BarleyNY

Absolutely. I came back to edit my post to add Sweeney. At least he didn’t rob the Bills while doing nothing like Kroft did. I’d add him too.

Star

I am not saying that Beane wasn’t genuine in this case. But every time he doesn’t rip a rostered player to shreds (even when they deserve it) we get the idiotic “Beane has his back!” posts. GMs who have a clue don’t ever do that. About the worst you ever get is what we saw here: He’s a hard worker, great teammate, etc. He fell a bit short this year but he’s got plenty of room to improve and we expect to see that. The “meat on the bone” schtick is literally the lower bound for GM comments on players like Brown. I’m not saying that isn’t fair in this case, just that you wouldn’t hear worse regardless of circumstance.

When I was in high school I appreciated a clumsy HJ.

Guessing teams look at Parham as a cheap depth option with immediate impact in the RZ. We need depth at TE so adding a cheap FA and a draft pick heading into camp sounds like a good plan.

What else would you expect Beane to say?

An owner only focused on profit can always torpedo a team. GMs have to carry out the owners’ visions and they all aren’t out to win a championship if it means making less money. Check out the Bengals NFLPA report card: Link

Or heal a WR’s hamstring? (Maybe he’s a cleric.)

Semi-competence or better at GM usually gets the “magician” label here. Sigh. Probably 28-30 fan bases are convinced everything their GM just did was genius. That includes fans of the GMs who didn’t do anything in FA yet and are waiting for the prices to come down. SMH

But an expensive ($11.5M this season) RB about to hit 28 that we have to trade for doesn’t make much sense. I could see him having one more quality season before his production drops off, but that’s not guaranteed. I’d say it is unlikely if he gets stuck behind a poor run blocking OL, which we have. I am not saying that having a good RB or a good run game isn’t a good thing. It is. But acquiring Dalvin Cook will not give us that. It’ll just be throwing away resources.

Not all contracts have team option restructures in them. The ones that do have it generally only have it in one or two of the early seasons. Diggs’ extension was probably one that did have it. Also the option can’t add void years so if you see that done it was with player approval.

Nothing wrong with letting FAs like Poyer test the market while leaving the door open. Sometimes it works out. Waiting on contract details before finalizing my opinion…..

In fact, very few have had success post Cheatriots.

The Browns have had multiple HC interviews with McDaniels - on two different occasions. Even they passed. Twice.

Sal is correct. The team option restructuring clauses I’ve seen are always at the beginning of the contract - usually set up to execute in year 2. Diggs is going into year 2 of his extension. The extension was initially structured so that a restructure at this time was going to be make sense. Beane is a competent GM so he knew they’d likely need the space. I expect that he had the foresight to include the clause and Diggs would have had no reason to object to it. So, yeah, these clauses are pretty standard practice as they eliminate some red tape for GMs. Also agents would usually add a small increase to the contract for doing it. But they are not common in later years though. Dawkins is a good example. He’s got two seasons left on his deal and would not want to restructure without an extension. That is a clause that would be fought by an agent.

I’d expect Dawkins to require an extension rather than agree to a restructure at this point as there are two seasons left on his deal. I think the Bills will leave this one alone this season and decide what to do next offseason.

Yes. And the money was guaranteed when the extension was signed so it was in escrow anyway. Also it is unlikely that the Bills even needed Diggs’ permission to do the restructure. The option to do so was almost certainly already in his contract.

Giving out guarantees at signing for up to 3 seasons seems to be the generally accepted limit. Cousins got a fully guaranteed contract - but it was only 3 seasons. I believe that only Cleveland went beyond that to 5.

I think we will see some other QBs ask for the same guarantees soon. No team wants to be the second one to give in to that though and the Ravens were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

We don’t know what contract he was offered. We just know what was leaked by the Ravens. The info seems plausible, but when teams leak imo they usually make their offers seem better than they really are.

bored beyond belief

I can’t imagine that the Chargers will get anything close to a second for Eckler.

Welp, we do now - and there wasn’t as much improvement as I had hoped. Bummer.

Trades cannot be designated post 6/1, they have to be executed post 6/1 if the team is to delay some of the cap hit. The 6/1 designation is only for cut players. Lots of people are missing some details on a Diggs trade. The only time this season that he can reasonably be traded is before his $16M roster bonus is paid. It is due between 3/15 & 3/21. Most people look at Spotrac and see $37.6M dead cap and -$17.3M in cap savings if he’s traded and think it is impossible. But those figures include the $16M bonus. Without that the dead cap is “only” $21.6M and the cap implications of trading him is only $1.3M in lost space. That’s not great, but it is definitely possible.