BarleyNY

Love me some Lawyers, Guns and Money.

Chip is an excellent college coach. He's a poor NFL coach and an absolute dumpster fire as an NFL GM.

Most games in the NFL are very close, so close that one or two plays usually determines the outcome of each. Unless a team is good enough to play a wide variety of offensive schemes, they have a vulnerability. The main vulnerability of the ground and pound, like the Bills run, is that it almost always relies on completing deep passes at least a few times a game with a relatively high success rate. I think we all have seen what failing to do so meant in some of the losses. It's also why the Bills took such a big chance on Harvin and gave him the contract they did. They had to have a guy like that opposite Watkins. Just look at how teams are beating the Bills now that he took a powder. The KC game is a perfect example. 1st half: safety help was consistiently late helping the CB covering Wakins (our only deep threat). 2nd half: safety lined up over Wakins with CB playing bump and run on him. Acquiring a deep threat (or two for depth) will be a priority in the offseason.

Yup. Plus a lower seed means less of a chance of home field advantage.

Totally agree.

Absolutely

Cincy was bland. Big meh, but they weren't good at the time. The stadium is odd in a disjointed kind of way. Really didn't like it at all. Cleveland is a lot like Buffalo in the game day experience respect. A lot of it has to do with how the team is doing. Stadium is good, not great. Pittsburgh's stadium is a notch above Cleveland's. Liked it. Good experience overal.

If structured like Wilson's deal and assuming the same numbers, you'd be looking at an outlay of about $44M over the first two years, including a SB of $31M. And you've committed to him for 3 years minimum since you won't be able to cut him before then if he doesn't perform well. I don't think he's earned that kind of deal yet.

$22M in 2017 plus about $2M (depending upon starts) in 2017. That's 2 years at an average of $12M per year if he isn't signed long term before then. It's also only $2M or less for one season if he doesn't work out. So, again, I'm certainly open to deals where TT gets some money and has his chance to earn big dollars, but could be cut loose early without breaking the bank. That's fair. But I'm not discussing it until after the season concludes and I'm negotiating from the standpoint of knowing I could have him for two years for $24M. If his demands aren't reasonable, then he can play under his contract next season and we can go from there with the tag on the table.

The rest of the season sure means a lot to TT. I want to add that (assuming a strong finish) it would be a big mistake if the Bills didn't offer him some sort of new contract or at least start that dialogue in the off-season. You don't want him to be angry and feel unappreciated. i'm OK with him feeling like he has to earn his money though.

The main problem I've heard rumored with Chip's offense is that it is far too basic for the NFL. Teams know what's coming too often. His prickish arrogance has not played well in that context.

I disagree totally regarding playing out the current deal. The Seahawks, for example, tagged Wilson after his deal ran out. I have two reasons for wanting to wait. The first is: Yup. Sample size. I like a lot of what I've seen from TT, but I haven't seen enough yet. Before I give him an elite QB deal he has to show he can shoulder more of the weight of the offense - and stay healthy while doing it. Durability is a huge concern for me and that compounds as he's asked to do more. The second has to do with the projected contract versus the cost of the franchise tag. There isn't much difference between a $20M per season average and the first year tag (which should be about that). I'm okay with tagging him and getting a deal done, or preferably telling him we are going to tag him and getting a deal done before we would have to actually use it. Or I would do a Foles type of extension after June 1st, but before the 2016 season starts so no signing bonus money would hit in 2016. They could, of course, agree to the deal before then and wait to sign it. He's got 4 more games before then to consider. Lastly, I totally understand the reasoning behind signing him early and saving some money. That's valid if you're sold. I'm not yet, not to that degree anyway. I've got no problem with paying an elite quarterback market value if I know I have one. http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/tyrod-taylor/ You really have to read the details, including the notes section. 2017 has already voided.

Wow. Mr. Negative's just getting off stirring the pot here. Starts a thread with stats favorably comparing TT to Brady, then calls people haters and stupid for not agreeing with him that TT is a stud while simultaneously denying that he ever implied that TT was on par with Brady. Then sits back, watches and occasionally stirs. It's the most trollish posting I've seen in a long time. Very well done, in a horrible and pathetic way.

