jr1 Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 The league leader in throwing interceptions got 59 million. A mediocre OLB got 24 million. Stevie's agent has all the leverage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBuff423 Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 The BILLS SHOULD use a Franchise Tag on him!!! It would give him the money he's looking for, and therefore motivated to play (if not for the pride of it and the contract he could earn) and the BILLS wouldn't be locked in long-term if he has another penalty riddled year due to stupid and juvenile behavior. Giving him a long term deal no matter what the numbers would be foolish, letting him walk would be just as foolish...use the Tag to keep him and pay him so that both sides are "happy" for the year and if his production hits the toilet, then let him walk, if he continues to make stupid decisions costing the team valuable yards then let him walk....but IF he matures in his behavior and has the year of productivity he had this year while staying healthy, then you can consider a five year deal in the $40 million range or more if need be....Tagging him is the only thing that makes sense, and there is no one else worth it on this team right now AND the BILLS have plenty of cap space Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 Sadly, I think he played his last game as a Bill. And while Stevie is to blame, Gailey's hard knock "I'm coaching an NFL team likes its Georgia Tech" attitude didn't really help things. Good point. Chan should have used his high school coaching attitude instead, since that's about Johnson's level of maturity. Not to mention, in case you failed to notice how things went for the Jets this year, the coaching strategy of letting your arrogant, selfish WRs do whatever they want isn't exactly a plan for success. I certainly hope they can figure out a way to keep Johnson despite his antics, but if the price is $10MM there is no chance of it happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 To me, it sounds as if the Bills have sent their #1 shill to start thr negative PR campaign against Stevie, since they have no plans of re-signing him. This is a very sad, yet plausible thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 pay the man and get back to busines of trying to repair this team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 Seems like Stevie may have learned a little more from T.O. than just how to run routes. He's looking like T.O. part deux at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zazie Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 We have essentially lost one of our only bright spots in SJ already, due to the fact that he was not extended a year ago when we had some leverage and a good signing bonus and reasonable raise would have done it. Once SJ was through most of the season injury free, it behooved him to not negotiate any further. Unless they extend Byrd and Levitre NOW, expect this exact same thread with different names next year, same bat-time, same bat-place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 Why is everyone giving Gailey a pass on enacting such a dumb rule in the first place? What's next, anyone who gets a false start has to sit out a quarter? Ultimatums are stupid, because if someone violates it and you don't follow through, you completely undermine yourself, but if you do follow through, all you do is compound a problem with another problem. And especially when the condition for the benching (celebration penalty) is one of the most arbitrary and capriciously officiated rules in sports. If you're going to demand punishment for such a thing, at least keep the threat vague enough so that you can adjust the punishment to the situation. Benching Stevie for a series or two would've sent a plenty strong enough message. To sum up: I like that Gailey followed his own rule that he arbitrarily made. I don't like that he arbitrarily made a terrible rule that was likely to hurt the team, and wasn't smart enough to realize this in advance. +1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 Why is everyone giving Gailey a pass on enacting such a dumb rule in the first place? What's next, anyone who gets a false start has to sit out a quarter? Ultimatums are stupid, because if someone violates it and you don't follow through, you completely undermine yourself, but if you do follow through, all you do is compound a problem with another problem. And especially when the condition for the benching (celebration penalty) is one of the most arbitrary and capriciously officiated rules in sports. If you're going to demand punishment for such a thing, at least keep the threat vague enough so that you can adjust the punishment to the situation. Benching Stevie for a series or two would've sent a plenty strong enough message. To sum up: I like that Gailey followed his own rule that he arbitrarily made. I don't like that he arbitrarily made a terrible rule that was likely to hurt the team, and wasn't smart enough to realize this in advance. There are plenty of people sticking up for Stevie and/or criticizing Gailey. This is a pretty heated but evenly divided topic by my reckoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QCity Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 He was a 5th, not a 7th like Stevie is, and the book isn't finished on Williams just yet now is it. Did they let Williams walk? Yes or no? The answer is no. So, yes, the book is finished on that topic. If you want to bring up Williams performance, that's completely different from what was being argued, now isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QCity Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 feel like a broken record for saying this in every stevie thread, but ill say it again: we have to spend to the cap next year. i strongly suspect johnson will be back. don't see how NOT franchising him has anything to do with it. a franchise tag (which isn't used as much as people tend to think) is basically an admission that a player WON'T be back, and that you're looking to get picks for him. players that get franchised are usually very unhappy, and walk the following year. its called, a "negotiation." im sure stevie has told the bills, he's going to test the market, as he should he will see what his value is, and the bills will more than likely resign him for that asking price. he will likely find that no team is willing to spend 10 mil a year on him, and the bills will match anything lower. if some team goes above and beyond that, because they are DESPERATE for a wideout... (and no teams in our conference really come to mind... maybe baltimore??....) and spend above 10 million a year... well, we can't tie up THAT much of our cap in 1 position, and it wouldn't be prudent too. the money would be better spent on our oline and secondary, and yes, cj spiller. all in all, we're in a great position, and again WE HAVE TO SPEND TO THE CAP. stop with the ralph is cheap, it doesnt matter anymore. if stevie walks, the money still has to be spent. say that to yourself every night before bed: "if stevie walks, the money still has to be spent." "if stevie walks, the money still has to be spent." "if stevie walks, the money still has to be spent." No, no, no. In 2013, when the new CBA salary floor rules go into effect, teams will only be required to spend at least 89% of the salary cap annually in cash. That is cash spent, not cap space. Many people fail to understand