DrDawkinstein Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 billsdaily.com says they are 2 mil apart... is that alot? Negotiations Today: Representatives for the Bills and Stevie Johnson will meet today in Indianapolis to continue contract negotiations. The two sides swapped proposals earlier this month and reports say they are about $2 Million a year apart at this time. Today's meeting will not result in a new deal but will go a long way in determining if the team has a chance at keeping Johnson off the free agent market. Im guessing the Bills are offering $5-6mil/year, and they are asking for $7-8mil/year. If those numbers are correct (again, just guessing), then it is on the Bills to get this deal done. If we're actually offering more, and he is asking for $9+mil/year, then I can't fault them for letting him hit the market. Ugh, BIG DAY TODAY! Killin me, Git-r-dun!
UConn James Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 In a chat session on BB.com, Doug Whaley just wrote that putting a franchise tag of SJ is still "a possibility" but that it would be "a short-term fix."
Coach Tuesday Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) BillsVet is right. They will tag SJ if they have to - they won't let him walk. They don't want to announce that right now, because as I stated earlier, SJ probably would be happy to get the franchise tag amount and so it's hardly a threat. He's not going anywhere, one way or another he'll be here next season. Edited February 24, 2012 by Coach Tuesday
DrDawkinstein Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 In a chat session on BB.com, Doug Whaley just wrote that putting a franchise tag of SJ is still "a possibility" but that it would be "a short-term fix." Im all for tagging him, and I think in this particular case, the player would not be too upset. Since $9.4mil is a LOT more than SJ has been making, and is probably more than he'd see on the open market. With that in mind, tagging him should be taken as a compliment since it shows that the Bills really want to keep him and arent afraid of paying him, they just want to get it right for both parties. Also, just because they tag him doesnt mean they must only give him 1 year/$9.4mil. By tagging him, it allows us to keep him and negotiate a long term contract, which most likely would reduce that $9.4mil hit. In this situation, the tag is a perfect tool. (uh-huhuhhuh, i said "perfect tool")
95altima12 Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 Im all for tagging him, and I think in this particular case, the player would not be too upset. Since $9.4mil is a LOT more than SJ has been making, and is probably more than he'd see on the open market. With that in mind, tagging him should be taken as a compliment since it shows that the Bills really want to keep him and arent afraid of paying him, they just want to get it right for both parties. Also, just because they tag him doesnt mean they must only give him 1 year/$9.4mil. By tagging him, it allows us to keep him and negotiate a long term contract, which most likely would reduce that $9.4mil hit. In this situation, the tag is a perfect tool. (uh-huhuhhuh, i said "perfect tool") Bills havn't tagged a player since Nate... Don't think this will happen. What do you know DR.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
UConn James Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 Just wanted to mention Whaley said that, since many media outlets are reporting and fans are saying that it's 0% / completely off the table. Per the Ass't GM, it's not.
DrDawkinstein Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 Bills havn't tagged a player since Nate... Don't think this will happen. What do you know DR.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Bills havent had a Free Agent worth tagging since Nate. THAT's what I know!
Jerry Jabber Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 According to Boss Hogg, the Franchise Tag is an option for Stevie J: http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2012/2/24/2821646/stevie-johnson-franchise-tag-buffalo-bills "You know everything's an option," Nix told WGR 550's Joe Buscaglia on Friday at the 2012 NFL Combine. "I read in the paper or somebody sent it to me the other day that we definitely were not going to tag him. I don't know who they talked to, I'd like to talk to them maybe see what we're gonna do with some of those other guys. So I don't know who the source was but they don't know, I can promise you that. Again, that's an option we've got until March 5 to decide."
eme123 Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 "A League Source" as I suspected is just another example of terrible journalism by The Buffalo News/WNY media. Who should we believe? An unidentified "League Source" or Buddy Nix? J/C. No source. No story! Quit wasting my F***** time reading these baseless reports.
Ramius Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 Im all for tagging him, and I think in this particular case, the player would not be too upset. Since $9.4mil is a LOT more than SJ has been making, and is probably more than he'd see on the open market. With that in mind, tagging him should be taken as a compliment since it shows that the Bills really want to keep him and arent afraid of paying him, they just want to get it right for both parties. Also, just because they tag him doesnt mean they must only give him 1 year/$9.4mil. By tagging him, it allows us to keep him and negotiate a long term contract, which most likely would reduce that $9.4mil hit. In this situation, the tag is a perfect tool. (uh-huhuhhuh, i said "perfect tool") Stevie will make a lot more than 9.4 million guaranteed on a new long term deal. Thats essentially why players hate the tag. They'd make more guaranteed on a longer deal than playing 1 year under the tag.
