Einstein's Dog

It's disappointing to see problems getting Cook a contract. Cook took a step forward as an exciting RB. The Bills in 2025, and beyond, would be a better team with Cook on it. But we know this won't be easy. I hope you're right and we at least get 2025 with him.

Yeah, could be, I remember being told this about my interpretation of Digg's tweets. Except Cook posted $15M, he's wrong.

It's my hope the Bills can come up with some formation of the CB room that does not bring back Douglas, something better.

Don said "to some degree" and you said it was "NOTHING". Putting $15M on social media is not nothing. And now what, Cook putting his house up for sale is just another coincidence, didn't mean for any attention at all - sure. The newbie agent is probably feeling all giddy about the coverage of Cook listing his house (he may have leaked it himself). Just seems like something out of the Diggs handbook of getting yourself out. The unfortunate thing is it didn't work out poorly for Diggs financially. I would prefer, if this is the route Cook is taking, that things don't work well for him. I hope you can understand how Bills fans don't want multiple malcontents to prosper financially by trying to force their way out.

Actually, J Cook (and team) posted on social media $15M. Posting $15M is not nothing. Paying $15M is something most people do not believe Buffalo will be doing - especially in his role as a 2 down back, which it appears is his role in Buffalo. So, I agree with Don above because there is a big desire to get a bag no matter where that is, and since it likely isn't in Buffalo, you do the math.

The problem with not drafting an RB is that it increases the impact of a Cook threat to "hold in" until week 11.

For me, it's not the social media post as much as it is the substance of the post, the $15M. It gave a clue into difficult negotiations and not surprisingly Cook is the last to be extended. You can keep claiming it means nothing (just as many dismissed Diggs social media as "kids will be kids").

Putting out a high number on social media is not a common tactic. Why do that? What do you think of that? While the negotiation is between Cook and Beane the public has received some information - and so far, IMO, Beane is the clear leader.

No, if the 6th rounder (Benford type) outplays the 1st rounder (Elam type) it doesn't matter.

No, Cook's team (with the amateur agent and devious Dalvin) have not done a good job. The idea of starting with a high number on social media may backfire big time. If that figure was never released there would be much more support for Cook. This may be a blessing for the FO. What if the FO never wanted to pay an RB big money? Cook's team has given the FO an out -the fanbase is clearly on the side of Beane. The trick now is for Beane to get Cook to play on his current contract this season. As for Cook knowing he has to play - I'm not so sure about that. Seems like most think Cook could get $12M if he were on the open market now. Playing as a 2 down back again in 2025 doesn't change that figure, so Cook may not want to risk it. As for the "given RB is an easier position to replace if need be", it's the "need be" part of the equation that is tricky. The RB room is kind of full for 2025 right now if you include Cook. But if Cook is going to sit out 11 games you may want to draft another RB in the upcoming draft.

And help McDermott's decision to go for it on 4th down.

They didn't care about that. What they did care about was when the one team had a strategy to defend the tush-push by guessing the count and sending a defender flying over the center -they got all bent out of shape about that. After the defense did it a couple of times the refs threatened to award Philly a TD - what? That annoyed me.

It's more like banning a play where one team gets the benefit of the doubt that the first down is made unless there is evidence to the contrary, and another team (the Bills) needs to provide evidence that the first down was made. Now that the play has been exposed that the refs have no idea with spotting the ball, the play should be retired. Also it's an unattractive play, already flirting with rule violations in getting pushed from behind, and seems like only a matter of time before someone just goes full out to injure the QB.

There's a problem in just giving Cook a raise because he outplayed his contract, and that is because that is part the incentive in the extension process. You don't let the player have it both ways - get a raise and go hit FA. Also the FO doesn't have any worries now about the optics, Cook and his team took care of that with the post about $15M - really stupid thing of his team to do.

Seems like a planted rumor out from SF trying to get a team to put in an offer with a made up ultimatum. SF would like to get someone to trade prior to a large payment going out to Aiyuk, don't see how SF paying him takes him off the trade market though.