BuffaloBob

I actually find that rather sad.

Parker overplayed his hand on this one and he continues to do so. Although only one player tagged this off season managed to sign a new deal, his is the only player who hasn't signed the one year tender and reported to camp. The Bills are playing this right. Just blow them off until he's ready to show up. Don't put him in until he's ready to perform in the new defense. Tag him again next year. Make him a good offer and blow them off again until they are willing to negotiate. If they can get a first round pick for him, maybe they take it and move on. Otherwise, maintain status quo.</p>

Cough, cough [bullsheyyitt], cough [bulsheyitt] cough.

That doesn't sound good that he had trouble putting weight on it.

Believe it or not, the food does have to get specially packaged and bagged so all the condiments are in there, all the entrees are in there, so they don't tip over inside and make a mess. Sure, if it a pizza or a sub, and all they have to do is slip it into a sleeve or a box, NBD and no tip. But if I'm ordering something like Chinese or something to go from a restaurant that involves multiple entrees, sides, etc, along with utensils, packets of condiments et al., then I do tip. Or if it's a large order, like $75 worth of Chinese, that no doubt took some time and effort to prepare, box and pack. It may not be the same as walking back to your table and asking if you if you would like more water, but it is a still food service someone is performing in an effort to serve you, and is often done by the same people who are also waiting on tables. But that's just me.

The big difference is, you would be making those personal decisions for yourself. Parker represents his clients and owes them a fiduciary duty to work for them zealously in their best interests, not his (as mentioned above). What he needs to do is learn that sometimes, it's in the best interest of his clients not to overplay their hand. That's crazy! He would not be anywhere near as well-respected around the league if he were to engage in that sort of activity. Smarter players would soon realize that he was steering them in a direction which was based on his own personal bias and mistrust would ensue. Would you trust an agent who is supposed to be representing YOUR best interests if you discovered he was actually letting his petty personal biases interfere with that? I wouldn't, because it would make me wonder what other little personal biases were motivating him to do and say what he was doing and saying. Sorry, not buying it.

Good idea! But on the other hand, it does cause one wonder whether it's the container that's too big or the item which is too small!

^^^^^THIS^^^^^^

Where's the scenario where the Bills just franchise him again?

Dude, please. The first example is a re-working of a back-loaded deal to create cap space in an early part of the deal. This is inapposite to your first argument because you are trying to convince me that backloading is done to make it necessary to do an extension in the last year. Then, when I ask why a team would want to do that, you cite me an example of re-working a deal in the early part of the deal. The first example demonstrates the conversion of salary owed later into signing bonus now to get the benefit of pro-rating the cap out to later years to make cap room in the current year. It only COMPOUNDS the problem and makes it worse. Which is precisely why teams do NOT do those types of deals anymore. They try to create deals where the cap hit is relatively even over the whole contract. If anything, they tend to keep the cap higher in the first year or two to make it easier to cut them later without huge cap ramifications. You are citing examples of old contracts that were huge problems that created cap problems for the team, and then how they compounded that problem by pushing the cap ramifications out to later and later years, creating huge dead money if they have to get rid of him. Sorry, but I just don't have the time or inclination to keep arguing with you on this. Believe what you want.

I am THRILLED he's not hear! Sorry.

He wouldn't pay anywhere near as much as McGahee because he has no pre-existing condition. I don't know how much the premium is for a year. I haven't had a need for such a policy. But I know A-Rod and the Yankees both have insurance on him, because of the guaranteed contracts, but it's basically the same idea. Regardless of how much the premium is, these are the issues that should be pondered when deciding whether to have your agent hold out for "highest paid safety in the league" dollars, or sign a really lucrative long-term deal that might be only top 5 money.

OK so once again, where is the evidence that Jim Overdorf is making that call? Seems weak when there is absolutely no evidence, but only assumption, that because he is their cap and numbers guy, that this was somehow his decision. At that time, Overdorf reported to Russ and Ralph. Are you trying to tell me that they had no input and that they were as surprised as the GM and the Coach were? I think NOT. I am sure that Jim is asked to make recommendations. I'm sure he is given parameters within which to work, whether it's in negotiations with players or whether it's roster and cap planning. I am sure he reports to Brandon when they stray from those parameters and adjustments must be made. I have seen ZERO evidence that Jim Overdorf is making those calls himself and somehow the men over him have nothing to say about it.

