K Gun Special Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 No, my plan would be to pick up a QB, a LT, and a weakside pass rushing LB through the draft. In that order. Preferably, they'll be able to move up to obtain another second by acquiring some ammo (a third-plus for Marshawn?) A Dansby comes around once every few years (not every year) and the Bills aren't going to be able to sign that sort of player anyway because of both money and the attractiveness of the destination. The Karlos Dansbys of the world ain't signing with the Bills. It's $5 million, and honestly I'd have to look. The whole thing is skewed because guys like Vernon Gholston and Aaron Maybin have broken the bank as first round picks. My bad but for $5 million same thing, look it up. I know its not the same (MLB) but Urlacher's base salary is $5.25
Nuncha Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 Yes, it makes sense to overpay an aging, clumsy, slow, defensive end to play linebacker for a four year deal, because it is impossible to conceive that the Bills might be able to replace him. In four years. Four years. I feel a little better now about the rude post you felt like putting in my thread, to see that you are actually just a total idiot. LOL! Agree with you 100%. This organization let SEVERAL good players walk away over the past ten years....Then they throw the bank at a worthess aging bum who was average (at best) as a DE, and SUCKS even more as a LB. Way to go guys.
NaPolian8693 Posted September 30, 2010 Author Posted September 30, 2010 Everyone around here seems to think there is no money left for free agents because of the Kelsay deal. Here are some facts: - The Bills have effectively UNLIMITED money to spend in free agency. They can sign lots of players and have no salary cap issues whatsoever. - The Bills have to pay more for free agents that other teams, because they are one of the the most unpopular free agency destinations, bar none. Just because some other linebacker plays for less than Kelsay in another market has zero relevance to this situation. - The Bills simply can't attract top free agents anyways, so all these fantasyland free agent linebackers the Bills could bring in are just a pipe dream anyways. - Most posters here can not understand the situation on a level beyond that of "OMG KELSAY GOT BURNED BY FINLEY $6M WTF".
K Gun Special Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 Everyone around here seems to think there is no money left for free agents because of the Kelsay deal. Here are some facts: - The Bills have effectively UNLIMITED money to spend in free agency. They can sign lots of players and have no salary cap issues whatsoever. - The Bills have to pay more for free agents that other teams, because they are one of the the most unpopular free agency destinations, bar none. Just because some other linebacker plays for less than Kelsay in another market has zero relevance to this situation. - The Bills simply can't attract top free agents anyways, so all these fantasyland free agent linebackers the Bills could bring in are just a pipe dream anyways. - Most posters here can not understand the situation on a level beyond that of "OMG KELSAY GOT BURNED BY FINLEY $6M WTF". The market set by other OLBs has no relevance? really? Im not sure we should be listening to you then bc that is how all contracts are negotiated. You cannot find comparable players to Kelsay earning as much as he is, nor can you find similar players earning slightly less to support your 'we have to overpay argument'
NaPolian8693 Posted September 30, 2010 Author Posted September 30, 2010 Also you guys don't really seem to understand how contracts work. Did you even see that the signing bonus was small, so the Bills can just cut him down the road with much worry if they want to?
K Gun Special Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 Also you guys don't really seem to understand how contracts work. Did you even see that the signing bonus was small, so the Bills can just cut him down the road with much worry if they want to? Actually i do, i deal with them on a daily basis and have negotiated some at the professional sports level. But really, keep going.
dave mcbride Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 Actually i do, i deal with them on a daily basis and have negotiated some at the professional sports level. But really, keep going. That may be the case, but he does have a point. The "option bonus" - which I take to be the actual bonus, although I could be wrong - is $2 million.
