nucci Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 Because of the belief that Buddy is asleep? Marv used to say that, "Once you get a reputation as an early riser, you can sleep in all you want" and the same probably holds true for someone with a self-earned reputation as a good sleeper like Buddy. I personally have faith in Buddy.. he's not infallible but no one is. However this 3rd year in his tenure is critical both in evaluating the job Buddy's doing and in determining if the organization is really allowing him the parameters with which to build a winning program. In exactly 3 months we'll know a lot more than we do now. Unless the rules have changed, the franchise tag can be rescinded. The Seahawks did that a few years ago after the draft with Leroy Hill. What if he's tagged and signs immediately? The Bills can not rescind and they have to pay. I also think it's guaranteed so releasing him wouldn't be an option.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 What if he's tagged and signs immediately? The Bills can not rescind and they have to pay. I also think it's guaranteed so releasing him wouldn't be an option. I think that's the crux right there (though I could be wrong). It seems like the franchise tag could be rescinded right up until the moment that it's signed.
Danny Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 It costs them NOTHING to tag him. They can then deal him or drop it later if they choose, but it costs nothing to protect themselves. Who else they gonna tag this year? Yes it will. As Nucci and Zazie already pointed out.. if you tag a player you cannot then rescind it if the player signs.
HurlyBurly51 Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 Yes it will. As Nucci and Zazie already pointed out.. if you tag a player you cannot then rescind it if the player signs. If...if...there's a lot of ifs involved. You still need to tag him rather than let him walk. Even if he signs, what's to prevent a trade and subsequent re-negotiation of the contract with his new team? Worse case, you keep your best free agent for another year. Some backfire.
nucci Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 If...if...there's a lot of ifs involved. You still need to tag him rather than let him walk. Even if he signs, what's to prevent a trade and subsequent re-negotiation of the contract with his new team? Worse case, you keep your best free agent for another year. Some backfire. We were just responding to your post that it costs NOTHING to tag him. We understand there are a lot of ifs but it can cost the Bills. I'm not against signing him.
HurlyBurly51 Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 We were just responding to your post that it costs NOTHING to tag him. We understand there are a lot of ifs but it can cost the Bills. I'm not against signing him. But if they tag him, he signs, then they find a trade partner, it still costs them nothing, and they get something in return.
Danny Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 But if they tag him, he signs, then they find a trade partner, it still costs them nothing, and they get something in return. C'mon man..Really?? So what you meant when you said that it would cost them nothing was.... if they sign and trade him they wont have to pay his salary for the OTHER TEAM??
HurlyBurly51 Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 C'mon man..Really?? So what you meant when you said that it would cost them nothing was.... if they sign and trade him they wont have to pay his salary for the OTHER TEAM?? Yes, really. And that is not what I meant to say at all - I don't even understand what you're saying. It's simple - tag him, and it costs them nothing while they explore options. They can drop it later if he doesn't sign. If he does sign, trade him, and the new team can worry about contract. In either scenario, it costs the Bills nothing, which IS what I was talking about.
Danny Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 Yes, really. And that is not what I meant to say at all - I don't even understand what you're saying. It's simple - tag him, and it costs them nothing while they explore options. They can drop it later if he doesn't sign. If he does sign, trade him, and the new team can worry about contract. In either scenario, it costs the Bills nothing, which IS what I was talking about. Ok no need to get angry. I just didnt realize that anyone thought for a second that if the Bills put a one year tender in front of Stevie Johnson for $9,500,000 that he actually wouldnt sign right away.
HurlyBurly51 Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 Not angry - just sayin' I'd hate to see them let their best free agent walk away for nothing, again.
JohnC Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 I think if Johnson was going to be re-signed by the Bills it would have happened already. Very rare that players re-sign with their same team once free agency starts. Sucks but I think he's gone. Don't jump to conclusions. His agent knows what the price range the Bills are willing to pay. I'm sure the agent is examining the market to see if he can get a better deal. It is not surprising that Johnson has an inflated view of his value. I don't believe that Johnson is going to get an offer matching his expectations. If Johnson is offered what he thinks he is worth by another team he will be gone. The Bills under Nix are doing the right thing by pricing players at the right/reasonable values. The Bills were willing to retain LB Paul Pos at a particular rate. He got a better offer, so he was let go. In the end the Bills got better value with the signing of Barnett to replace the overpriced Paul Pos. Stevie Johnson is a very good second receiver. In my view he is not a number one receiver, or if he is he is at the low end of that scale. Overall, I like Stevie Johnson. Although I'm troubled by his lack of maturity and discipline I would like to retain him. Since the Nix/Whaley regime took over I think that they have operated in a foundamentally sound manner. That is not to say that I agree with everything they have done, especially with their first draft, but in general they have acted in a steady and competent manner.
nucci Posted January 29, 2012 Posted January 29, 2012 Don't jump to conclusions. His agent knows what the price range the Bills are willing to pay. I'm sure the agent is examining the market to see if he can get a better deal. It is not surprising that Johnson has an inflated view of his value. I don't believe that Johnson is going to get an offer matching his expectations. If Johnson is offered what he thinks he is worth by another team he will be gone. The Bills under Nix are doing the right thing by pricing players at the right/reasonable values. The Bills were willing to retain LB Paul Pos at a particular rate. He got a better offer, so he was let go. In the end the Bills got better value with the signing of Barnett to replace the overpriced Paul Pos. Stevie Johnson is a very good second receiver. In my view he is not a number one receiver, or if he is he is at the low end of that scale. Overall, I like Stevie Johnson. Although I'm troubled by his lack of maturity and discipline I would like to retain him. Since the Nix/Whaley regime took over I think that they have operated in a foundamentally sound manner. That is not to say that I agree with everything they have done, especially with their first draft, but in general they have acted in a steady and competent manner. Good point John but normally once a player hits FA they're gone. I hope we keep him but it is going to more difficult once FA starts.
BigBuff423 Posted January 30, 2012 Posted January 30, 2012 No player on the verge of UFA wants the franchise tag, given the one year contract length. Players want some semblance of security, which is a long term deal with guaranteed money. If the Bills tag SJ when it becomes apparent they won't reach a deal for a multi-year contract, I would expect both sides to reach terms before the season. It's not a good sign if there haven't been actual negotiations since the early part of the season. That is, unless they're just planning to tag him. I realize it's not what a player wants..... but a coach and GM doesn't want their player making juvenile mistakes on the field costing them field position...so the Tag gets SJ paid for a year while he proves he's learned his lesson and wants to be a leader in the locker room while demonstrating his talent and hard work can do all the talking for him....so yes, I'm sure he wants a long-term deal and doesn't want the Tag, but at this point, he's earned it...he can put the responsibility on himself, and given the Cap hit the BILLS will take, it's not beneficial to them to use the Tag on him for financial reasons for this season but does make sense before they invest too heavily for the future....
Recommended Posts