Ramius Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 The Bills may not tender Nelson because they may intend to sign him to a multi year deal. But thats just logic speaking.
NickelCity Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 Glad to hear we're talking to his agent.
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 Average talent role players have to be expendable to find real talent. Letting the bubble guys who over achieved to get on the field turn over is the only way to keep growing the team. If you have a mediocre/average player at every poisition guess what you have for a team?
Doc Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 Average talent role players have to be expendable to find real talent. Letting the bubble guys who over achieved to get on the field turn over is the only way to keep growing the team. If you have a mediocre/average player at every poisition guess what you have for a team? What's the downside? Tender him and if there are better players, cut him with no impact.
NoSaint Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 What's the downside? Tender him and if there are better players, cut him with no impact. Doesn't the tender become fully guaranteed at some point
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 don't get why we are creating holes at receiver withjones and nelson. These are RFAs who we can give pretty reasonable minimum tenders.
Doc Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 Doesn't the tender become fully guaranteed at some point Nope. Only vested veterans (those with 4 accrued seasons in the NFL) get their salaries guaranteed, if they are on the opening day roster.
Kevin Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 The Bills may not tender Nelson because they may intend to sign him to a multi year deal. But thats just logic speaking. Logically speaking. Logic isn't allowed here. Only panic, an asterisk next to all things Patriots*, and Ralph is cheap. Git r dun
FleaMoulds80 Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 Who cares. Nelson was OK but he was never a threat. I think we're going WR at 8 and QB in 2nd.
NoSaint Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 (edited) Nope. Only vested veterans (those with 4 accrued seasons in the NFL) get their salaries guaranteed, if they are on the opening day roster. I thought because these guys are restricted they got that as a reward, like a franchise tag Reading more, it looks like I may be wrong on that Edited February 24, 2013 by NoSaint
Cotton Fitzsimmons Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 Two words Randy Moss Can't nobody cover Rrrrrrandy Moss
BADOLBILZ Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 Who cares. Nelson was OK but he was never a threat. I think we're going WR at 8 and QB in 2nd. Too bad for you, TSW's resident Semenole Ramius reports that the Bills aren't tendering Nelson because they are OBVIOUSLY working on a long term extension. Please proceed with your regularly schedule panicked and illogical behavior.
ganesh Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 Donahoe and GW totally scalped the roster and extracted the teams identity when they got rid of the "fat guy" Ted Washington. Comparing the Nelson situation to Washington is a little surprising. Washington was a proven player. Nelson on the other hand has been our 3rd WR. You got to give the new coaching staff to bring in their kind of players.
jjmac Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 Patterson becomes a real possibility at eight. They should have tendered him. What's the status of his injury?
BADOLBILZ Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 Comparing the Nelson situation to Washington is a little surprising. Washington was a proven player. Nelson on the other hand has been our 3rd WR. You got to give the new coaching staff to bring in their kind of players. I'm not comparing player for player. The Bills have lost tons of quality players to bad decision. That year was just the starting point for something that has been going on for years. New coach comes in, good players go out the door, draft picks get burned to replace them. I mean, it is crazy all draft picks that have been burned simply to replace players like I have mentioned in many other threads. Milloy for Whitner. Fletcher for Poz. Clements for McKelvin. Pat Williams for McCargo. McGahee for Lynch. Lynch for Spiller. Even Peerless Price leaving lead to the Bills desperate need to draft Lee Evans in hopes of resuscitating Drew Bledsoe....whose production was stifled by losing Price, Riemersma and Larry Centers all to free agency in one offseason. Had they overpaid Price, he probably would have continued to be productive and rather than trading up to get Losman they would have been in position to trade up for the guy Donahoe wanted. Ben Roethlisberger. But I digress...... And no Nelson isn't a great player, but he has been an important player. He lead the team in receptions in 2011 and the chances are good he would have done the same in 2012 if not for his ACL injury. The guy is not a spare part, he is the second best receiver on the Bills roster and by a considerable margin.
CardinalScotts Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 The only NFL level receiver on the roster is Stevie, the rest of the WR corps is a joke, and that includes Nelson. I can't believe some people here are describing him as a "good young player." Cutting so many WRs is a good sign that they will bring in not just one but at least two new ones. but the qb was the problem remember - I've been posting here for three years our wideouts as a group would rank 32nd - lower if they could
BADOLBILZ Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 but the qb was the problem remember - I've been posting here for three years our wideouts as a group would rank 32nd - lower if they could Here is a question then, what receiving corps would Stevie Johnson and David Nelson NOT be able to make?
Lurker Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 (edited) I don't get why so many knickers are in a twist on this. Just because they don't assign him a 2nd round tender (i.e., locking in his salary at $2MM per year) doesn't mean he won't be back. If the Bills want to sign him to a much more reasonable $1 million per year contract, he'll likely be here. If he's as mediocre as many here claim, who's going to throw more money than that at him? Edited February 24, 2013 by Lurker
Webster Guy Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 What's the downside? Tender him and if there are better players, cut him with no impact. Exactly. We're thin at the position already, the guy has proven to be valuable and skilled, and he's relatively cheap for his production. I think they'll tender him for sure, he'll win a job at camp no problem. Unless the knee is completely messed up, that is the only reason he isn't back with us next year.
Recommended Posts