NaPolian8693 Posted September 30, 2010 Author Posted September 30, 2010 (edited) Actually i do, i deal with them on a daily basis and have negotiated some at the professional sports level. But really, keep going. Haha quite the shocker you weren't able to cut it at the professional sports level. A wannabe agent that doesn't comprehend that the Bills have to overpay on free agents, nice. You should have represented Cornell Green and signed him to a nice minimum salary deal! Edited September 30, 2010 by NaPolian8693
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 (edited) There have been good pieces written on how contrary to conventional wisdom, pass rushers often hit their stride in their early 30s because they understand the game so much better (e.g., Bruce Smith had his best year in 1996, Strahan in 07, Jason Taylor in 2006, Chris Doleman in 1998, etc.). I wish I could find the article I'm referring to, but I simply can't. It was convincing, but I guess you'll have to trust me. I'm pretty sure it was a Sporting News piece. Not buying. These cats were in stable situations, not being bounced to new positions, and radically changing schemes every few seasons. Furthermore, are you seriously comparing Chris Friggin Kelsay to Hall-of-Famers like Bruce and Strahan?? Saying that you don't need a pass rush from the strong side is just ridiculous. Was Bryce Paup useless to the Bills? He rushed from the strong side. How about Bennett? Would you pass on Reggie White as a LDE because you don't need a pass rush from the strong side? Sorry, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. At any rate, you're not going to get a superstar at every position. But there is a decent chance you'll get guys who suck if you undervalue steady/solid players. Who said anything about superstar? I'm thinking upgrade from really !@#$ing bad. Have you actually seen Kelsay at OLB? Edited September 30, 2010 by Sisyphean Bills
NaPolian8693 Posted September 30, 2010 Author Posted September 30, 2010 The whole Kelsay drama on this board is just a classic illustration of group think. People can't think critically for themselves, they just kind of want to pile on whatever the herd is saying at the moment.
K Gun Special Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 The whole Kelsay drama on this board is just a classic illustration of group think. People can't think critically for themselves, they just kind of want to pile on whatever the herd is saying at the moment. bc your statements continue to be logically inconsistent. You start off by praising kelsay bc you cant replace everyone in one year, when none of the guys you listed were going to leave. just now you say the board is group think at its worst bc people pile on the herd. So the group hates the herd which is not a group?
dave mcbride Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 Not buying. These cats were in stable situations, not being bounced to new positions, and radically changing schemes every few seasons. Furthermore, are you seriously comparing Chris Friggin Kelsay to Hall-of-Famers like Bruce and Strahan?? Saying that you don't need a pass rush from the strong side is just ridiculous. Was Bryce Paup useless to the Bills? He rushed from the strong side. How about Bennett? Would you pass on Reggie White as a LDE because you don't need a pass rush from the strong side? Sorry, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. Who said anything about superstar? I'm thinking upgrade from really !@#$ing bad. Have you actually seen Kelsay at OLB? Like I said, let's reserve judgment about Kelsay until we're far deeper into the season. He's very clearly not %$##@ bad, although I realize that other people think otherwise. As for my comment about pass rushers in their 30s, I'm not comparing those guys to Kelsay. My (far) more general point is that pass rushers who manage to stay healthy tend to accrue experience advantages that often outweigh any loss of first step. Given the nature of the position, knowing more moves and how to actually play brings measurable benefits. Finally, I *never* said that I don't want a pass rusher from the strong side. What I said was that I want a pass rusher from the weak side first. Baby steps. Why get rid of a decent player on the historically less important side for pass rushing if you should be investing on the other side??? One minor note as well: Cornelius Bennett's reputed ability to rush the passer was always greater than his actual ability, I think in part because of how he exploded on the scene in 1987. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BennCo00.htm .
DanInUticaTampa Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 I personally wouldn't mind extending Kelsay and keep him for depth in the next four years... but signing him to THAT kind of contract is just too much. And him being a starter is too much. One thing is for certain, our linebackers are KILLING the offense. They better sign at least 1 decent OLB that can rush the passer.
Clippers of Nfl Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 The whole Kelsay drama on this board is just a classic illustration of group think. People can't think critically for themselves, they just kind of want to pile on whatever the herd is saying at the moment. u may be right about most people here. or wrong. i dont care. but EXCEPT ME! i dont care what people think of me. i dont kiss @. im not trying to make friends. i come here to talk football/joke around/get bills info. THAT'S IT. so i will agree with anyone or disagree with anyone. even the moderators. i appreciate them for keeping the site. but i will defend my point if i have to. having said that, I DIDNT NEED A bills board to tell me he's not good. i have been saying he's not good for years! for the record. i would keep him. but at the vet minimum. preferably as a back up also.
