Jerry Jabber Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 For the doom & bloomers out there that say Ralph is cheap, Ralph is getting ready to sell the team, go get a straw and suck it up already!! The real reason why the Bills are cost cutting now is because they are freeing up cap money to resign key players. Parrish's contract is being worked on. Stevie Johnson is in his last year of his contract. Depending on how Fitz does, he will either get a long term contract extension or just a journeyman offer. After this year, I think Wood & Levitre have 2 years left on their contracts, so they will need extensions as well. So if the Bills spend to the cap like some fans want them to, then how in the he'll are they going to be able to resign the key players that I just mentioned? Nix said he wants to spend the big bucks on resigning their own players and not spend it on high profile players. That philosophy has been working for the Steelers, so I have no problem with that. Gloomers....damn auto correct!!!!
BillnutinHouston Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 (edited) For the doom & bloomers out there that say Ralph is cheap, Ralph is getting ready to sell the team, go get a straw and suck it up already!! The real reason why the Bills are cost cutting now is because they are freeing up cap money to resign key players. Parrish's contract is being worked on. Stevie Johnson is in his last year of his contract. Depending on how Fitz does, he will either get a long term contract extension or just a journeyman offer. After this year, I think Wood & Levitre have 2 years left on their contracts, so they will need extensions as well. So if the Bills spend to the cap like some fans want them to, then how in the he'll are they going to be able to resign the key players that I just mentioned? Nix said he wants to spend the big bucks on resigning their own players and not spend it on high profile players. That philosophy has been working for the Steelers, so I have no problem with that. Gloomers....damn auto correct!!!! I agree. Some other thoughts on how the new regime's philosophy impacts overall payroll: 1) Building through the draft by definition means that payroll will not jump up quickly. And when your efforts to land an occasional big-time free agent (Clabo) fail, that keeps payroll down as well (not by choice of course). As a side note, I believe that Buddy's "building through the draft" philosophy is more of a practical acknowledgement of the relative nonattractiveness of Buffalo as a free agent destination than it is a true philosophy of winning (as evidenced by his efforts at Clabo). 2) When you inherit a talent-poor roster and you have a philosophy of spending $ to retain/extend GOOD incumbents on the roster, it stands to reason that payroll will go down initially while the FEW good players get extended. When "better drafting" takes over, then you have a roster that can grow together. Edited September 4, 2011 by BillnutinHouston
jcbillsfan Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 ding ding ding , we have a winner. THE PLAN FROM DAY ONE .
CodeMonkey Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 (edited) So they do not want to sign better players that could make them a better team now. Instead they want to save the money now so that they can resign the key players from the 4-12 season last year? Even though if they spent the money this year on short term veteran improvements they could cut these players in the future when they needed to in order to fit under the cap? This is your logic? This theory makes the Bills front office seems so stupid that it makes you look like a "gloomer" in my opinion. LOL I am not privy to the inner working of OBD, but I sure as hell hope you are not correct for the sake of the Bills future! Edited September 4, 2011 by CodeMonkey
BillnutinHouston Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 So they do not want to sign better players that could make them a better team now. Instead they want to save the money now so that they can resign the key players from the 4-12 season last year? Even though if they spent the money this year on short term veteran improvements they could cut these players in the future when they needed to in order to fit under the cap? This is your logic? This theory makes the Bills front office seems so stupid that it makes you look like a "gloomer" in my opinion. LOL So I guess you think that Buffalo has as good a chance at top level free agents as everyone else, dollar-for-dollar. I think we may be headed in the right direction by having Merriman help with recruiting, but I'm not sure that I agree. If we had beat out Atlanta for Clabo's services I might give that view some consideration, but alas we did not.
CodeMonkey Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 So I guess you think that Buffalo has as good a chance at top level free agents as everyone else, dollar-for-dollar. I think we may be headed in the right direction by having Merriman help with recruiting, but I'm not sure that I agree. If we had beat out Atlanta for Clabo's services I might give that view some consideration, but alas we did not. No I do not. But I also do not buy the premise of the OP that the current lack of spending is a plan to resign existing players in the future either. Your premise, that they can't find players that will sign with the Bills in order to spend the money makes much more sense in my opinion.
