JohnC

I watched a portion of the Eagles/Cardinals game. What surprised me the most was the impressive play of Foles. His accuracy was superb and his confident demeanor on the field was apparent. His first couple of years were very turbulent. But after taking his knocks on the field he has gotten to the point where the game has slowed down and his talent has taken over. Especially for qbs it takes time to mature and have a better mastery of the offense. For those people who are prematurely making a judgment on EJ I recommend a greater degree of patience. Every qb has their own maturation timetable. The way Foles played in his first two years is starkly different from what I saw in his last game. He went from an qb who was under seige to a confident qb who was in command of the game. I'm certainly not declaring Foles to be an elite qb. But his transformation from a young qb who was overwhelmed to be a qb who is in control offers a good example of the importance of being patient with young qbs.

I'll repeat what I said in my prior post that it is not easy calling plays for a rookie qb, especially a young qb who has missed a lot of practice time due to injuries. The OC has to not only factor in what is the best play to counter the defense but he also has to consider the type of plays that best suit his inexperienced qb. At this point no one can reasonably say that EJ is a very accurate passer who can consistently fit the ball in tight spots. Assuming that is so then it is going to scale down the number of plays to draw from. In general the playcalling for EJ has been very cautious. The tendency was to play it safe rather than to gamble. The mentality was not to go out and win games but to not lose games. It might be frustrating for fans but I think it was a wise approach to take. The Bills are at a stage in this season where they have little to lose by taking more risks. So don't be surprised if the offense is opened up more for the rest of the year.

I respectably disagree with your positive view of the roster. Our OL strains to be average. The departure of Levitre left a gaping hole filled by inadequate players. A number of people like Pears (most notably NYC Bill) but I consider him below par. He was a good value pickup but his level of play is average at best. Our receiver corps is below par. The emotional Stevie is not a #1 receiver. He is a decent #2 and a better slot receiver. Woods and Goodwin are good prospects but TJ Graham is another one of Nix's catalogue of busts. Chandler is not a starting TE but I do like him as a second TE. If you consider that the offense is led by a rookie who entered the league very raw then the offense has a way to go. I grant you that Glenn is a superb player that Nix deserves credit for. Let's look at the defense. The LBing corps is horrible---- maybe the worst in the league. Kiki is going to be an upper tier player but at this point he frequently gets caught up in the pack and forgets his lane responsibility. Most of the big running plays against the defense are due to his lack of discipline and over exuberance to react. I agree with you the the DL has played relatively well. But the play of the LBing corps has undercut the good work of the DL. Our DL excels in rushing the passer but they have been gashed on too many running plays. I am a staunch supporter of Gilmore. But I do acknowledge that this year he is not playing well. I attribute much of his decline (from last year) to his injury. I still believe that the Bills are two years away from being a serious team, with the assumption that Manuel develops to the degree that I think he will. Since the departure of Nix and the elevation of Whaley I have felt that this is a three year rebuilding project. I still believe that. Again my view is that this staff has done a solid job with what they had to work with. I respectfully but strongly disagree with the judgment that this was a playoff roster.

I don't understand your hyper-criticism of this coaching staff, especially considering what preceded them. Is there any doubt that this defensive staff is better than its predecessors? The OC has done a solid job with what he was working with at qb. Calling games for backup caliber qbs (Lewis and Tiel) and then calling games for a rookie qb who has missed practice time prior to the season and during the season is not an easy task. There is a delicate balance that Hackett has to always keep in mind when calling plays for Manuel: He hss to call plays that the rookie qb is able to make at his experience level. You don't think there is a difference calling plays for a Brees or Brady? The repertoire of plays at their disposal is significantly larger than what a rookie qb can handle. When you are a defensive or offensive coordinator you are at the mercy of your talent level. The success of most plays has more to do with the talent of players executing the play (offense and defense) than the play itself. In general, I think the coaching staff is demonstrably better than the prior coaching staffs. Very often what is lost is the player development aspect of their job. It is more than working up a game plan. It is also about developing your younger talent. There again I think they have done a good job. It was very evident to me when the season started that this roster was very limited. This year was mostly dedicated to rebuilding a lackluster roster. In almost every game the team gave a good effort. The team, with the exception of the Steeler and away Jets game, was never outclassed. In general my view is that the HC and his staff have done a quality job.

