dave mcbride Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Levitre is gone. Look at some teams that are far closer than the Bills who have desperate needs at guard. The Lions come most immediately to mind, but the same could be said about the Steelers and the Eagles (despite the fact that the Steelers took a guard last season in rd 1). A number of teams are desperate for an offensive line upgrade, and Levitre is really good. Durable too. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/OL
Dorkington Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 I really don't see how this in any way insinuates that we won't re-sign Levitre. With Kelsey off the books now we should have more than enough cap space to sign him and some decent free agents, plus I doubt that teams would want to shell out tons of money for a veteran guard when this year's draft has a few studs that you could pay way less for on the new rookie wage scale. It's not really about money, I don't think. I think Levitre and Byrd want to play for real teams, and the only way we keep one to have another year to convince them to stay is to use the franchise tag.
Pete Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Read the above response...what are you talking about? What the hell are you talking about? I gave clear cut examples of Bills front office mistakes. Did we learn from them? Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it
JPS Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 The elephant in the room is - why weren't these 2 guys signed a long time ago?
Mark Vader Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Gotta love TBD. Had they placed the tag on levitre, the same knuckleheads would be kvetching they did the wrong thing and we were going to lose Byrd. Few Players will pick a contender over the team offering more money. I don't think it's the wrong thing. I want to keep both Byrd & Levitre. My hope is that the Bills will now focus on getting a new contract with Levitre before March 12. And I want Byrd to get a long term contract as well, otherwise it'll be a stupid one year deal and Byrd will be a free agent again next year which will be a waste of time.
Dean Cain Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Levitre is a UFA meaning he is free to "take his talents" anywhere. Much like Winfield, Clements, Greer, and the others before him Levitre likely wants out. Again he is not forced to stay here.
Mark Vader Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 The elephant in the room is - why weren't these 2 guys signed a long time ago? Exactly! Levitre is a UFA meaning he is free to "take his talents" anywhere. Much like Winfield, Clements, Greer, and the others before him Levitre likely wants out. Again he is not forced to stay here. True, it does go both ways. I hope Levitre wants to stay with the Bills, but we don't always get what we want.
KD in CA Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 The elephant in the room is - why weren't these 2 guys signed a long time ago? Yup. Both should have been locked up a year ago.
BringBackFergy Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 I'm ok with this. Byrd is young and is consistent....but still has to prove worthy of long term money. For those of you who say losing Levitre would be as bad as losing Pat Williams....we also lost Jason Peters and D. Bell.
Dean Cain Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Exactly! True, it does go both ways. I hope Levitre wants to stay with the Bills, but we don't always get what we want. People always act in their own self interest.
dave mcbride Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Exactly! True, it does go both ways. I hope Levitre wants to stay with the Bills, but we don't always get what we want. He's gone, I think. There are desperate teams that have more pieces than the Bills do, and just need an upgrade on their o-line to put them over the top (or so they're probably thinking). I'll bet you that Levitre has been targeted by a half dozen teams. He's a very good player.
thewildrabbit Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Levitre is gone. Look at some teams that are far closer than the Bills who have desperate needs at guard. The Lions come most immediately to mind, but the same could be said about the Steelers and the Eagles (despite the fact that the Steelers took a guard last season in rd 1). A number of teams are desperate for an offensive line upgrade, and Levitre is really good. Durable too. http://www.footballo...rs.com/stats/OL Who cares... Levitre is far from worth what the top guards are getting IMO. Draft one of the top 3 LT's with that #8 and move Glenn to RT or guard. Anyone else recall how Levite looked at center or LT, or how he looks when Eric Wood isn't next to him?
Nostradumbass Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 You clearly do not understand what's occurring here. The Bills now have until June to sign Byrd to a long-term contract, or he plays for them under a one-year, $6.9M contract. Free Agency doesn't start for another 11 days, which is more than enough time to work out a deal with Levitre...so please elighten me as to what you're talking about... Read the above response...what are you talking about? Thank you. I don't see how anyone could see it any differently... Your not grasping how it works. March 4th is tag deadline The Bills only hope for keeping Levitre is the tag, he's not going to negotiate and sign a deal 8 days away from Free agency. He's going to let the deadline come and see what suitors are out there so that the Bills will be compelting against high cash and better teams. Byrd's camp indicated a willingness to sign a LT deal, maybe it was BS but the strategy to keep both was fairly clear. Sign Byrd to a LT deal which probably would require an overpay (which I'm fine with) and then tag Levitre
Mark Vader Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 People always act in their own self interest. And that point will be proven if he signs with the Lions. I'm ok with this. Byrd is young and is consistent....but still has to prove worthy of long term money. For those of you who say losing Levitre would be as bad as losing Pat Williams....we also lost Jason Peters and D. Bell. Your point being?
