JPS Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 he is an offensive guard, I hope we sign him but it's easiest postion to fill on a football team Yeah...and we had a string of 42 bad ones since 1994.
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Well we are talking about a team that has drafted RB in the first round 3x in the past decade despite already having a 1000 back on the team. I have a hard time seeing them putting out the big cash for Levitre and if he leaves I'd bet my free hat the Bills draft OL in the first 3 rounds. That's my sad prediction. The difference being that Nix wasn't GM for any of those. He's publicly stated he wants to draft well, keep good players on the team, and augment with FA. Obviously it takes 2 to tango and Levitre needs to want to stay but I'm sure Nix will do whatever he can to convince him to stay.
Erik Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Levitre has been clear he wants to test the market, the only strategy that keeps both is getting a long term deal done with Byrd and then franchising Levitre The franchise for Levitre is upwards of 9 million though...that's surely more per year than he'd get on the open market. Not sure I understand the logic that franchising Levitre was ever even an option.
jahnyc Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Do we know if the Bills are using the exclusive or non-exclusive franchise tag on Byrd? I kind of hope it is non-exclusive since the Bills could match or get two first round picks if he is signed by another team.
Never NEVER Give-up Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Good move. Now lets make signing Levitre priority #1. Mark my words- if we !@#$ up and lose Levitre- it will be the biggest FA loss since Pat Williams. On a team with gaping holes everywhere- two positions are set- RB and Oline. Losing Levitre creates another gaping hole and would be a kick in the balls THIS!
RyanC883 Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 (edited) that would be retarded logic by the Bills. We need to spend early picks on a QB, 2+WR, 2+LB, CB, DE. What the hell? How about we give away our best lineman and create another need. If we let Levitre go I am convinced we plan on tanking this season and will go for Johnny Football 1st overall next year worked for the Colts. But I doubt this is the strategy. It's clear to me that Levitre does not want to be here, and wants to be on what he views as an "instant contender." That's what the "test the waters" crap is all about. Byrd wants to prob make top 5 safety money long term, Bills want to see what he does this year. Having a winning season will help keep Byrd, etc. Edited March 1, 2013 by RyanC883
Mark Vader Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 that would be retarded logic by the Bills. We need to spend early picks on a QB, 2+WR, 2+LB, CB, DE. What the hell? How about we give away our best lineman and create another need. If we let Levitre go I am convinced we plan on tanking this season and will go for Johnny Football 1st overall next year I agree, losing Levitre will hurt the O-Line, and create another need on this team which would not be necessary. I think the philosophy was tag one and negotiate with the other. If true it was much smarter to tag Byrd. As far as the tag price goes, all OL are lumped together so they'd end up paying elite LT money to a guard. I actually see this as a win-win - they buy time with Byrd and can be more aggressive with Levitre. I sure hope you are correct in this analysis. It does make sense.
The Big Cat Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 I think it'll take 6-7.5/year for 5 years with 15 guarnteed for Levitre to stay.
B-Man Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Agreed, but he's going to test the waters, we know this. So the real question isn't whether they will or won't, but how much is too much? I agree with this.
Mark Vader Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 he is an offensive guard, I hope we sign him but it's easiest postion to fill on a football team [sARCASM] Yeah, just remember all of those great Offensive Guards the Bills had in the last 10 years before Levitre got here. Replacing Levitre will be easy. [sARCASM]
Nostradumbass Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 The franchise for Levitre is upwards of 9 million though...that's surely more per year than he'd get on the open market. Not sure I understand the logic that franchising Levitre was ever even an option. Why? Non-exclusive for a guard is 8.5 million To me if the choice is between long terming Byrd, transition tag for Levitre and cutting Fitzpatrick or franchising Byrd, losing Levitre and keeping an 8 million dollar QB who has turned over the ball the 2nd most times in the last 3 years of NFL play? hmmmm
DrDawkinstein Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Awesome news! This means Levitre should be re-signed by the end of next week!
hondo in seattle Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 The franchise tag is expected, but welcome, news. The Bills already lost McGee, Kelsay, Wilson and Barnett. Whatever we thought of these guys, they played a lot of snaps because they were better than the next guy down the depth chart. I like Pettine as DC but I don't know he has enough to work with. It would have sucked to lose both our starting safeties and 3 of 4 of our starting defensive backfield.
NoSaint Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 he is an offensive guard, I hope we sign him but it's easiest postion to fill on a football team Perhaps easiest to hide poor play in, but with a rookie qb it would be great to find someone that excels to keep his pocket clean so he can see, step into throws etc...
thebandit27 Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 More water treading for one of the worst run franchises in sport Now we can say goodbye to our stud guard and we get a draft a replacement in the 2nd/3rd round. The perfect metaphor for this franchise is someone digging a hole only to use the dirt to fill a hole right beside it 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... Einsteins definition of insanity comes to mind here. Didn't we learn our lesson? We let Antoine Winfield go for nothing, then drafted Clements to replace him, then let him bolt, and drafted another CB. 1-1+1=1 how the hell are we supposed to get ahead? Read the above response...what are you talking about? 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. Thank you. FA doesn't start until the 12th, correct? They still have time to get a long term deal done with both Byrd AND Levitre, if they want to (and can). This just ENSURES that Byrd isn't going anywhere - good move! I don't see how anyone could see it any differently...
cosmo Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 I wonder if this is a result of Nix/Whaley not wanting to pay him what he wants or them waiting to see how he fits in Pettine's D before committing long-term.
Erik Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Why? Non-exclusive for a guard is 8.5 million To me if the choice is between long terming Byrd, transition tag for Levitre and cutting Fitzpatrick or franchising Byrd, losing Levitre and keeping an 8 million dollar QB who has turned over the ball the 2nd most times in the last 3 years of NFL play? hmmmm First off all we have the cap room to sign both regardless of Fitzpatrick's contract so I'm not sure why you even bring him up. Second off all Byrd likely will sign for more AAV than Levitre on a multi-year deal so clearly you save money by franchising the more expensive player with the smaller franchise number and negotiate long term with the guy who will make less money per year long term yet has the higher franchise number.
thebandit27 Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 Do we know if the Bills are using the exclusive or non-exclusive franchise tag on Byrd? I kind of hope it is non-exclusive since the Bills could match or get two first round picks if he is signed by another team. Won't matter...nobody is going to give up 2 first-round picks for the right to pay a free safety $7M/year.
Mark Vader Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 worked for the Colts. But I doubt this is the strategy. It's clear to me that Levitre does not want to be here, and wants to be on what he views as an "instant contender." That's what the "test the waters" crap is all about. Byrd wants to prob make top 5 safety money long term, Bills want to see what he does this year. Having a winning season will help keep Byrd, etc. Don't know if anyone saw this, but Rotoworld predicts that Levitre will sign with the Detroit Lions for a 6 year 38M deal. Of course it's just a prediction. First of all, the Bills could offer Levitre that kind of contract. More to your point, if Levitre does not want to stay with the Bills, going to the Lions would not really be seen as signing with a contender. Here's the article: http://www.prideofdetroit.com/2013/2/25/4028722/nfl-free-agency-predictions-2013-detroit-lions
Malazan Posted March 1, 2013 Posted March 1, 2013 (edited) 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. More to your point, if Levitre does not want to stay with the Bills, going to the Lions would not really be seen as signing with a contender. Few Players will pick a contender over the team offering more money. Edited March 1, 2013 by jeremy2020
Recommended Posts