Edwards Arm will eventually come around. Right now he is very invested in his bandwith paradigm. It's a very interesting approach to evaluating qb prospects and it does have merit. My complaint with his paradigm is that there are plenty of examples outside of his paradigm who have thrived at the position. On this issue don't give up on Edwards Arm. I and many others are taking turns hammering away trying to wear him down. If he is as open-minded as I think he is he will eventually come around. He is like the man who only dates blonds. When he eventually trys a redhead who rocks his boat he will learn the lesson about the wisodom of expanding his bandwith.

Excellent post Well reasoned and stated.

I didn't suggest that they should use a first round pick on an OG or even TE. There is also a free agent market to draw from for the guard position. You can get a veteran competent guard who is solid instead of relying on bargain basement and bottom feeding talent. I wouldn't be adverse to using a first round pick on an OT. Pears is nothing more than pedestrian. If there was a dynamic TE prospect I would have no problem trading down and taking an impact TE. > Steadily Big Ben got better and better to the point that he is now bordering on being an elite qb. You have made a determination that I'm not ready to make. Atlanta gave up on Farvre (for a variety of reasons) after his first year. This qb with little bandwith led his team to a SB championship. He is going to be in the HOF. Very often patiece is a virture. > He doesn't have the natural impeccable accuracy that those types of special qbs possess. Cam Newton doesn't fit your bandwith paradigm but he was the frist player taken in the draft, and he is currently exhibiting a judicious approach to qbing that your bandwith theory can't explain. > This organization has no choice other than place their chips on the qb they brought to the table. I'm very aware of your thoughts are on this issue. But do you really believe that this organization is going to draft another qb in the first round next year?

The WaltersFootball evaluation you cited is a terrific evaluation of him as a prospect. What made him appealing were his pysical tools and his personality and character traits. That's the essence of why he was such an intriguing prospect and also a risky prospect. Not one qb prospect in last year's draft was a clean prospect. In all probability no qb prospect in this year's draft is a clean (guaranteed) prospect. The best qb I have seen this year in the college ranks is FSU's Winston. He is not eligible to enter the draft this year and he has some serious legal issues hovering over him. Andrew Luck is a once in a generation qb. So let's not bother using him as a template to compare qbs to. Russell Wilson is another special prospect in that his on the field maturity is already at an elite level. Kaepernick/Griffin/Newton/Foles were not instantly finished products. All of them are undergoing the challenges of learning how to play. That's the frustrating nature of the learning curve that can't be avoided. Since you can't avoid it my recommendation to you is don't allow yourself to be spooked to the point of prematurely pulling the plug on a prospect. The irony that you haven't stated is that the struggles that EJ is going through are the same struggles that other future qb prospects are going to endure. Why start the developmental process and then start the same process with another fresher prospect??? That makes no sense to me. Next offseason the Bills shouldn't use a high draft pick for another qb. In my view that would be foolish. What they need to do is do everything they can to put EJ in a position to succeed. They need to bolster the OL and they need to acquire a playmaking TE. The model for qb development that we should copy is the model that the Steelers used when they drafted Roethlisberger. They had a terrific OL and emphasized the running game and kept the pressure off of their raw qb. Steadily Big Ben got better and better to the point that he is now bordering on being an elite qb. If you put things in perspective you have to acknowledge that EJ has shown enough ability to allow you to think that he can be a franchise qb. The inconsistency he is exhibiting is the norm for young qbs. Is he going to be an elite qb? Absolutely not! He doesn't have the natural impeccable accuracy that those types of special qbs possess. This organization has no choice other than place their chips on the qb they brought to the table. Gambles pay off if you play the cards you are holding; not if you too soon throw the cards on table and walk away. If you want guarantees then you shouldn't have walked into the casino,

At least for me the difference in determining whether a team is taking a step forward rather than being mired in the muck of mediocrity is the play of the qb. The Falcons are a very battered team, especially on both of their lines. What enabled them to come out of this game as winners was the differntial in qb play. Matt Ryan was able to play the whole field. He spread his passes around and he used all his receivers. On the other hand the Bills OC kept a tight reign on Manuel and limited his options to mostly the safe underneath stuff. Maybe the OC feels compelled to do so because EJ is not at the point where he can make quick reads and his accuracy in tight spaces is too erratic. EJ locks in on SJ at the expense of his other receivers. Woods has become the forgotten receiver. TJ Graham is a bust. All teams have position vulnerabilities due to the nature of the cap that spreads talent out. Every team has unit vulnerabilities that can't be hidden. For the most part the difference between a successful franchise and an unsuccessful franchise is the quality of the qb play. I still believe that EJ can be a franchise qb. But he has a way to go. This season was never about the playoffs. The roster was simply too inadequate for that marker. The most important issue for this team is finding out whether EJ is a legitimate franchise qb. I believe he is but I am not going to confidently state that I know it for sure.