How do you know it doesn't offend or embarrass the Bills or the NFL? I suspect they didn't notice it until afterward. Yah, that's what the NFL wants parents of kids to see. Hey look, here are the guys you look up to and idolize. very nice! Say what you want, but it's just plain lame and immature. I cuss like a sailor, but not around kids. I love South Park and Family Guy, but I don't watch it with my sisters kids. It's just in bad taste. If he were a man, he would know that.

Exactly. Yeah, I'm a middle-aged white guy, but that doesn't mean I don't get it. I thought a shirt like that was funny, when I was 12! You know, back when I was lighting farts and reciting poems by Hoo Phlung Pu. I watch South Park and Family Guy and laugh my azzzz off at some absolutely off the chart crude humor. But being 27, having a family and wearing a shirt like this for a public photo shoot says, I'm still "representing" mentally at 13. So no doubt, it ain't like he killed someone, hit and ran somebody, got in a fight at a titttty bar, etc. And no doubt he's working harder, he's fun to watch on the field, at least when he isn't trying to emulate Chad Ocho whatever his name is now. But that picture is just flat out stupid and in bad taste when you're representing your employer and the NFL. I guess his wife and kids are proud though. And calling it "hood" humor doesn't make it any less in bad taste under the circumstances. And for all you apologizers who are posting, "oh it's such a non-issue, and stop being so uptight blah blah," I'm not uptight, not losing any sleep, and am not moralizing one bit. He can wear all the stupid shirts he wants and as long as he catches TD's it's all good. But that doesn't change the fact that it's awfully hard to take him seriously as a man if he can't tell when doing something reflects poorly on him, his family and his employer, and makes him generally look like an idiot. I guess I just find that disappointing. If the guy took himself at all seriously, I think he have a career that could get Hall of Fame consideration. He clearly has other priorities.

Having "sway" doesn't mean he has the FINALLY call. I'm sure they have established some sort of regime by which they manage the cap and he is the guy who crunches the numbers and recommends contract numbers, and probably raises the issue when they are considering straying from that regime, but that doesn't mean he FINALLY decides whether a contract offer gets made or not.

Dude, you're missing the point here!! This is an opportunity to jump in and rant about how stupid the Bills are and how bad Buddy was. He should have known the guy would get hurt, and he should have known Wanny would be incapable of getting anything from him what little time he was healthy! The fact that the Bills took a reasonable shot at a FA without huge cap ramifications is last year's news!! Stop being so reasonable in your analysis. You're spoiling all of the fun! Now, back to our regularly scheduled Buddy bashing: WE'RE DOOMED!

Really? I think this is a really poor decision for an adult, except under very limited circumstances. I love crude humor, but there is a time and place for it. Just like the stupid celebrations and drawing penalties to the detriment of the team, or celebrating the fact that he doesn't take his off-season workouts seriously and yet can achieve the 20th ranked WR in the league. AWESOME DUDE! I fail to see how making poor decisions does NOT reflect on his leadership ability. I love Stevie as a player. As a person, I'm sure he can be fun to hang around with, but how he conducts himself as a representative of the team is simply unprofessional on so many levels. It's as if he goes out of his way to do this crap every chance he gets. A person who cannot conduct himself professionally, while great to have around at parties, is not someone on whom I would prefer to rely to lead my team. I get the Peter Pan concept. It sucks having to grow up. But this is what we do. We find a way to celebrate the kid in us when appropriate, and otherwise we conduct ourselves with professionalism and put the team first. We try to do our absolute best, rather than rely on our natural ability to get us by.

Yes, they HAVE gone away. Teams who manage their cap do NOT backload contracts any more, and they seek to avoid forcing a renegotiation after three years with a young guy like Byrd. Why would they want to go through this again in just 3 years? Byrd has the incentive to play, and play well. If he doesn't he only penalizes himself as to the huge payday he seeks. The Bills can play this game if he and Parker want to. It will NOT help Byrd's long-term goal in the least. If the Bills franchise him over the next two seasons, he's two years older and if he shows up after camp and takes half of a season to begin playing well, it will hurt the Bills, but it will hurt him as well, and perhaps more than it hurts the Bills. He can buy an insurance policy against that.