Nostradumbass Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 The elephant in the room is - why weren't these 2 guys signed a long time ago? Exactly Idiot franchises draft players, see them develop into effective starters and then let them wal four years later
Pete Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Exactly Idiot franchises draft players, see them develop into effective starters and then let them wal four years later we are a farm team. I want Buffalo to have an NFL team
thebandit27 Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 What the hell are you talking about? I gave clear cut examples of Bills front office mistakes. Did we learn from them? Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it I'm talking about the current front office, whereas you gave examples from 10 years ago and 5 years ago. The current front office has re-signed every free agent they've attempted to over the past 3 years, with the exception of Poz and Whitner, who it's debatable they wanted to sign in the first place. Observe: Kyle Williams Stevie Johnson Fred Jackson Ryan Fitzpatrick Erik Pears Kraig Urbik Scott Chandler So again, feel free to justify your comments with an example from inside the last 5 years. The elephant in the room is - why weren't these 2 guys signed a long time ago? Because there really isn't a need to...Byrd will be here next year, as will--presumably--Levitre, as long as they focus on him after having bought time with Byrd (they now have until June to sign him to a long-term deal). Your not grasping how it works. March 4th is tag deadline The Bills only hope for keeping Levitre is the tag, he's not going to negotiate and sign a deal 8 days away from Free agency. He's going to let the deadline come and see what suitors are out there so that the Bills will be compelting against high cash and better teams. Byrd's camp indicated a willingness to sign a LT deal, maybe it was BS but the strategy to keep both was fairly clear. Sign Byrd to a LT deal which probably would require an overpay (which I'm fine with) and then tag Levitre Why? Free agents sign this close to FA all the time, on every team in the league. Stevie did it last year, as did Scott Chandler. I'm aware of the tag deadline...to me it's very clear that they weren't 100% confident that Byrd's deal would get done by then, so they use the tag and move on to negotiating exclusively with Levitre. Get that deal done, and then you have until June to deal with Byrd. What part of that doesn't make sense from a football operations perspective? Exactly Idiot franchises draft players, see them develop into effective starters and then let them wal four years later Examples from the current front office regime requested please...otherwise you may as well stick to facts.
Nostradumbass Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 I'm talking about the current front office, whereas you gave examples from 10 years ago and 5 years ago. The current front office has re-signed every free agent they've attempted to over the past 3 years, with the exception of Poz and Whitner, who it's debatable they wanted to sign in the first place. Observe: Kyle Williams Stevie Johnson Fred Jackson Ryan Fitzpatrick Erik Pears Kraig Urbik Scott Chandler So again, feel free to justify your comments with an example from inside the last 5 years. Because there really isn't a need to...Byrd will be here next year, as will--presumably--Levitre, as long as they focus on him after having bought time with Byrd (they now have until June to sign him to a long-term deal). Get Serious Wow they signed up 3 UDFA that they got of the street and a 7th round QB that they backed up a garbage truck full of cash to his front door after 4 decent games Real bunch of capologists and long term planners
cosmo Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Levitre is gone. Look at some teams that are far closer than the Bills who have desperate needs at guard. The Lions come most immediately to mind, but the same could be said about the Steelers and the Eagles (despite the fact that the Steelers took a guard last season in rd 1). A number of teams are desperate for an offensive line upgrade, and Levitre is really good. Durable too. No way the Lions and the Eagles are "far closer" than the Bills, both finished with worse records last year. The Steelers are but they don't have nearly enough cap room to offer anything that we can't. It's not really about money, I don't think. I think Levitre and Byrd want to play for real teams, and the only way we keep one to have another year to convince them to stay is to use the franchise tag. Its always about the money!!
Mark Vader Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Who cares... Levitre is far from worth what the top guards are getting IMO. Draft one of the top 3 LT's with that #8 and move Glenn to RT or guard. Anyone else recall how Levite looked at center or LT, or how he looks when Eric Wood isn't next to him? Why should we move Glenn over to Guard? He did a good job at LT? Why should the Bills waste a pick in an area that considered a strength, while the need at QB, LB & WR is much higher? Yes I remember how Levitre looked. At Center he looked lost and was not suited for it, but at Left Tackle he did a decent job. Also when Eric Wood was injured, Levitre stepped up and was still making plays. Losing Levitre and replacing him with a rookie will not help the Bills, and Reinhardt is not the answer.
Recommended Posts