this. In 2011, the Bills spent $130 million, which is actually over the salary cap limit. For the 3 previous seasons, the Bills came in at around $10 under the cap in cash spending, which is on target for the 89% rule. Remember, cash spending is different than cap space. TLDR: The Bills are already above the floor and have been for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 We have essentially lost one of our only bright spots in SJ already, due to the fact that he was not extended a year ago when we had some leverage and a good signing bonus and reasonable raise would have done it. Once SJ was through most of the season injury free, it behooved him to not negotiate any further. Unless they extend Byrd and Levitre NOW, expect this exact same thread with different names next year, same bat-time, same bat-place. Exactly extending Levitre & Wood is the priority this off season. You extend players you want to keep the season before they become free agents. It's called GM101 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 (edited) Letting Big Pat go was a mistake, but there was no way the Bills were going to match the obscene offer by the 49er's for Winfield. He got QB money as I recall. The problem with Johnson is that some stupid team will pay what he's asking, so instead of us having solid no. 2 receiver, someone else will be cursing the day they paid him. Big Pat Williams was a catastrophic loss. Losing Stevie would be regrettable but not catastrophic. He's a good #2 but I wouldn't blame Ralph Inc. for letting him go if he insists on #1 WR money. Yes I'm known to complain Ralph is cheap but that doesn't mean I expect him to pay stupid money. Is it too late to trade him for a fourth round draft pick? Edited January 6, 2012 by JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offsides#76FredSmerlas Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 The Bills have a history of not wanting to pay top money to players they develop out of walk-ons or late round draft picks. Players like Pat Williams who was a walk on free agent who developed into a top pro bowl DT. Jason Peters who was a walk on free agent TE who they developed into a pro bowl LT. It makes me wonder if the FO feels these players were nothing and "we" made them into something, they owe "us" to continue to play for what "we" think is fair. If this is the case I suspect not only will the Bills lose Stevie Johnson, they will also lose Bell, and somewhere down the road they will also lose Fred Jackson Yeah, somewhere down the road Jackson will be gone. He is 31 years old so I'm guessing he will play through only one more contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirate Angel Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 Big Pat Williams was a catastrophic loss. Losing Stevie would be regrettable but not catastrophic. He's a good #2 but I wouldn't blame Ralph Inc. for letting him go if he insists on #1 WR money. Yes I'm known to complain Ralph is cheap but that doesn't mean I expect him to pay stupid money. Is it too late to trade him for a fourth round draft pick? Its understandable why they didn't resign Pat, he was on the wrong side of thirty to give out a big contract. Wished we resigned him...who knew he would have another 5+ years of good production...but letting Johnson walk without getting anything for him is mind boggling. With the #'s he has had and the less then stellar QBiing he has received we should be able to franchise him, trade him and get a 1st for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 Bottom line is that this team needs to stop creating holes on their team that have no need to be created while still trying to plug other holes. It is akin to trying to stop a boat from leaking by chopping a piece of wood out of one side of the boat to use it to plug the hole on the other side of the boat. Makes no sense, since you just created a new leak to try and fix the old one, and the new leak may be worse than the old one was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zazie Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 Exactly extending Levitre & Wood is the priority this off season. You extend players you want to keep the season before they become free agents. It's called GM101 For Brandon it seems to be more like GMquantum physics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThurmasThoman Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 No, no, no. In 2013, when the new CBA salary floor rules go into effect, teams will only be required to spend at least 89% of the salary cap annually in cash. That is cash spent, not cap space. Many people fail to understand this. In 2011, the Bills spent $130 million, which is actually over the salary cap limit. For the 3 previous seasons, the Bills came in at around $10 under the cap in cash spending, which is on target for the 89% rule. Remember, cash spending is different than cap space. TLDR: The Bills are already above the floor and have been for years. oh. i stand corrected. hes gone. this stevie johnson situation is my first "adult" experience like this following the bills. i was in high school when pat williams left, so to me, i didn't have as much of an understanding of the front office side of the game. but sitting here, watching our offense, and just seeing what a natural athlete stevie is. how he can just seemingly make things happen out there. it's like we have an honest-to-god, real life NFL talent level player on our offense. it's amazing. i could care less about his histrionics - he is something to build around. if we let him go over a 1-2 million dollar difference in asking price... ill be upset. and ill be upset with our bean counters. NOT at our crummy team falling apart (like always) on the field. i REALLY REALLY REALLY don't want to lose that magical aspect of my childhood of following the bills. that feeling on sunday that anything is possible. but if this guy walks, im going to turn into my father... or my grandfather... or my uncles... and just be another "we won't win til ralph is gone" kind of fan. and i really dont want that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 but sitting here, watching our offense, and just seeing what a natural athlete stevie is. how he can just seemingly make things happen out there. it's like we have an honest-to-god, real life NFL talent level player on our offense. it's amazing. i could care less about his histrionics - he is something to build around. I disagree with the bolded part completely. In my opinion, SJ is a #2 WR in the NFL. And that has little to do with his adolescent antics and everything to do with his on field performance. He could improve and get over the choking, and he is clearly and absolutely worth keeping, but not worth overpaying for. You build around a QB, or you can build around a feature RB, but I don't see how you can build an offense around any WR, much less SJ. I would like to see SJ remain a Bill, but if he doesn't it won't be an earth shattering loss. There are plenty of good to very good WRs available as shown in other threads (if Nix decides suddenly that FA is an option of course). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 For arguements sake, and those falsely saying that stevie is nothing more than a #2, Stevie is 1 of only 9 WRs to rack 1,000 yards in the past 2 seasons. The others: Megatron, Fitzgerald, White, Wallace, Bowe, Nicks, Colston, and Marshall. Not too shabby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts