eSJayDee

Actually, the Law of Supply & Demand would dictate that w/ so many FAs out there, prices should be kept down. Prices go up when there's many bidders & minimal supply.

How old are you? You do know that the Bills made it to the SB 4 yrs in a row? Who was our most successful coach of all time? I'll give you a hint - he started as a ST coach. Granted, this was before the cap era, but the effort & emphasis was definitely there, and this was at a time w/ smaller rosters.

That's like $140m/yr! Over that span, that's around 75% of their total cap. Granted, rookies & young players don't count much cap-wise, but to me that indicates that they retain virtually none of their players after their 1st contract. That's indicative of a) not doing a good job of scouting/acquiring players and b) a recipe for continued suckitude.

I think it's more a matter of him not wanting to sign w/ us. He's a solid contributor here, as a 4th or 5th WR. One can't afford to pay a 5th WR well. Further, I would suspect someone desperate to upgrade their WR position would see his productivity here & think he's got a (good) chance of being a significant contributor for them & of course offer him commensurate pay. As for KR, I think he could be good & therefore worthy more $. I'd be hesitant to let him return punts as I think he'd be a noticeable downgrade relative to Roberts WRT fielding the ball.

Rather surprised that his projected salary is about the same as Williams. I think the consensus is Williams ranks higher among Ts than Feliciano among Gs AND, more importantly, Ts get paid better than Gs.

I don't know this for sure, but I believe this to be the case, too. Although in the example you provided, I would assume Bojo would decline that proposal & instead opt for the 1 yr deal. I would think a multi-year deal amenable to both parties would either include a "significant" signing bonus &/or escalating salaries.

I definitely think an effort should be made to re-sign him, the question is whether or not he's even worth the minimum tender though. That would put him in the top 1/3 of punters salary-wise. If we were flush w/ cap space, then yes. I don't think he's worth the higher tenders (though if someone wants to surrender the pick, then thank you very much), but I don't think his market value is much less than that & I wouldn't want to lose him over a few hundred K. Then again, perhaps a better solution for both parties would be a multi-year deal.

The "cash to cap" was really just a clever marketing slogan so as to justify not spending TO the cap. You're obviously limited by the cap for amortized money, but if you also constrain yourself by "cash to cap" it really means you're gonna spend (well) below the cap. There's a difference between the previous regimes "cash to cap" "strategy" & actually a "pay as you go" (to the extend practical) that we currently seem to employ.

I'll add that WRT Milano's situation, one of the ways I think this regime is fiscally responsible is to not give large bonuses. What some teams do, is give large bonuses w/ small initial yr(s) salaries. This allows you to easier afford signings by pushing fwd the liability. Problem w/ this is if the player doesn't work out, you're left w/ substantial dead cap when you release them. As much as possible, I think we currently pretty much "pay as you go".

I wonder why at this juncture. He's gotta be making close to minimum wage for his experience & he's gotta be replaced by someone else, so the savings are really only (eventually) a few 100k. When he's on the field, he's comparable (or better) than Wallace or Norman. Only thing I can think of, is we intend to re-sign someone & need the cap space while only the top 51 count.

A shoulder could definitely effect a kicking; an elbow maybe. A hand I doubt, though. Just an emergency Covid-type signing. Either that or after going 1-3 in FGs they wanna give the kid some competition. -jk

Roberts is good at fielding punts. Not only does he not muff very many, but also the majority of time he fields them rather than letting them go. The latter is worth several yards (provided you fulfill the 1st part & not muff it). As I recall McKenzie is "dangerous" when fielding punts & not in a good way.

Part of the answer is he fumbles a lot cuz he fumbles a lot. I think once he has a reputation as a fumbler, defenders are much more apt to make an effort to force it out. Part of the problem might be that he's difficult to bring down, so that gives more opportunity to cause a fumble. Unfortunately, I don't think that's entirely the situation as he seems to fumble quite easily under "normal" contact. Someone mentioned his height. That might sort of contribute to the problem, but I think it's more his upright running style. More/easier access to the ball.

I don't feel well. But I would've felt a heck of a lot worse had we lost.

IDK what this stat means but I find it interesting that the separation between #1 & #5 is only ~1.6%. Makes me wonder further what they're measuring.

I'm not familiar w/ La Nova (I went to college in Buffalo) but used to LOVE Bocce's. I haven't had it "in person" in like 30 yrs but I have had it delivered overnight to Albany NY a few times. So it's not a direct comparison but I tend to agree w/ others that it's good, but not as good as fresh/local.

Thanks for putting in the effort (I was too lazy to). So, 6 (or 5 events), IMO isn't too enough data to be too confident in your conclusions. That being said, 2 instances he performed exemplary & a 3rd he probably did his job (57 w/ 40 return) well. 2 were poor efforts (assuming wind wasn't a factor) & on the 6th he blew monkey spunk. Considering how inconsistent he was last yr (& as I recall early this yr) I think that's what we signed up for.

I'll concede his touch punting still has much room for improvement, but I don't buy your above statement. How many punts is that based upon? 10? Probably less. I assume that includes a 12 yarder which is going to lower his gross in those situations 4+ yds. Likewise, you're talking even fewer returns, so you can't place much confidence in the conclusion of those stats. Inside our own 40, I'd take him over just about any punter in the league. On the opponents side of the 50, there's prolly 20+ punters I'd rather have.

He's got a really big leg, & although I think he's otherwise improved, I don't think he's Probowl worthy. Just look at his counterpart (Bailey) last night. Admittedly, he hasn't had much opportunity, but he's not very consistent putting the ball close inside the 20. He's more likely to get a touchback than drop it inside the 10 & you're not even that confident he'll get it inside the 20 at all. I think Bailey's net is only like 2 yds worse than his gross.

Um, I think if we win both & Pit wins both & KC loses both, we all end up 13-3 & we would be the top seed by virtue of a better conference record. Admittedly, very slim but they haven't locked 1st seed yet.

I think the primary reason for that is cuz we went from one of the worst offenses in the league to one of the best. That definitely alters your probabilities & expected utility calculations.

No, if someone hasn't answered it yet, that was Ronnie Harmon.

Problem is the timing of signing them (You think maybe the Broncos would've signed someone off the streets to play QB if they could have). I believe it takes 5 days to get someone on your roster, so unless you're kicker gets sick Monday or Tues, you'd be SOL. As for the thought of stashing a K on PS, the idea has merit, but don't know if it's that important. 1st, I imagine it's much easier to keep your kicker isolated so they're not at risk for being Covid listed due to exposure. 2ndly, you've got 60 plus elite athletes available as a replacement. Unlike say a QB, there's minimal "knowledge" that a kicker (or punter) needs. It's pretty much plug & play. Your expected loss on kickoffs is minimal, perhaps a few yards. As for FGs, yes you're probably dropping you expected make rate from an aggregate of say 90% to maybe 70%. If you think your odds decrease too much for PATs, you always having the option of going for 2 (an aside, IMO I think stats probably bear out that you should go for 2 more often). Depending on who's available, how much more confident would you be of an inexperienced, unproven kicker? It's certainly something to consider, but given the apparent value of having the extra player(s) (I actually think a punter might be at least as important) available, I think NOT stashing a K &/or P is an acceptable calculated risk.

I don't think this has been mentioned yet, but I'd like to point out - After we got the 5 yd penalty on the KO, Bass hit the cross bar & put it through the uprights. From 80 yds out!!!

re: #8, I can only assume the refs got the number wrong. A DB blitzing (White?) hit the QB low, which I believe constitutes roughing the passer. Though technically not a wrong call IMO, it was dubious as the QB was running away as he went low.