Like you I was impressed with McKelvin. I think he and Aaron Williams have benefited the most from this defensive coaching staff. I thought Kiko got caught up inside without covering his lanes for a few big plays. But his instincts for a rookie are superb. Lawson was a good value free agent pickup. Hughes was a free bonus. I resolutely don't agree with you on Gilmore. He is playing hurt. When all is said and done he is our best DB. You may not see it now but be patient it will come to you. You were steadfastfully critical of Spiller but now you have reluctantly come around. I'm sure you are aware that he is playing on a bad wheel that won't fully heal until next year. EJ is a project that I'm sticking with. I understand why Hackett has kept a tight reign on him but now it is time to be a little more aggressive and let him fling the ball downfield a lot more. Was it just me but it seemed a very large segment of the crowd was for Atlanta? No one can argue that the Toronto series is nothing more than a money grab at the expense of a team's competitive advantage of the home field. Brandon is a good marketing man. But whatever he says about the Toronto series rings hollow.

The problem with this franchise has little to do with not taking an exotic approach to drafting qbs but is more attributable to poor drafting in general. The Bills had opportunities to draft good qb prospects but let them pass by. Kaepernick and Russell Wilson are the most glaring examples of their lackluster evaluation system. The moving up to select TJ Graham at the expense of not taking Russell Wilson still rankles me. This regime is trying to build a full roster. There are many identifiable holes that need to be addressed. Not only do they have to add talent to climb up the ladder of mediocrtiy but they also have this distressing habit of letting talent go they they cultivated. Filling a hole is challenging enough, but when you have to backtrack to refill a hole of your own creation you don't move too far forward in your quest to get beyond being below average. I'm not going to declare EJ a success story at this point. No one can. But let's see how he does with his remaining games this year and a full training camp under his belt. My problem with your approach is that if you bring in a new qb prospect then this team in the short run is set back again. Aren't you tired of taking the down elevator and starting at the bottom floor again? The Bills spent a lot of resources last offseason determining who was going to be their best prospect in last year's draft. Why be so impatient with the qb that this franchise invested in? If he doesn't work out then he doesn't work out. When that becomes apparent then move on to the next option. I'm trying to be open-minded on your innovative approach to finding a franchise qb. But for a number of reasons I don't find it very appealing. There are so many needs that need to be addressed that I'm not going to gratuitously squander a high first round pick on another qb at this point. My advice to you is be more patient and develop what you got. When you ride the bronco long enough you can end up with a tamed horse that can get you where you want to go. At this time jumping off of your erratic ride is simply not a wise thing to do. Watching a rookie qb play can be very unsettling. Being frustrated and not sure are normal sensations. Don't let that queasiness force you to do someting that will come back to haunt you.

If it appears that Manuel isn't a legitimate franchise qb you will get little in return for him if you draft another qb who potentially has a higher upside. That contradicts your original premise that both of your qbs have value on the trade market. SJB brought up the example of the Walsh trade after the drafting of Aikman. That deal happened a quarter century ago. There is a reason why that type of deal is such a rarity. It is so improbable that the odds of it happening is bordering on being nonexistent. It is very unlikely a team is going to give up an abundance of picks when the discarded qb is not valued by his trading team. Your Cutler example has little to do with your orignial premise. He made it very clear that he didn't want to remain with the franchise and work with the new coaching staff. The HC wasn't enamored with him and his attitude so the organization made the trade.

The Walsh/Aikman scenario happened a quarter century ago. There is a good reason why that duplicative qb strategy hasn't happened too often. In addition, it didn't take the Cowboys too long to determine that Walsh didn't have a strong enough arm to be a quality qb starter. When the Saints made the deal with the Cowboys that bolstered the Cowboys and weakened their team they made a stupendous blunder that current non harebrained franchises would not want to make. Another factor why the Dallas/Saint deal you make reference to is improbable is that in the NFL of today draft picks are coveted in this era strongly influenced by the cap. The Bills are in a rebuild stage where they are entering the level of respectability. If they believe that they already have a good franchise qb prospect with their first drafted qb it would make little sense to delay the rebuild process with another younger qb entering the mix.