Jerry Jabber Posted September 4, 2011 Author Posted September 4, 2011 Code Monkey, so what you're saying is the Bills shouldn't resign a WR that had 80+ catches, 1000+ yards & 10 TDs last year, just because the team was 4-12? Yeah, that makes so much sense... So you don't think that Nix & Gailey doing a major overhaul on the smaller, speedy players that Jauron loved had nothing to do with our 4-12 record. Plus, that record landed us Marcell Dareus, who will be the centerpiece of our defense for 10+ years, just like Bruce Smith was. So continue with your whining, I'll call the Whaambulance for you.
EasternOHBillsFan Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 OK then genius, why in the heck are we waiting to get the deals done, right in the middle of the season? They could have easily done it LONG before this since we were $20 million under the salary cap. I am SO SELLING this idea we're saving it ALL to resign key players. SELL!
Jerry Jabber Posted September 4, 2011 Author Posted September 4, 2011 Also, I guess you feel that the Bills should just lose their good players to FA instead of resigning them? Yeah, that's brilliant!!!
Beebe's Kid Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 So they do not want to sign better players that could make them a better team now. Instead they want to save the money now so that they can resign the key players from the 4-12 season last year? Even though if they spent the money this year on short term veteran improvements they could cut these players in the future when they needed to in order to fit under the cap? This is your logic? This theory makes the Bills front office seems so stupid that it makes you look like a "gloomer" in my opinion. LOL I am not privy to the inner working of OBD, but I sure as hell hope you are not correct for the sake of the Bills future! This is a good example of putting your fingers in your ears and yelling when somebody is talking to you..."LOL" Clearly you really "get it." The CBA has affected FA the past two years. While you would love to go out and sign everybody rated over 80 on Madden to an 8 year deal, try to listen for two seconds. The FA's the past two seasons were far fewer and two years older than in a normal year. When these players and their agents are negotiating contracts, they are looking the "the" contract of that players career. That is when you shoot for guaranteed money and length, because the player is in his prime. What also helped the FA/agent is that the supply was much smaller than normal, which drove up demand. Teams on the cusp and truly needing that player would have to pony up the extra money and length of contract. I can promise you that the same people crying now, would be the same people crying later, when we have spent the time developing our players, and are forced to watch them walk at the end of their first deal without a chance to resign them. They would walk because we would have a bunch of old ass players that were past their prime cashing big ass checks, and we wouldn't have the flexibility to sign them back. You might think that is crazy, but there is a team in Washington that is a perfect example of this. They sign the big FA's every year, and fall on their faces. Then they are married to aging players that are past their prime in terms of playing, but in their prime in terms of earnings. This is what a real rebuild looks like.
b stein 22 Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 The real reason is because the Bills want to resign like Jerry Jabber said above. They then can give their best players money up front so they have more money to sign players in the future. So then we can be loaded with talent.
Jerry Jabber Posted September 4, 2011 Author Posted September 4, 2011 I don't know why the Bills waiting so long this year to start negotiating? Ever think Einstein that the NFL lockout had something to do with it? Oh wait, but according to you, the Bills were still suppose to make deals with a lockout in place!
stinky finger Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 For the doom & bloomers out there that say Ralph is cheap, Ralph is getting ready to sell the team, go get a straw and suck it up already!! The real reason why the Bills are cost cutting now is because they are freeing up cap money to resign key players. Parrish's contract is being worked on. Stevie Johnson is in his last year of his contract. Depending on how Fitz does, he will either get a long term contract extension or just a journeyman offer. After this year, I think Wood & Levitre have 2 years left on their contracts, so they will need extensions as well. So if the Bills spend to the cap like some fans want them to, then how in the he'll are they going to be able to resign the key players that I just mentioned? Nix said he wants to spend the big bucks on resigning their own players and not spend it on high profile players. That philosophy has been working for the Steelers, so I have no problem with that. Gloomers....damn auto correct!!!! Key players? From this roster? Yeah, save your nickels, Ralph. We're loaded with key players. Sorry, not buyin' what your sellin'.
