BarleyNY

Was thinking about this too ever since I looked at TT's contract details a couple days ago. I sit TT, start Cardale and use EJ as backup if Jones gets injured.

That's fair.

He's being defended better. The book on him is out and he hasn't grown. He can't adjust. It's over.

I agree with this. He's exactly the same QB he was last season. It didn't happen for him and it's time to accept that. There's no shame in being a quality NFL backup. QB is the most difficult job in team sports.

You're correct that we'd be tied to him for 2-3 seasons, but his full contract average is $18M right now. That'd put him tied for 17th for QB average salary. This season is bringing that average down though. If his option is picked up that average salary over the next 2 seasons is $20.5M and over the next 4 seasons is $20.25M. That'd put him 13th just barely behind Foles who is playing on the franchise tag this season. Everything about the option is bothering me. Being tied to him for 2+ seasons, the guaranteed money and the average salary. I put him much more in the Fitzpatrick, 1 season at $12M range.

I don't think I can any longer support pulling the trigger on paying his roster bonus to give him the extension currently on his contract. I'd support bringing him back under a deal that pays him more in line with what he's shown himself to be - a bottom tier starter or high end back up.

If I'm running this show I'm not picking up his option, but I would work on negotiating a new contract. I'd also be looking very hard for his replacement. The Bills will have the last week of the league year and the first couple days of he new year to fed a replacement that's better and/or cheaper. Or they could use that leverage to negotiate a new deal with Taylor.

Believe nothing that comes from Lombardi or his friends in the media. He's just trying to create a market for Garoppolo. He has no idea what the Browns brass think of Garoppolo or what they'd give for him.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/tyrod-taylor-7899/ Interesting info regarding the guarantees Taylor gets on the 3rd day of the league year. Spotrac has changed their contract info to reflect it. $30.75M in guarantees on 3rd league day of 2017 and an additional $9.75M in 2018 rather than all $40.5M guaranteeing in 2017. He'll be a very tough cut and here for 2, probably 3 more years if his option is picked up.

This succinctly sums up what I was about to post. Sometimes a coach comes in with great ideas, does well and has success, but then stalls because he can't evolve. All of his good ideas are copied and countered and that's that. Fisher is a great example of this. Sad to say, but it looks like Rex is too.

Under normal circumstances I'd be inclined him a shot for our second - plus a conditional in 2018 based on performance and whether or not he re-signs here. The issues I see with Garoppolo are: - 2017 is the last season he's under contract. - We got such a limited look at him. Wentz looked damn good until teams figured him out. Now he looks terrible. Is Jimmy a handful of games from the same? - I just don't trust Belichick. I get that he has Brady and wants to get premium value for Garoppolo while he can, but he's hosed so many teams out of so many good picks for middling (or worse) QBs that I'm gun shy. Don't forget that Garoppolo would net a substantial comp pick down the road if he hits FA. He's looking for more value, sooner. And it doesn't help that Bill's shill, Mike Lombardi, is already trying to drive up his trade value. When taken together I have to pass. I'd rather use a 1st or 2nd on a highly talented developmental QB in this draft than hand picks over to Belichick for a QB he knows so very well. I think some team is going to get burned on this.

Lotta bad shrooms going around.

This. If and when Bills are officially eliminated from playoff contention I'd like to see some of Cardale, assuming he is at all ready. Even some time against the Browns to get his feet wet would be nice. EJ is done here. No need to trot him out on the field.

Truth

Denver offered a first for Thomas two seasons ago. The Browns wanted more so the deal didn't get done. And it's definitely not insane to ask for a first plus more for the best LT in football. The Browns don't have many quality vets to build around so why should they let their best player go for something less than what they would need to replace him? If they do find a QB somewhere, Thomas will be huge in giving him a chance to develop. Why throw that away?

MAJBobby is correct. Getting Joe Thomas for a day 3 pick is a joke. The Browns probably wouldn't trade him at all, but if they did it would require a 1st plus more. The Bills are better off making RT a priority in the offseason - either via free agency or in the draft.

You are correct that the team would have taken the full cap hit of the $10M this season if the contract has not been restructured. The team did kick $7.5M down the road. But that doesn't matter when looking at the impact of cutting Clay. That's because taking the additional $7.5M hit in 2016 would have reduced the cap carryover by $7.5M. The amount of remaining cap space is exactly the same in both instances if Clay is cut. You're concerned that Clay's dead money is high if he's cut soon - and it would look high - but it doesn't matter if you understand that it's only high because the team's other choice was to take the cap hit earlier. The real problem was the original deal that guaranteed Clay such high payouts of cash so early. Cash paid out must be taken as a cap hit so it was just a matter of determining when the team would take the hits.

Your numbers are wrong. Look at Spotrac's page. Read the comments below the numbers too. You are also missing the effect of paying out the $10M as a roster bonus. http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/charles-clay-7893/ NoSaint has it correct.

TT is the same QB as last season, but we needed progress from him and we haven't gotten it. Defenses are also better prepared for him and are forcing him to do things like stay in the pocket. He might still be our best option next season, but we will be better off if we can find a better option.

I got pulled away before I could finish my post. The only difference between pre- and post-restructure is the distribution of the $10M bonus. Pre-restructure it would have all hit the cap this season. Post-restructure it hits the cap $2.5M in 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019. If he's released or traded before then the remaining portion accelerates. So the result of the restructure is that the Bills currently have $7.5M more cap space than they would have if they hadn't restructured, which is exactly the additional amout of dead money releasing him would currently cost the team (versus before the restructure). The net result to the team's cap is $0. After next season (2018) the Bills will have an additional $5M in cap space due to the restructure and Clay's release will result in $5M more dead money than it would have without the restructure. Net difference in cap space between pre- and post-restructure if released will still be $0. After 2019 both figures will be $2.5M and net will still be $0.

Yes, dead money is lower after the restructure because under the previous structure the entire $10M roster bonus hit would have been taken last season, instead of only $2.5M of it. That would, of course, mean the Bills would have $7.5M less in cap room right now. The net is the same against the cap. It might look better to you because you're just looking at the dead money.

Again, not correct. The full cap hit would already be on the books without the restructure so the total cap hit from his release would be exactly the same whether he was restructured or not. The Bills just deferred $7.5M of it. The problem was the contract, not the restructure.

That is incorrect. The only thing the restructure did was change his $10M roster bonus into a $10M signing bonus so it's cap hit would be spread out rather than taken all at once.

He is owed $27.5M next season, but his $13M base salary for 2018 also guarantees. $40.5M for 2 seasons is the full guarantee. I'm scouring my other options in the week leading up to the new league year and the two days before his bonus is due to find a better/cheaper option.

I've got no problem with Clay missing a game for the birth of his child. None. I don't have any problem with his play when he's on the field. He's the same player he's always been - a multifaceted TE who is good at everything, but not great in any single facet. My problem has always been with the asinine contract the Bills gave him. That is not on him, it's on Whaley. I notice that the "he's worth it because defenses will find it difficult to match up with him" and "we paid what we had to to pry him away from Miami" crowds have quieted. That's refreshing. It's the same as it ever was: good player, terrible contract.