Calm down! You are jumping ahead of yourself. We are dealing with a Ralph Wilson owned franchise. Let's look at the context. The Bills have not made the playoffs in 14 yrs, and still counting. The Bills have had a losing record in 11 out of the last 12 seasons. This is a franchise that for a generation has not mastered the bare basics of running a franchise. Now you are dreaming of taking the grand leap of being pioneers in new ways of running a franchise. Before this franchise can get to this advanced stage of evolution it has to master the basics of life in real time i.e. now. What this franchise needs more than anything else is stability and maturity. Going off on some experimental course instead of concentrating on mastering the basics of managing a franchise and coaching a team is a recipe for disaster, and starting over again, and again. Before you can master calculus you need to be able to master arithmetic. Before you become a neuro-surgeon you have to be able to handle a basic biology class. Go ahead and reach for the moon. I don't want to deter you from seeking your dreams. But I'm not going to apologize for being more grounded and seek basic competency before I follow (your) out of this world dreams.

I understand your position but it still doesn't make sense to me. Let's go back to your San Diego example of Brees and Rivers. Brees had some early struggles (not unsurprisingly for a young qb) and he had some injury issues. The Chargers drafted Rivers and allowed Brees to leave because of injury concerns and also contract restraints with two qbs. Let's review the rsults. Drew Brees left with no compensation (I believe---????) and ends up in New Orleans. As good as Rivers is he is not as good as Brees who will eventually be a first ballot HOFer. In addition, Brees has led his team to a SB championship and has consistently led his team to regular visits to the playoffs. What it comes down to is if the Chargers would have stuck with Brees (hindsight is a beautiful tool) they would have been better off. My main criticism with your consecutive qb procurement approach is the damage it does to the qb development to the first qb. You develop with playing time. If you play the first qb at the expense of the second qb you diminish the second qb. If you play the second qb at the expense of the first qb you diminish the first qb. Your premise on this issue falters for the simple reason that you don't account for the fact that the qb position is qualitatively different from other positions. With the other positions, even if you have an abundance of players playing the same position, they can still get playing time. You can't easily rotate the backup qb in a game and then rotate the qb out as you can with the other positions. Sometimes being conventional is better than being innovative. Very often you can end up outsmarting yourself when trying to demonstrate how much more creative one is compared to the boring conventional crowd. Remember Tom Donahoe? On this qb issue I prefer the stodgy approach over the risky creative approach. Your road is too perilous for my tastes. I'm sticking to the paved road rather than the off beaten path you are on. I'm very confident is saying that I will get to the destination sooner than you will with fewer damages to your now jalopy.

I don't understand your theoretical strategy of drafting qbs in the first round in consecutive years. If the first drafted qb demonstrates an ability to be a franchise qb then why would you pursue another high round qb instead of using that pick to address one of your other many needs? What a young qb needs more than anything else to develop is playing time. Your approach makes sense if the first qb you selected demonstrates little ability to succeed in the long run, such as Gabbert. But if a young qb gets progressively better or demonstrates the potential that he can play that position then why would you hinder his development with another potential prospect hovering over him? It's not an issue of a qb being weak-minded by feeling threatened by the other prospect but the issue is playing time. Let's forget about the possibility of an Adrew Luck caliber being available in the second draft year. He is a once in a generation type qb who will be the first pick taken in any draft. If you want to pursue an intriguing qb prospect in a lower round, such as Russell Wilson, then I wouldn't be adverse to taking qbs in consecutive years. But for me taking two qbs in the first round in consecutive years is not an approach I would advocate for. What makes more sense is if an interesting qb prospect is available in the second year with numerous suitors trying to move up to our spot to get that prospect then I would make the trade down and accumulate picks to address the numerous holes that exist on the roster.

He abided to the terms of the CBA in his contract dealings with the organization. That doesn't mean that he has to like the situation. What do you want him to do? Put on a fake smile and dance for you? Repeating what I have already stated his reaction is the same reaction that nearly all players who are franchised have. All players prefer being a free agent and testing the market rather than being franchised.