How has McKelvin not made a worst list yet? How is that possible?

This Sunday is their last real chance to screw that up. The Oiltans are very unlikely to win again. Ditto the Cowbois. They should've waited another week.

I didn't take this topic as being directed at Clay. It's not his fault someone offered him that contract and I'm sure not blaming him for signing it. But to your point, why give a guy who's not going to be used that much a contract like that? I want to clarify some things since it's easy to look at this in black and white instead of grey. It's also easy to miss some important details: Clay is overpaid, but not horrifically so if the whole contract is looked at from an average yearly cap hit. And to be fair it's early in his time with the Bills so things can change/improve. His contract has much more glaring issues than the average yearly cap hit, though. It's heavily guaranteed and it pays out heavily early on. That is trouble in the making. If he performs well he almost certainly will be looking for a new deal when his yearly salary shrinks Below his level of production. That will inflate his yearly salary average. Or ifhe performs poorly, he will only make it through the early portion of his deal where he is paid disproportionately well and wind up way overpaid with a much higher yearly average salary than it would appear. Lastly, the worst case is if he has a catastrophic injury or off the field incident that effectively ends his career. The Bills are on the hook for a lot of money early in the deal so they'd take a big hit. http://overthecap.com/player/charles-clay/675/ Contract details for reference. $24.5M over the first two seasons, all guaranteed. Then $13.5M over the last 3 years. $38M total. I know it was structured this way because the Dolphins had him tagged, but it's still weird deal.

Not at all. The tag certainly had an effect on his price, but that is not material. The price and his value are all that matter. The intradivision argument is terrible. He was on the freaking Dolphins. The argument could be made if the Bills were neck and neck with a team at the top of the division and we took a top playmaker from them, but that wasn't the case. We took him from a mediocre Dolphins team that is making a habit of way overpaying for players. With or without Clay, the Phins aren't a team that a good team should worry about.

Nice work, Gunner. I've been piecing this together and can confirm about 2/3rds of your work. I hadn't gotten to the rest. I wish I would have seen this sooner.

Houston/Indy are obviously in the mix, but the Bills have the h2h on both and they play each other in two weeks. I just don't see a WC team coming out of the AFCS. The Bills have plenty to do and plenty to worry about, but AFCS teams aren't on the first pages of those lists.

I modifyied my post to include this situation after I read your previous one. Yes, the Bills would pull ahead in the Conf tiebreaker if they go 3-1, including beating the Jets, and Pitt goes 2-2. Edit: I'm not worrying about common opponents yet. In the WC tiebreaker it is applicable only after the division record tiebreaker.

The Steelers finish with the Bengals, Broncos, Ravens and Browns. Two tough games - including at the Bengals on a short week - and two easy ones. We should know if the Bills have a shot to pass them by the 20th. If they go 3-1 their Conf record will be the same as the Bills if the Bills win out. The Bills would pull ahead in that tiebreaker if the Steelers go 2-2 and the Bills 3-1 including a win over the Jets. No h2h obviously.

The Jets have a tougher road with the Titians, Cowbois, Pats and Bills. Obviously if the Bills win out they'd have no worse than the same record and same conf record. They'd obviously also have the h2h tiebreaker.

KC is pretty much in. Their schedule is about as easy as it gets: Chargers, Ravens, Browns and Raiders. I can't realistically imagine them going worse than 3-1 over that stretch, They will have the head-to-he and and conference tiebreakers over the Bills.

Here's what went down a year and a half ago: McDaniels was Mike Lombardi's choice for Browns HC to the point where he was told that interviews were a formality. Haslam was just getting wise to who Lombardi is and decided to make his own decision. He nixed the McDaniels hire, fired Lombardi (GM) and Banner (Pres), retained Farmer and hired Pettine. Lombardi now works for the Patriots and has sniped at the Browns through intermediaries pretty much constantly since his dismissal. There is no way Haslam is considering McDaniels. This is just Lombardi stirring the pot again. Lmao. That's hilarious.

I know what the situation was. Don't confuse the price Bills paid with what the minimum cost would have been or what Clay's true value was/is.