What do you think a back-loaded contract is? It is exactly what you described in the bolded text and yes, the era of those contracts IS over. And spreading the bonus out over multiple years is not new either. All it does is allow the amortization of the consecutive chunks of bonuses to start later in the agreement, albeit over less years. Bottom line is, teams rarely if ever do deals anymore that have the cap hit super low in the beginning of the deal and escalate to much, much higher values at the back-end. The cap hit tends to be evenly distributed, perhaps slightly in favor of the earlier years but not enough to create a problem at the other end. How exactly will it be a bigger contract mess next year? The fact they will go through this process again? Look, if Byrd wants a long-term deal from the Bills, they can sign one next year and it doesn't change ANYTHING other than the fact the new deal starts a season later in his career. The only way it gets worse is if he has some unbelievable year and the Bills will either have to pony up the really big bucks next year, or they merely tag him again and get aggressive about trading him. The Bills hold the cards here. If Byrd is in such demand that he will get huge bucks from someone, and the Bills decide it won't be from them, the Bills will be compensated for losing him with draft picks. Otherwise, they can pony up the cash and it ain't gonna change anything.

Dude, you are completely ignoring the fact that teams will also pay salary over the first years of the contract in addition to the guarantees. You cannot look simply at he guarantees. As I said in several posts here, most teams will not structure contracts that push salary into the back end of a contract anymore. It just creates problems. The Bills are not pushing out any problems into the future by not locking up Byrd now. The cap hit for Byrd over two years under the tag is less or at the very least equal to that they would be under a long-term deal. And in fact, they are BETTER off because they are only guaranteeing a portion of the total that would be guaranteed under a long-term deal on a yearly basis. If Byrd suffers a torn ACL in week one, the Bills are only out $7 Million. If they signed him to long-term deal with $21 Million up front, they will have paid him $21 Million and would be worrying about how well he comes back from the injury. There are a lot of good financial reasons to pay him the franchise tag this year and even next. It is Byrd who suffers because the guarantees are on a yearly basis instead of up front all at once. This is why a player should be willing to at least temper his perceived market value a bit to get the bigger up-front guarantee. Agents like Parker play the "hold-out" game because they are trying to punish the team for using that leverage. They don't want their player to sign for less in exchange for long-term security, they want every dollar they can get, AND get the guarantees up front. The only way they can negate a team's leverage is to play the hold-out game.

Let's do an example. Let's say the Bills cave in and give Byrd a 5 year $45 Million dollar contract with $25 Million up front. That means that the $25 million dollar guarantee would be amortized over 5 years at $5 Million per year. You have to pay a salary, so what teams used to do was pay minimal salary for the first couple of years. So let's say the Bills pay him only $1 Million in salary for the first three years. That's what teams used to do. That means his cap hit for the first three years is only $6 Million per year: The bonus of $25 Million is amortized over the 5 year deal at $5 Million per year, plus the salary of $1 Million equals $6 Million. In year four, you have to start escalating salary, because you have only paid the guy $28 Million of the $45 Million in the first three years. So that means they have to pay him $17 Million over the last 2 years. So say you split remaining the salary at $8.5 Million per season. That means his cap hit the last two years jumps to $13.5 Million. And if you are doing this with Wood and CJ, their cap hits are going to jump about the same time. On top of that, let's say Byrd gets injured in year 2 and can't play at the same level anymore. So in year three, the Bills have to release him because they need the roster spot. His cap hit would then accelerate to $15 Million in dead money! Teams have long since learned NOT to do this anymore. They might take a small benefit for the first year or two on cap space, but it is small. Most teams, especially like the Bills who have cap space, do NOT take more cap space, but rather use the cap space up front by paying more of the salary early on in the deal. In any event, they typically now make the cap hit average out to about the same on a year-to-year basis. In this case, that would be 9 Million per year. Highly unlikely the Bills would ever create a cap hit lower than what they are seeing through use of the franchise tag over the first two years of a long-term deal.

You do realize that most teams combine salary and guaranteed bonus money to roughly approach a cap hit that is even over the length of the deal right. The days of teams backloading deals by paying a guy $20 Million up front and then paying him the smallest possible salary for the first years is over. It is highly unlikely that Byrd's cap hit at any time during the length of his deal will vary much from the average yearly price of the contract. Therefore, there is little difference between paying him two one year salaries that are guaranteed, and paying him a big chunk of change up front and plus salary. If you back load a contract where most of the salary is at the back, your going to be back negotiating an extension or cutting the guy before he gets there anyway, at which time any unamortized bonus money hits the cap after he's gone. Problem is, your assuming that the premise of GG's post is correct. It isn't as I posted above. The Bills would be paying him salary on top of the bonus for the first two years, otherwise it's only a two year deal! If you backload a contract as GG suggests, as soon as the salary escalates, so does the cap hit and suddenly you are really crippled and looking at cutting the player or trying to renegotiate. The days of backloaded contracts are over. Teams have long since learned that only leads to cap hell later on. The cap hit for any deal Byrd would likely sign would be roughly equivalent to what the Bills would pay for Byrd under the tag.