Let's just reduce this discussion to simple terms. In my opinion JB is going to sign with the team that pays him the highest salary and most favored structured contract i.e. guaranteed money. The Bills could stymie his ability to be an unrestricted free agent by again franchising him at $8.2 M. While some people believe that the Bills will do that I don't believe they will. Bryd is not reacting any differently than any player who is in position to be a free agent who is then franchised by their respective team. No player is going to like being franchised. The norm is when the player gets to the market he is going to let it work for him. That is what Levitre did. Without trying to be argumentative on this issue JB is going to maximize his value by letting the market compete for his services. That is how the system is designed. My positiion from the beginning was that the Bills should have signed him to an extended deal last year. Without a doubt it was going to be a rich deal for him. The Bills had plenty of cap space to get the deal done. If you are going to overpay for a player I would rather have it be for an instrumental player. The Bills payed above market rates for Mario Williams. Most people would agree that it was well worth it. So if you are going to overpay for a safety then do it for an impact player that he has demonstrated to be.

The Redskins come off of their two year $36 M penalty at $18 M per year next year. If they decide to target Byrd to upgrade their poor defensive backfield I am confident that they will win a bidding war with the Bills. They will structure the contract so it is frontloaded with guaranteed money that will make it a more appealing deal for JB. The issue isn't whether the Bills are in a better cap situation than the Skins or any other team; the issue is whether they are willing to make the financial committment to keep him. The Bills are $20 M under the cap this year. They had the ability to comfortably sign him within their cap space to an extended contract last year, but they didn't. Not only did they have a significant amount of cap space this year but the organization rolled in a portion of Fitz's salary into next year's cap allotment instead of writing it off this year. The mistake you are making is confusing having the ability to do something with having the willingness to do something. The Bills' record on how they manage their finances is well documented. If the Bills outbid the market they will retain his services. If they don't he will walk. I don't forsee the player agreeing to a hometown discount. It's simply business.

If Marrone or Brandon felt that Byrd was hustling the system they would have reacted to that type of team destructive behavior. On a daily basis they watched him rehab and work out. Not one person from the upper echelon of the organization to all the coaches and players on the team indicated that his behavior was inauthentic. What it comes down to is that those in the room with him find his behavior appropriate while people from the outside who have no contact with him making assumptions that they have no basis to make from other than that is their guess. You have no proof that he could have played when he was out rehabbing his well documented injury because there is no proof. Making up besmirching assertions on the basis of no facts other than your non-factual opinion is a very weak way to support your position. You can call me an apologist for him if you want. But my opinion regarding his conduct in based on people in the organization who saw him every day. What it comes down to is that you want me and others who find little fault with the way Byrd conducted himself to disprove a negative characterization of him that you base on nothing but your impression. Do you honestly believe that Brandon and Marrone would want to sign Byrd to a longterm contract (as they have both unequivocably stated) if they felt that he cheated the organization by malingering? Byrd and the organization are going to act in their own best interests. How else do you expect the parties to behave? If Byrd can make more money with another team he will do so. What is wrong with that? It's a business approach and the right approach to take in the business of the NFL.

Jaurius Byrd is making $6.916 M this year, not $7.9 M this season. When Brandon was asked on WGR if he felt that Bryd was maligering because of a contract dispute he said absolutely not. Brandon stated that he regularly saw him at the facility and was convinced that he was doing everything necessary to get healthy and get back on the field. When Marrone was asked on WGR if he felt that Byrd was milking the situation because of a contract dispute he said absolutely not. He said he saw him every day working hard to get back to full health and get back on the field. Many people continue to make the claim that he was not getting back on the field out of spite. What do they base their speculative claim on? Certainly they are not basing it on what his bossess and fellow players witnessed on a first hand basis. Not one playerI called out JB for not playing when he was not ready to play. Yet many people continue to make a claim that he declined to play because he was upset with the way he was treated. There is no doubt he was not happy with his contract situation but he handled this situation in a way that was the right thing for him and the team. It was not in the team's interest nor his own interest to prematurely get back on the field with his foot injury. Re-aggravating that type of foot injury could set him back by a year. Yet people continue say what they think he did while simply basing it on their prejudicial impression. If the top sources within the organization are saying the opposite of what those who are smearing JB are saying I will lean toward those in the know rather than those on the outside who are guessing. The bottom line is that it was in his own interest to get back on the field because he was entering another free agency year. It was also in the team's interest to observe him play while he was healthy rather than impaired so that they can make a reasoned judgment on his next contract offer.