Zulu Cthulhu Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 "A League Source" as I suspected is just another example of terrible journalism by The Buffalo News/WNY media. Who should we believe? An unidentified "League Source" or Buddy Nix? J/C. No source. No story! Quit wasting my F***** time reading these baseless reports. There probably was a source, albeit an anonymous one, who has some connection to the negotiations from one side or the other. He/she probably heard an opinion or comment from someone else, embellished it to make a better quote, and passed it along to the media.
BillsVet Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 Tagging SJ, even at 9.4M for 2012, also serves to minimize the commitment Buffalo has should the team be put on the market. I realize that's somewhat macabre considering the ownership situation, but I've never felt they have a vision, but rather reflect successive one year plans.
yungmack Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 My take on the Stevie situation is that he knows the town, he knows the team, he knows the coaches, he knows the system and he's Fitz's security blanket. Why would you (the front office) let him walk away? After all, if he signs elsewhere then the Bills have to sign a receiver at least as good or else the 2012 season is really in danger. And what is a FA receiver going to cost? At least as much as Stevie and probably more. And that's assuming they could even entice one to come to Buffalo. WTF is the front office doing? Get him signed and put this behind you.
Zulu Cthulhu Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 My take on the Stevie situation is that he knows the town, he knows the team, he knows the coaches, he knows the system and he's Fitz's security blanket. Why would you (the front office) let him walk away? After all, if he signs elsewhere then the Bills have to sign a receiver at least as good or else the 2012 season is really in danger. And what is a FA receiver going to cost? At least as much as Stevie and probably more. And that's assuming they could even entice one to come to Buffalo. WTF is the front office doing? Get him signed and put this behind you. That right there is the biggest reason to resign SJ. Paying him, even overpaying him, is imperative given Buffalo's trouble luring free agents (ones in their prime, at least) to this market. I'm not dogging the town, that's just a fact nowadays. If they allow SJ to move on and sign somewhere else, there's a strong chance the Bills will be unable to sign a proven guy like Colston, Jackson, or even Bowe. Left hanging out to dry, they'll be forced to start over again and try to groom a later round WR pick into the next Stevie.
DrDawkinstein Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 Stevie will make a lot more than 9.4 million guaranteed on a new long term deal. Thats essentially why players hate the tag. They'd make more guaranteed on a longer deal than playing 1 year under the tag. Right, but one (SJ included) would have to assume that if the Bills did tag him, it would be with the intention to work out a long term deal that pays him more. We're not stopping him from signing a $100mil contract like with Clements.
Mark Vader Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 billsdaily.com says they are 2 mil apart... is that alot? Negotiations Today: Representatives for the Bills and Stevie Johnson will meet today in Indianapolis to continue contract negotiations. The two sides swapped proposals earlier this month and reports say they are about $2 Million a year apart at this time. Today's meeting will not result in a new deal but will go a long way in determining if the team has a chance at keeping Johnson off the free agent market. If that report is accurate then there is no excuse for not getting a deal done before the free agency period starts. That is not a HUGE amount to be apart. My 4000th post....woohoo!
BeastMode54 Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 Looks like Stevie might be staying afterall. From rotoworld: After meeting with Bills brass Friday, the player rep for free agent Stevie Johnson said he emerged "very optimistic" about Johnson signing a long-term deal to stay in Buffalo. By most accounts, Johnson's contract demands are within reason and under $9 million annually. "We had a very productive meeting," said Johnson's agent, C.J. LaBoy. "I'm very optimistic. I'm looking forward to continue talking."
PaattMaann Posted February 24, 2012 Posted February 24, 2012 if this deal does NOT get done...look at our WR's...yikesss, we need to find a way to bridge that 2 mil. gap, make some of it incentive based but this has got to get done, and also find more WR help, we cannot sit and be content at this position...obvious I know
NoSaint Posted February 25, 2012 Posted February 25, 2012 If that report is accurate then there is no excuse for not getting a deal done before the free agency period starts. That is not a HUGE amount to be apart. My 4000th post....woohoo! That's the definition of huge. That's like 20-25% of the total value. Without even starting on the details.
Mark Vader Posted February 25, 2012 Posted February 25, 2012 That's the definition of huge. That's like 20-25% of the total value. Without even starting on the details. To me, huge would be 50% apart.
Recommended Posts