ganesh Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 Just reading between the lines but drafting two safeties with Dukes and Meeks and having Williams move to safety pretty much indicates that the front office is planning on his departure. With Parker as his agent any negotiating is pretty much off the table. I may be wrong and I'm hoping i am but that's a big contract for a safety while he is very good he is not Polomalu or Ed Reed. May be this is a way to put pressure on Parker to come to the table and agree to a contract that is mutually acceptable to both parties. The Bills could do with Byrds play and leadership and Byrd should be happy to get a good chunk of money that he is worth. Comparing him to Polamalu or Reed doesn't do any good. Byrd's contract has to be based on what Byrd has done ON and OFF the field.
Beerball Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 Yes. And if what I think, which is that Byrd doesn't have the playbook yet, is true, I think he comes in for training camp. If he doesn't know the defense and has a poor 2013, he loses a ton of money next off-season. Huh? That's a heckuva a stretch to declare missing the off-season automatically means him playing poorly and therefore he won't get the cash after this season? Revis held in 2010 for the entire post-season and did just fine and yes, I recognize one is a CB and the other a S. It's probably the last thing on Byrd and the agent's mind going into negotiations. Byrd's adapted fine to playing in 3 defenses in 4 seasons. I doubt it'll take much to pick up what Pettine's preaching. You two may be having fun battling this out, but common Vet? "If" is hardly a declaration. Read what people write before you respond.
eball Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 And Byrd's been in 3 in 4 NFL seasons. There's a chance for a lot of things, but it's a huge leap to think not showing for TC will mean his play suffers significantly to warrant a smaller contract on the open market. There's a chance he could have another All-Pro season in a scheme that should generate more pressure and therefore more inadvertent throws into coverage. The point to all of this is Byrd will get paid. If the Bills don't like paying the going rate, well, it's Peters 2.0. And that worked for the player and agent last time. Do we know anything about the status of negotiations? No; it's all assumptions. I believe comparing this to the Peters situation is like apples and oranges. Byrd is coming off his rookie deal; Peters had been re-worked two times already by the time things hit a snag. I think the Bills viewed Peters as a guy whose motivation was questionable and they would never be able to "make happy." Byrd is night and day by comparison -- at least from what we've seen. If the two sides really don't agree what the "going rate" is, then I expect Byrd to sign the tender late and play like his life depends on it. If his motivation or effort are questionable (there's no evidence he's that type of guy, though) the staff won't play him, and teams (including Buffalo) can decide on their own whether he's worthy of the elite paycheck. In a way, it's nice Byrd isn't around right now and all of these other guys have gotten the extra reps. Do I want Byrd in there? Of course. By September 8 I'm pretty sure he will be, and I agree with you the scheme change will not be a big deal for him. This was very effective use of the tag by Buffalo, knowing they had a budding star coming out of his rookie contract.
GaryPinC Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 The most important thing to me is to laud Tim Graham for an extremely well-written and well-researched piece. We complain all the time about the coverage that the Bills get and to read a piece with historical perspective and quotes from relevant major players in framing a situation is something that deserves major kudos. Great job Tim and thank you for helping restore my faith in the local Bills coverage. The second most important thing to mention is that no one out of the numerous people quoted in the piece had anything bad to say about Eugene Parker except for Robert Kraft (who was counterpointed by Bill Parcells) and that the actual facts of Parker's existence show a man of honor and honesty. In many ways I feel much better about things having read this piece. Agree completely. Fantastic article. Thanks Tim.
Doc Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 And Byrd's been in 3 in 4 NFL seasons. There's a chance for a lot of things, but it's a huge leap to think not showing for TC will mean his play suffers significantly to warrant a smaller contract on the open market. There's a chance he could have another All-Pro season in a scheme that should generate more pressure and therefore more inadvertent throws into coverage. The point to all of this is Byrd will get paid. If the Bills don't like paying the going rate, well, it's Peters 2.0. And that worked for the player and agent last time. He might have another All-Pro season or he might not. Again I said he's taking a chance. And while it worked out for Peters and his agent, did it work out for the Eagles? That's what I'm more concerned about. Just reading between the lines but drafting two safeties with Dukes and Meeks and having Williams move to safety pretty much indicates that the front office is planning on his departure. With Parker as his agent any negotiating is pretty much off the table. I may be wrong and I'm hoping i am but that's a big contract for a safety while he is very good he is not Polomalu or Ed Reed. The Williams bros, Searcy, Meeks, and Silva will get a chance to show what they can do in this defense. I asked if anyone could name the safeties in the Jets' defense the last few years and no one could. Which is pretty telling.
first_and_ten Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 (edited) Parker seems to do his homework on a player and comes to an estimation of what he then feels the market value of that player is. He doesn't seem to be one to move off that number. If the Bills agreed with his assessment, don't you think he would have been signed by now? It's possible they are waiting to clear cap room, and then will sign him, but It doesn't look good to me. If Parker isn't one to budge, then either the Bills decide to pay him what Parker decided his value is or they will try to move him. The Bils may even agree that Byrd is worth what Parker feels he's worth but are not willing to pay that much for whatever reason. Maybe they feel they have to choose between Byrd and some of the upcoming contracts that will be expiring next year. Whatever the case may be, it seems pretty clear that Parker won't budge. I hope I'm wrong but it doesn't look promising to me. Edited June 3, 2013 by first_and_ten
marauderswr80 Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 Am I the only one who thinks this is a win win situation for the Bills? If we lose Byrd we should get solid draft picks! If we keep him we have a solid player returning! That's how I look at it.