Cash Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 Look at the Bills linebackers. You have Poz. You have Kelsay. Then you have: Akin Ayodele Antonio Coleman Andra Davis Chris Ellis Keith Ellison Aaron Maybin Arthur Moats Reggie Torbor I mean, there is just not much there. Do you want to extend Keith Ellison instead? It is just not realistic to replace all of these players in one offseason. Kelsay isn't very good, but neither is anyone else. You just have to keep some mediocre players around while the team goes through the process of rebuilding. It's not like the Bills are going to run out of cap space. This has no bearing on free agency or the draft. There are bigger areas of need on this team, and Kelsay is just a band-aid for a few years while more important issues are addressed. Wrong. There is no salary cap, but the Bills have a finite budget. Every dollar spent on Kelsay is a dollar that can not be spent elsewhere. Furthermore, he's being paid big-time starter money, which probably means that the team feels he's a good starter, and won't look to replace him via either free agency or the draft. I would much rather see Chris Ellis or even Antonio Coleman play OLB than Kelsay, because they're young and have some upside. Ellis has looked better than Kelsay so far this year. And then consider that Ellis and Coleman combined probably make about a third of what Kelsay makes, maybe less. Is Kelsay three times as good as Chris Ellis? He's being paid like it. Is he twice as good as Reggie Torbor? Again, that's how he's being paid.
KOKBILLS Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 Also you guys don't really seem to understand how contracts work. Dude seriously...How long have you been around here? You honestly think Folks on this site don't understand how NFL Contracts work? If you ever intend to have your side considered you gotta stop insulting the collective intelligence around here..Cause there may be a few meat-heads, but by and large there are some VERY knowledgeable NFL Fans on this Board who most definitely understand the ins and outs of Contracts, the Cap, etc... We understand...We still think it was a dumb Deal by a Team that seemingly is trying to set some kind of record for poor decisions... So what else do we not understand about the NFL and it's inner workings?
K Gun Special Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 Haha quite the shocker you weren't able to cut it at the professional sports level. A wannabe agent that doesn't comprehend that the Bills have to overpay on free agents, nice. You should have represented Cornell Green and signed him to a nice minimum salary deal! I wasnt on the player side, pal. And i still do work for that particular team so i was able to "cut it" quite well.
dave mcbride Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 (edited) Dude seriously...How long have you been around here? You honestly think Folks on this site don't understand how NFL Contracts work? If you ever intend to have your side considered you gotta stop insulting the collective intelligence around here..Cause there may be a few meat-heads, but by and large there are some VERY knowledgeable NFL Fans on this Board who most definitely understand the ins and outs of Contracts, the Cap, etc... We understand...We still think it was a dumb Deal by a Team that seemingly is trying to set some kind of record for poor decisions... So what else do we not understand about the NFL and it's inner workings? Like I said above, I think he has a point. Many here seem to think that it's a 4-year/$24 million contract, which isn't true. If he hits the incentives, then he'll get that, but in that case we'll have gotten him for a song. The real contract is 4 years/$20 million, which seems like a lot until you realize that the only guaranteed money he's receiving is a $2 million bonus right now and a raise of approximately $400,000 this year. Not all of the details are available, but it seems unlikely that there's a second guaranteed bonus lurking in the wings. Edited September 30, 2010 by dave mcbride
DreReed83 Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 Look at the Bills linebackers. You have Poz. You have Kelsay. Then you have: Akin Ayodele Antonio Coleman Andra Davis Chris Ellis Keith Ellison Aaron Maybin Arthur Moats Reggie Torbor I mean, there is just not much there. Do you want to extend Keith Ellison instead? It is just not realistic to replace all of these players in one offseason. Kelsay isn't very good, but neither is anyone else. You just have to keep some mediocre players around while the team goes through the process of rebuilding. It's not like the Bills are going to run out of cap space. This has no bearing on free agency or the draft. There are bigger areas of need on this team, and Kelsay is just a band-aid for a few years while more important issues are addressed. OR you could NOT pay a player who never produces and replace him with players that WILL perform. I like that idea better.
NaPolian8693 Posted September 30, 2010 Author Posted September 30, 2010 Dude seriously...How long have you been around here? You honestly think Folks on this site don't understand how NFL Contracts work? If you ever intend to have your side considered you gotta stop insulting the collective intelligence around here..Cause there may be a few meat-heads, but by and large there are some VERY knowledgeable NFL Fans on this Board who most definitely understand the ins and outs of Contracts, the Cap, etc... We understand...We still think it was a dumb Deal by a Team that seemingly is trying to set some kind of record for poor decisions... So what else do we not understand about the NFL and it's inner workings? Do you understand they can just cut him two years down the road with almost no penalty? Do you understand how much Stroud and McGee are making? Do you understand that it takes some time to adjust from a 4-3 to a 3-4? Do you understand they have little chance of landing a top OLB in free agency? Would you prefer to spend one of the first two picks in the draft on an OLB rather than QB/OT?
Recommended Posts