I agree with you. There is a line of reasoning that the guard position is not an important position. The loss of Levitre was a major blow. I'm not arguing that the Bills should have paid him at the amount he got from the Titans. But I am saying is that they should have replaced him with higher quality talent than with what they had. There is no doubt that the void at the LG position has had a major negative impact on Spiller and the running game in general. When you plan on playing a rookie qb it helps the qb if the OL facilitates a good running game to take the pressure off of him. Under the new NFL rules of "proper" hitting and less head hunting hitting having a very instinctive safety who can react to the ball is more valuable than under the more belligerent interpretation of the old rules. If the Bills lose Byrd to the market it will be a big loss.

There is nothing new about the Byrd saga and how the organizaton handled the situation. For the sake of argument if the organization doesn't come to terms with him and instead keeps him under the franchise tag ($8.2 M) then in retrospect wouldn't it have been better to simply sign him to a contract last year? Most contracts, even long term ones, are structured so that the real money is paid in the early years of the contract with the organization having the ability to walk away from the deal at the back end of the contract. A two year franchise contract is a rich contract that has the liability that the player is still in position to walk the next year. You and many others are making the mistake that there is a feud going on between the agent, Parker, and the organization. That is not the case. There is nothing unusual going on between the parties that is outside of the norm. Both the organization and the agent are using their leverage to get the best deal for themselves. The Bills are not going to act out of spite if they believe that the result is going to hurt their interests $$$$. The agent is doing what he is paid to do i.e. get the best deal he can for his client. It's a hardball game played by both sides. It isn't as personal as most people make it out to be. When it comes to money Parker is tough, just as the organization is. The way the Bills manage their finances is different from the way many other teams manage their finances. That is their prerogative. But in that type of environment if another franchise is interested in bidding on Byrd's services (such as the Skins) the Bills are at a disadvatage. Where I disagree with you and many others is that I don't believe that the Bills are willing to franchise Byrd again at $8.2 in order to keep him off the market. The Bills were $20 M under the cap this year and couldn't get a deal done. I simply don't see him wearing the Bills uniform next year unless the organization is willing to pay him the most. That's how I see it playing out.

The Bills have a business model and history in which if they can replace a player with a much cheaper player they will do it. Can they afford his salary within the cap? Absolutely. But that isn't how they approach managing their finances. How were the Levitre neogtiations handled? The smart approach would have gotten a contract done prior to his free agent year. They didn't take the initiative to lock him up. When a player reaches free agency it would be foolish to let that opportunity go to waste. I simply don't see the Bills signing him for $8.2 M when they have Searcy waiting in the wings for more playing time. Is he nearly as good as Byrd? Of course not. They drafted two safeties last year. So the pipeline has functional bodies waiting in the wings. If the Bills were going to franchise Byrd for two consecutive years they should have signed him to a long term deal last year. They didn't. It is my view (contrary to many) that he will be playing on another team next year with a richer contract than if he stayed with the Bills. The Bills act in their interest; he will act in his interest. Ultimately it is a brutal sport in a high stakes business. I believe he will be playing somewhere else next year. That's how I see things playing out.

One team that would be in a good position to sign Byrd is the Redskins. They will be off of their $36 M two year cap punishment (2x$18 M). They have a desperate need to upgrade their secondary and defense. Byrd would be a terrific fit for them. The Bills are currently not only $20 M under the cap this year but they rolled a portion of Fitz's salary into next year. If the Bills and the Skins are both vying for Byrd's services next year the Skins would easily win that bidding war. They will structure the contract in such a way that Byrd woulld get more guaranteed money while the Bills would simply move on to a cheaper player. Byrd and his agent fought hard for a maximum contract last year. They didn't get it. When he gets to his free agency status he is not going to let it go to waste. Anyone who thinks that the Bills are going to franchise him again at an $8.2 rate is wishfully thinking. He is not dumb enough to take a hometown discount after what he went through in last year's hardnosed stance taken by both parties. The only way he is going to be retained is if the Bills give him the highest offer. It is as simple as that. It's a business approach that both parties are going to take.