precedent last August when they re-signed DE Aaron Schobel to a 7-year, $50.5 million deal with $21 million guarantees, even though Schobel still had three years remaining on his deal at the time of the signing. If the Bills are lucky, Peters will take a page out of the book Schobel wrote last year. Schobel missed all of the team's spring practices in 2007, but reported to training camp on time. He had a new deal by August 25, less than a month after training camp began. It's speculation, but it's not impossible to believe that a similar situation could emerge around Peters.
One other veteran seeking a contract extension - WR Lee Evans - is expected to report to camp with the rest of his teammates tomorrow. We're hearing that the Bills have been in discussions with Evans' agent on a new deal, but an extension does not appear imminent.
Four of Bills' Rookies Unsigned
Perhaps not as importantly, but just as curiously, four of Buffalo's ten drafted rookies were unsigned as of press time as well. It's likely that without NFL contracts, the agents of all four players - CB Leodis McKelvin (Round 1), WR James Hardy (Round 2), DE Chris Ellis (Round 3) and RB Xavier Omon (Round 6) - will advise their clients to stay away from camp until their deals are completed. Fifth-round linebacker Alvin Bowen agreed to terms with the club late Wednesday.
The potential absences of McKelvin, Hardy and Ellis could be crippling to their early development. All three players are expected to make heavy early contributions, and without those initial reps at training camp, they'll be playing catch-up from day one. At this point, it's hard not to be concerned about the lack of news on these ultra-important signings.
Stay tuned to Buffalo Rumblings throughout the evening, as well as throughout tomorrow's reporting day, as we'll keep you updated on signings as best we can.
0 recs |
19 comments
Comments
Peters is most worrisome
Missing a Pro Bowl LT is about as crippling as it gets to an offense. We aren’t going to fill his void with guys like Kirk Chambers or Matt Murphy. It is imperative that we get Peters into camp as soon as possible to build the line chemistry that we sorely need. We can’t go into the season hoping for the best when it comes to him. His absence effects Edwards and Lynch a great deal, and having a rusty Peters against Seattle and Jacksonville would be pretty awful. I hope something can be worked out in the next few weeks if Peters does hold out.
Of the rookies, Hardy is probably the one we need in camp the most. We have to get him up to speed to be a threat from the get-go. We need his red-zone threat immediately, and it’s important for him to build a strong rapport with Edwards in training camp and the preseason games. I doubt we’ll see Hardy, Ellis and Omon unsigned by the time camp starts Friday. I think tomorrow will see all three ink deals. There are still a TON of unsigned rookies around the league, so it’s not really a cause for concern yet….
~K
by Kurupt on Jul 23, 2008 7:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It appears you’re right on Omon. From this (Thursday) morning’s Buffalo News:
The Bills reached an agreement Wednesday with fifth-round pick Alvin Bowen, a linebacker from Iowa State. They were believed to be close to a deal with sixth-round pick Xavier Omon, a running back from Northwest Missouri State.
by Brian Galliford on Jul 24, 2008 8:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Surprised to see Hardy #1 vote getter
His deal, although not done, should be relatively soon since other WRs and draft picks very near his spot have been signed. In contrast, McKelvin has not been signed nor have others near his draft slot, or being the “top player at position”, except for players in the top 6, which is worrisome.
I see Peters working out like Schobel as Brian stated. Also, is Peters a monster or what? I love it
Protect ya neck!
by killascript on Jul 23, 2008 7:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hardy
I think that has more to do with the fact that rookie WRs tend to struggle. The more time he spends in camp the better. Thats why I voted for him anyway.
The time has come for someone to put his foot down. And that foot is me.
by sireric on Jul 23, 2008 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Worry
I interpret that as meaning who we are worried not to have signed within the first day or two of camp.
With that interpretation, Peters is under contract, and I am not worried at all, as I believe he can just show up and be excellent. Schobel amde similar comments in an interview on Sirius NFL radio. I think Hardy will be signed very soon, and McKelvin is the only one I think might be out of there the first week.
Now as far as consequences of not being signed, I would say that people are right in saying Hardy. Because there is a terrible rumor going around that our offense is inept and he might be a big part in fixing that.
Protect ya neck!
by killascript on Jul 23, 2008 9:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Isn’t anyone else as irked as I am, though, that more of these signings aren’t done? Players report TOMORROW. Where the hell have the signings been? Why the holdup on signing a sixth-round running back? I don’t get it. At a maximum, the only names on this list should be Peters and McKelvin.
by Brian Galliford on Jul 23, 2008 9:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Take a look around the league
There are a ton of unsigned rookies, from every round. I’m puzzled as to why Omon hasn’t signed yet, but it’s not really a big deal at this point. If come Friday, we still have all these guys unsigned, then we should worry. I fully expect to see Hardy, Ellis and Omon signed tomorrow, especially the last 2.
