Would You Rather?
Pay for players on the downward side and close to the bottom of the slope in their careers, or pay players with solid potential, just starting the upward slope of their careers?
It comes down to this, do you want: the left-overs from the past, all good players who have had their day, but clearly players past their prime? These are players who are living off their wisdom and grit; again, good, but not something you can build on. You bring in these players when you are a top run Super Bowl team with an immediate hole to fill. They're stop-gap solutions, not build-on solutions.
I don't see the BIlls in position to take these second tier answers. Yes, they can produce, and would be to a degree, good players.
However, if the BIlls want to really develop and make progress, they need to identify players they think have good potential, and who are on the way-up in their careers. At this stage of the teams development, younger, players with good potential, are a better value than, older, plug-a-hole, for a season type players.
In this case, go with potential over experience: the current production will be about the same, but the future potential is much higher in the "younger" players.
My Opinion.