That's the crux of the issue. A segment of posters on here are beating the drum that the Bills should make what they believe to be a bad football decision in signing a player at a position they may not need to spend type of money in order to show 'They can keep their own players' and 'Are committed to winning'. It means neither of those things. In fact, if they made the decision based on either of those factors then it would be the same as the people who believe Littmann decides what players they sign based on money.
The question isn't whether Byrd is better. Is Byrd enough of an upgrade over an upgrade somewhere else like receiver, offensive line or tight end?