CBD Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 "I don't bluff because that's just not me," Parker said. "In this business, if you bluff and somebody calls it, in my mind you've lost all credibility forever." That says it all. And why I don't think Byrd will be a Bill any longer. Everyone here talking, saying that Byrd would have to show up for regular season games, I say just to prove a point he doesn't. Ends up getting traded and everyone here has a heart attack. Not showing up at all doesn't solve anything for Byrd. He sits out a whole year, doesn't get paid anything, gets franchised next year without the 10% bump, and the whole process starts over again.
mrags Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 Not showing up at all doesn't solve anything for Byrd. He sits out a whole year, doesn't get paid anything, gets franchised next year without the 10% bump, and the whole process starts over again. im not quite sure why there's like 3-4 Byrd threads. I'm also not quite sure why I have to keep repeating myself. Byrd doesn't have to sit out the entire year. He doesn't even have to sit out a single regular season game. All he has to do is sit out the pre season games, give the impression that he will not show up or sign his tender and play any regular season games and the Bills will feel forced to find a trading partner.
Malazan Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 im not quite sure why there's like 3-4 Byrd threads. I'm also not quite sure why I have to keep repeating myself. Byrd doesn't have to sit out the entire year. He doesn't even have to sit out a single regular season game. All he has to do is sit out the pre season games, give the impression that he will not show up or sign his tender and play any regular season games and the Bills will feel forced to find a trading partner. That is quite the assumption. The BIlls are well aware of Byrd's position that sitting out is a huge blow. Just sitting out of football for a year would lower his salary whether it is with the Bills or not.
CBD Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 im not quite sure why there's like 3-4 Byrd threads. I'm also not quite sure why I have to keep repeating myself. Byrd doesn't have to sit out the entire year. He doesn't even have to sit out a single regular season game. All he has to do is sit out the pre season games, give the impression that he will not show up or sign his tender and play any regular season games and the Bills will feel forced to find a trading partner. I guess I misunderstood your position when you stated that he didnt have to show up to any regular season games.
BuffaloBill Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 Parker is obviously a very good negotiator and we could all learn from him for sure. One of his most effective tools is a willingness to simply not come to an agreement with teams. This is not unlike buying a car. The dealers know that generally if they get you talking that you aren't likely to start walking. The Bills are going to have to pay Byrd if they wish to retain him as the fact is some team out there will. The real decision is simply whether he is worth the money or not.
mrags Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 I guess I misunderstood your position when you stated that he didnt have to show up to any regular season games. well, technically he doesn't have to show up for anything. There's too many in this board that feel he has no other choice but to show up. Holdouts happen almost every year. Look at Vincent Jackson from a few years ago. It's not that uncommon for a player to not show up come the start of the season. The Franchise tag is a lot of money for the season but that is absolute chimp change compared to a 4-6year deal with guaranteed money. If I was a football player I would never, ever play with the franchise tag. One bad hit or injury and yiur career could be over. Why risk that for 7m, when I I ow I would be worth much more over my career. I would t do it and I don't think Byrd will either.
shibuya Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 trade Byrd IMO. it's a shame but I wouldn't play that game with Parker. just grab all you can for him, and move on. In fact any player that comes to the table with Parker I would move.
Malazan Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 well, technically he doesn't have to show up for anything. Technically, no player has to show up for anything.
mrags Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 Technically, no player has to show up for anything. your right. They usually do because they have muti-year contracts worth millions and millions of dollars. Not 1 year contracts worth pennies cimpared to what they should be making and not have the worry to have the same thing done to you in another year.
Kelly the Dog Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 Great article,Tim. Good to see praise for one of the best agents instead of vitriol. Good to see Robert Kraft in that article showing his true colors again, the scumbag. Complaining about the poison pill when that is exactly how he acquired Wes Welker, only even more deceitful.
HankBulloughMellencamp Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 If the two sides really don't agree what the "going rate" is, then I expect Byrd to sign the tender late and play like his life depends on it. If his motivation or effort are questionable (there's no evidence he's that type of guy, though) the staff won't play him, and teams (including Buffalo) can decide on their own whether he's worthy of the elite paycheck. In a way, it's nice Byrd isn't around right now and all of these other guys have gotten the extra reps. To borrow a quote the Talking Heads, stop making so much sense like that here on TBD. People seem to enjoy hitting the panic button too much, and often in a way that resembles Montgomery Burns working the trap door button when an employee enters his office. Seriously, we know this guy can play; his absence has only given Searcy (who I am NOT sold on quite yet) A. Williams & the greenhorn draftees some time to get their feet wet back there. Byrd is a high-character vet, a pro's pro who was brought up in the game - and it shows. The apple certainly did not fall too far from the family tree. Jairus demonstrated a knack for the INT from day one, and he also creates his fair share of turnovers by stripping poorly protected balls loose. And from what I have seen, his tackling has improved by leaps and bounds since he got here. He will get paid, we just need to let the process play out. This is not unlike buying a car. The dealers know that generally if they get you talking that you aren't likely to start walking. Exactly, if you walk into a dealership with the intent of driving something else out that day, the odds of you getting the fairest deal are not in your favor.
NoSaint Posted June 3, 2013 Posted June 3, 2013 your right. They usually do because they have muti-year contracts worth millions and millions of dollars. Not 1 year contracts worth pennies cimpared to what they should be making and not have the worry to have the same thing done to you in another year. well, lets not say the tag is pennies. i mentioned it in another thread, but if anyone cares to look i would be curious to hear parkers track record on franchise tags.
Recommended Posts