d_wag

and why would he do that when he has a 10 million dollar signing bonus waiting for him? not a chance he signs the 1 year offer.........name me a f-tagged player who has signed the offer in the 1st week of free agency.......never happens........people on this board said the same thing about peerless, and he never took it.........

there are plenty of good backs who would be HAPPY to be backing up willis, so why don't we just go out and sign one of them while cashing in travis for a draft pick?? we have an asset and we should take advantage of it, and then fill the need (backup RB) elsewhere with someone who would enjoy the role......

when are people going to realize that, due to the salary cap, you cannot have a star at every position? posey is just fine and the bills are getting good bang for their buck.......

we didn't seem to have any problem signing takeo, adams, vincent, and villy after pulling the stunt with peerless, so count me among the unconcerned.......if we can get pick(s) for jennings, we'd be foolish not to.......

they gave petitgout a big money deal last off-season........why would they want jennings?

i forget the formula the NFL uses to figure out draft pick compensation for free agent losses, but we did lose more UFA's then we gained last year...... lost -- winfield, sidney, gash, polk, morris gained -- vincent, villarrial i believe salary also comes into play, and with winfield's huge contract, we could be looking at a significant pick........3rd or 4th rounder is a possiblity.......

i think that articile has more to do with attitudes then salaries......but it does go to show you have to be very, very careful who you give big signing bonuses to now a days because with the amounts that are being chucked around it is tougher and tougher to rid yourself of a problem......i guess that is why the bills value character so much in the draft room.....there are plenty of guys they won't even look at because of attitude concerns, whereas the phins/cowboys/redskins of the world could care less about that intangible.......

to me it looks like some people are making waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to much over one midly negative comment from TD about bledsoe after 100 positive comments from TD about bledsoe........it's a grain of salt compared to all the praise he has heaped on him, so don't count bledsoe for dead yet........ same thing with the EM bullsh*t.......totally blown out of proporation......

i'm with you.......3 spots are locked up so we're talking about the #4 spot, and how much playing time will the #4 get?........forget DE, we have bigger fish to fry......no need to invest cap dollars or a high draft pick.......

i still don't get what he "came back" from -- he didn't accomplish anything before this season......in order to comeback, you have to be something in the first place, right?.......he was nothing before this year, other then potential......... what you just defined was a breakthrough player, not a comeback player.......

i didn't misunderstand you, i just think your incorrect.......i don't believe the t-tag was used on moulds because it wasn't available the year he was scheduled for free agency either (he was signed before free agency anyway, so we didn't need to use the tag).......like i said, i can't recall the player, but i know we used it on someone and gave them a 6 year deal, thus removing our ability to use it for the length of the contract....... from an blurb last year regarding winfield's impending free agency: The cornerback's agent said it has nothing to do with the Bills that his client wants to test the market. Donahoe also said that the Bills do not plan on placing the franchise tag on him. That would keep him essentially off the open market. The team does not have any transition tags at its disposal. even if the bills wanted to use the t-tag last year, they couldn't.......i think that is the case again this year....... and i couldn't disagree more on the possibility of JJ taking the f-tag offer........name me one player who has done that that first week of free agency? good luck.......it doesn't happen........like i said, alot of people were scared of tagging price for the same reason and he didn't touch it.......same with winfield, and he obviously would have had no interest in taking it either.......not a chance JJ would take the offer -- he'd be throwing away millions of dollars doing so and would become the first tagged player in NFL history to sign it that early.......can you give me one reason why he would do something so stupid?

i always thought "comeback" implied you used to be good before slumping or rebounded from a major injury.......i don't recall brees ever being good before this year.......

while also trying to fill KEY positions........thus, the secondary positions weren't a priority when the starters blow.......now that the starters are set, it's time to work on depth........one thing at a time and oh yeah, it's too early to call josh a bust in my eyes.......

in reference to the t-tag, i think your incorrect.......i can't recall the player, but i believe the bills t-tagged someone quite some time ago and then subsequently signed him........as a result, even though that player was cut quite some time ago, they can't use the t-tag because they lost it for the length of that contract (i believe 6 years).......maybe someone remembers....... in reference to JJ signing the f-tag, why on earth would he do that? he's looking at 10 mil in signing bonus, so why would he take the f-tag offer in the first week of free agency?? people said the same thing about peerless, and he didn't........people said the same thing about winfield, and he got 12 million in signing bonus......sorry, not a chance JJ takes it.......it would be a dumb move on his part........like i said, no risk.......

i think the important thing is we don't need alot of KEY positions upgraded....... how tough is it to find a #3 WR? a decent guard? secondary depth? run stopping DE? all of those things can be found in the draft or cheaply in free agency....... and forgot about the QB position......we won't be doing anything in that area, and with this style of offense i don't see why we would......

i think LT and RT are much more similar then LT and C.........your talking apples and oranges here.........

it would not cause "havoc" to our salary cap.......as long as moulds restructures there will be room available to sign PW and tag JJ........you have to remember it is a TEMPORARY MEASURE used to trade him, not to carry him at the f-tag value into the 2005 season........we're talking a week max, and if you can't work out a trade by then and need the cash to sign a free agent, no problem, you simply lift the tag and all you missed out on were the early, over-paid free agents.......i don't see us persuing any big name free agents anyway, so we can afford to tie up the cash if it means scoring a draft pick or two........ it's a no risk move....... and in response to another post regarding the t-tag, the bills do not have that available.......only the f-tag......

after basically ignoring o-line the past few drafts, i would love to see the bills take an interior lineman early.......we badly need more depth and someone to push tucker/teague........

i think TH will be traded before the draft, perhaps long before the draft.....

i think teague is just starting to figure out center and doesn't need to be yanked around once again.....i think they're are better options then this (i.e. free agency or big mike moving to LT).....

i said the same thing with winfield last year, and no one on this board was buying it, so i don't expect you'll find a favorable response in regards to jennings either.........we left a pick(s) on the table when winfield left and it will be the same story with jennings (if he does leave).......unfortunate because winfield proved last year there was a market for his services, and jennings will defantiely be sought after.......

why are you so sure?

i agree completely, but you won't find much support for such a move on this board or in bills management......they missed the perfect opportunity to do the same thing with winfield last year, and passed on it......they left picks on the table with that move, and i expect them to do the same with jennings IF he decides to sign elsewhere...... my preference would be to see him brought back at market value (i.e. 25 mil/5 years/10 mil SB), but if that isn't going to happen, franchising JJ is a no risk/decent reward proposition.......like you said, no first rounder required, whatever someone will give is good enough.......should be taken advantage of.......

does your opinion change if those guys are franchised and the market dries up??

if a backup RB is not hard to fill why don't we cash out for a draft pick and fill it then?? i think your contridicting yourself.......