John from Riverside Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 So they do not want to sign better players that could make them a better team now. Instead they want to save the money now so that they can resign the key players from the 4-12 season last year? Even though if they spent the money this year on short term veteran improvements they could cut these players in the future when they needed to in order to fit under the cap? This is your logic? This theory makes the Bills front office seems so stupid that it makes you look like a "gloomer" in my opinion. LOL I am not privy to the inner working of OBD, but I sure as hell hope you are not correct for the sake of the Bills future! Except for the fact that we did sign Kevin Burnett
Rico Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 Except for the fact that we did sign Kevin Burnett Vintage John from Hemet!
miserable_fan Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 I hope you're right, but I have my doubts. They are SIGNIFICANTLY under the cap right now
gus2378 Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 For the doom & bloomers out there that say Ralph is cheap, Ralph is getting ready to sell the team, go get a straw and suck it up already!! The real reason why the Bills are cost cutting now is because they are freeing up cap money to resign key players. Parrish's contract is being worked on. Stevie Johnson is in his last year of his contract. Depending on how Fitz does, he will either get a long term contract extension or just a journeyman offer. After this year, I think Wood & Levitre have 2 years left on their contracts, so they will need extensions as well. So if the Bills spend to the cap like some fans want them to, then how in the he'll are they going to be able to resign the key players that I just mentioned? Nix said he wants to spend the big bucks on resigning their own players and not spend it on high profile players. That philosophy has been working for the Steelers, so I have no problem with that. Gloomers....damn auto correct!!!! Sorry, but signing players for future seasons is not a good reason to get rid of Lee Evans THIS season. You can't say they need to clear money now because Wood and Levitre need extensions in two years ... that's ridiculous. (Not to mention, Levitre may or may not even start this season ... why are we worrying about extending him yet?) Two years ago, Lee Evans was one of those key players that signed to an extension ... so where does it stop? In two years, are you going to tell me they needed to trade Kyle Williams because Dareus had to be extended? What's the difference between Lee Evans in 2011 and Stevie Johnson or Kyle Williams in 2013? No one hates Pittsburgh more than I do (the teams, not the city), but don't compare what the Bills are doing to the Steelers. First of all, the Steelers "key" players are just flat out much better. Second, they sign their good players and KEEP THEM, they don't cut or trade them two years later to make room for the next "key" player .... that's an endless cycle of mediocrity. But maybe I am nuts ... Show me the last time the Steelers cut or traded a starter to make room for an extension for a backup like Roscoe Parrish ... I doubt you can do it.
FightinIrishBills Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 I hope you're right, but I have my doubts. They are SIGNIFICANTLY under the cap right now I think their spending will be determined in a big way by the team's on-field performance this year. Stevie Johnson and Roscoe Parrish are free agents in 2012, and contract extensions have been mentioned for both so far. I think that Stevie is a lock to be extended, but Roscoe needs to look good early to ensure that he stays a Bill. Ryan Fitzpatrick is a FA next year, and obviously his performance is very important to what his extension (if he gets one) would look like. But even more important, IMHO, is Demetrius Bell's contract relative to his performance. LTs don't come cheap. Even if he's only adequate this season, he'll still command big money simply due to the market value at that position. If he's terrible, the Bills have to address the position either in the draft or free agency next year. Either way, they're shelling out big money. In the meantime, prudence is necessary in judging what they've got and what they'll need to get, which is why I don't mind that they're significantly under the cap.
joey greco Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 There is more than enough money to renegotiate with any player on the roster that they want to AND sign free agents, which they chose not to do. The cap has nothing to do with the reasons why this team failed to improve through free agency. Oh, sorry, that was not precise at all. The NFL salary cap has nothing to do with why the team failed to improve through free agency. The owner-imposed cap, however, has everything to do with it. BTW, resigning Poz and Whitner is the kind of thing that good teams do. They don't have to be starters, they provide the kind of quality depth that winners have and this franchise is totally lacking in. There are zero cap reasons that they couldn't be resigned. There were no attitude or legal issues with either guy, yet we're still left with poor talent behind the starters. There is absolutely nothing behind the starters, as we saw all throughout the preseason.
gus2378 Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 (edited) Oh, I almost forgot ... the insane "we have young guys we want to develop" excuse for trading Lee Evans was shot down when they kept Ruvell Martin ... who was not on the team until 12 days AFTER Evans was traded. They loved their young talent so much, they kept something called RUVELL MARTIN and cut Roosevelt, Huggins, Aiken and Buster Davis. So I can only conclude they were lying, or they believe Ruvell Martin gives them a better chance vs. Kansas City than Lee Evans would have (that's the standard Gailey said was used for cuts). Edited September 4, 2011 by gus2378
Recommended Posts