~K
by Kurupt on Jul 23, 2008 9:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I realized that this wasn’t a problem specific to the Bills. It just irritates me when I see a team like the Bears – who had 12 picks – get all their rookies in on time, but we can’t. What did they do right that the rest of the league didn’t?
by Brian Galliford on Jul 24, 2008 6:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Uncontrollably irritating. They should have a value assessed to each draft pick, make every contract three years, then players are restricted free agents, and make everyone happy. That way there is no confusion. I hate it
Protect ya neck!
by killascript on Jul 24, 2008 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you saying that first-round picks should be handed three-year contracts? That’s incredibly unrealistic. If you were referring to later-round picks, I understand the sentiment, but that’s actually what players angle for. Teams want four-year deals across the board, except for the earlier round guys.
by Brian Galliford on Jul 24, 2008 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But...
If you had a contract that was three years, and the guy was a top five pick, and he was only guaranteed 5 mil, and then after three years the team had exclusive rights to said rookie as a modified version of a restricted free agent, maybe they called it a “rookie free agent” tag or something; then it would make sense because you already saved money and then you could base his future contract on fair NFL market value for his production, or if he was a bust, you could cut him
Protect ya neck!
by killascript on Jul 24, 2008 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or four years, I am just saying it has to be consistent and across the board
Protect ya neck!
by killascript on Jul 24, 2008 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the system in place is fine (though clearly flaws in terms of dollar amounts for the top picks). Something that regimented would be a sure bet to be challenged by the players’ union.
by Brian Galliford on Jul 24, 2008 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats too bad, because it enables young players to renegotiate earlier and saves teams from becoming robbed of their money for players who have not played a down and could injured by August. The system may be “fine” but players are still unsigned around the league, and why all the headache? I guess it keeps the NFL in the papers as much as possible though.
Protect ya neck!
by killascript on Jul 24, 2008 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
New England
just signed Jerod Mayo who was picked just one slot before McKelvin. Hopefully we’ll see movement on that front soon…
Get the Bills back to the big game!
by Blitz on Jul 24, 2008 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I voted Peters but....
I voted for Peters because he anchors our line however I am very scared about what could happen to McKelvin and Hardy if they miss any time in training camp. As we have discussed on this site before rookies that miss training camp time, a lot of it, end up wasting their first year and not living up to their draft status because as rookies it is most important that they reap the benefits of training camp. Odds are veterans are well in shape by training camp and if they have been with the team in previous seasons, especially one like the Bills that is retaining coaches and promoting from within, they are not behind when it comes to understanding the schemes and playbooks. Rookies are a different story. I will be devastated if McKelvin and Hardy, who we need to start or play significant time screw this season up for us, the team, and themselves.
McKelvin and Hardy - rookies of the year
by poz on Jul 23, 2008 8:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hardy Definitely
Definitely Hardy. He’s playing a position where he is expected to come in and start right away AND WR already has one of the steepest learning curves. If Hardy isn’t ready, the Bills have to start Josh Reed. That’s right, JOSH REED!
McKelvin is important too, but if he’s not ready to start he has a very cable Greer to hold down the fort until he is.
Evans should be in camp and Peters should get his fat a$$ there. As far as i’m concerned Peters is the least of my worries. He’s a pro bowl LT and the line had all of last season to build chemistry. He has three years left on his contract, so sooner or later, he’ll show up. Practice checks may not mean a lot, but game checks sure do.
And for the whole “Schobel deal set a precedent,” I have to disagree. For one, that was Levy’s front office, this is now Brandon’s. Although there are not a lot of differences between the two and we tend to forget that, they are two completely different people. Russ should – and he does – has his own opportunity to set his own standard and precedent. Secondly, even if that argument doesn’t hold water with Peters, just becuase the team made one mistake, doesn’t mean they should compound it by making another. Tell Peters to get to camp and come see them next off-season. Right now they have to worry about Evans and Crowell, who both have played good soilder and have shown up to practice.
BTW, some worry about alienating Peters and then letting him walk away. He has three years left on his deal! AND (at least under the current CBA) the Bills could potentially franchise him for two more years after that. So any worry about Peters walking should be kep to a minimum right now.
John I.
by jri111 on Jul 23, 2008 10:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The question was,"Which player's potential training camp absence worries you most?"
If Peters misses camp, annoying but will not impact the season. Hardy, on the other hand, is expected to make an impact at a position that is very difficult for rookies to do so. In case you have not guessed, I voted Hardy.
by Joe P. on Jul 23, 2008 11:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
james hardy
I agree with Joe P. and I as well voted Hardy. Leodis would be the 3rd priority as the team has good depth at the CB position, though it would be great to have as many reps possible during training camp. Peters would be the 2nd priority as LT might be the most important position on the team, and as Turk Schonert said in a recent article, “the our offensive line is our bread and butter, we will go as far as they can take us”. We dont need our best player to become disgruntled. Hardy would then be the most important signing, the sooner he can start building some chemistry with Edwards the better our offense will look, and as we all know seldom do rookie WR’s come into the league and play as well as the Bills need from a #2 WR this comming season. I hope all 3 are taken care of soon, and also Ellis at some point
GO BILLS!!!!
by Hassanali181 on Jul 24, 2008 3:49 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 






















