Byrd Skipping mandatory mini-camp

[NoSaint]

 

 

Tried answering your question earlier but I guess it's not the answer you wanted to hear. One of the best? I agree. The Bills' offer pays him as "one of the best."

 

Highest paid of all time? Not for a two time pro bowler and one time 2nd team All Pro with holes in his game. So if not Byrd, then someone better. That's my answer.

 

Next question.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

If its any consolation, in 2 years he will have almost no shot of being tops even if we pay him top money today. You keep saying most all time which is near useless as 10 years ago the most all time would barely be top ten right now

[K-9]

If its any consolation, in 2 years he will have almost no shot of being tops even if we pay him top money today. You keep saying most all time which is near useless as 10 years ago the most all time would barely be top ten right now

 

I agree. I use the term "most of all time" because I get the impression that people are really over-estimating Byrd's talent and that's my way of offering perspective. Hell, the WORST players of today will garner more than the best of all time in terms of dollars, especially as salaries continue to escalate. I get that. And I really DON'T care how much Byrd gets paid because to me, that's just not relative to his standing in my rankings of all time greats. No offense to Byrd. As I said, he's a good player but I'm not anywhere NEAR close to saying he's on his way to Canton.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Ralph W.]

 

 

I agree. I use the term "most of all time" because I get the impression that people are really over-estimating Byrd's talent and that's my way of offering perspective. Hell, the WORST players of today will garner more than the best of all time in terms of dollars, especially as salaries continue to escalate. I get that. And I really DON'T care how much Byrd gets paid because to me, that's just not relative to his standing in my rankings of all time greats. No offense to Byrd. As I said, he's a good player but I'm not anywhere NEAR close to saying he's on his way to Canton.

 

GO BILLS!!!

No you keep saying most all time b.v you want to fantasize the offer being over the top amount to justify your answer.

[K-9]

No you keep saying most all time b.v you want to fantasize the offer being over the top amount to justify your answer.

 

Wrong.

 

I don't care what he gets paid. Whatever the dollar amount ends up being is not going to change the fact that he's a good but imperfect player.

 

Fantasize about his offer? LOL! That is rich. I don't have to justify my answer to anyone, especially you. It's a nuanced business decision with mitigating factors. But your limited experience prevents you from getting past the "he's a two-time pro bowler, pay the man!" logic.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Ralph W.]

You don't seem to understand it is more then that.

[PromoTheRobot]

You don't seem to understand it is more then that.

 

But the bottom line here is that Byrd must be paid what he wants or the Bills are a failure as a franchise, correct? Is this what we are arguing?

 

PTR

[RuntheDamnBall]

But the bottom line here is that Byrd must be paid what he wants or the Bills are a failure as a franchise, correct? Is this what we are arguing?

 

PTR

Sure, it's all or nothing, all the time. It sure makes it easier to shoot down an argument.

 

17 pages of back and forth, mostly with each side characterizing the other's position in the extreme. I'm sure Byrd would love to be top paid at his position, and he even could end up there for a short time. Overpaying is undesirable. But you seem insistent on asking this question if the Bills can afford to have the top paid player at every position. Yet. that's a scenario that no one is suggesting! As others have said, the optics of drafting great players and letting them go are bad. And it means you create a hole where you had elite talent. Is that really worth it, to take a stand? They let it happen with Levitre and it was wise, even if they are a better team with Levitre. But they are not competing with anyone but themselves right now. Maybe Byrd is drawing a hard line at $9MM a year average, or maybe the guaranteed amounts Parker is seeking are too high. I find it hard to believe that they can't come to an agreement, and that he isn't worth an $8MM / year average on a contract that 1) another player will eclipse sometime in the next year or two, and 2) he likely won't see the end of anyway.

 

Now, is there a chance that there is someone on the roster that will step up and play capably? Yes. Is there is a chance that someone will play as well as Byrd in 2013? Very unlikely. The Duke Williams and Aaron Williams supporters here are the ones in fantasy-land - we haven't seen either guy play a down in the NFL at safety. It's like those that pinned their hopes on Marcus Easley. You can't expect anything from someone who has shown you nothing. Potential is great, but Byrd has highlights and accolades and time already served. K-9 makes a point that maybe free safety isn't as important as other positions, but you're arguing that a light-of-frame (but very, very good) RB is, or that an oft-injured (but very good) C is. I wouldn't feel comfortable making either of those guys the top-paid. I am more comfortable making a guy that Pettine could probably use very effectively among the top paid for awhile.

 

Overall, I'm suggesting that this straw-man argument of making all the guys top-paid began its course as useless, and is really just getting tired. We can stop rushing to the defense of the Bills organization at every turn until they actually start producing the results of a model franchise. They have been a failure as a franchise, and I think Russ Brandon admits as much, at least as much as a spin-conscious marketing dude can. Hopefully the measures they have been taking will begin to put them in a different category.

[eball]

Very well thought out post, RuntheDamnBall. Kudos. I have to admit I'm a bit "scared" of making Byrd one of the top 1-2 paid safeties in the game, because I haven't decided if his impressive statistics have been the result of opportunism or if he's really that good. Perhaps I'm suffering from PTBD (post-traumatic Bills disorder) in that I almost expect Byrd to bust if the Bills meet his salary demands.

 

Glad I'm not the one responsible for making this decision for the franchise; hopefully the guys who are have a better grasp of it.

[RuntheDamnBall]

Very well thought out post, RuntheDamnBall. Kudos. I have to admit I'm a bit "scared" of making Byrd one of the top 1-2 paid safeties in the game, because I haven't decided if his impressive statistics have been the result of opportunism or if he's really that good. Perhaps I'm suffering from PTBD (post-traumatic Bills disorder) in that I almost expect Byrd to bust if the Bills meet his salary demands.

 

Glad I'm not the one responsible for making this decision for the franchise; hopefully the guys who are have a better grasp of it.

Hey, first off, thanks. And believe me when I say that your fears are well-founded.

 

My friends and I have made it a verb in our lives, to "Buffalo Bill" something - i.e. to f--- it up.

 

That said, if Pettine is any good, I think that Byrd could be quite good in this system. He's shown that when he's partnered with a coach that really knows how to use him (Jauron, though I hate to admit it), he can really excel. I wouldn't say the sky is the limit, but I think Pettine would very much like to have him in camp as another weapon to strategize with.

 

I hate saying stuff like this because it's hard to quantify, but I think opportunism is something that can't be coached. So even if it is that, it has to be weighed in. How many times have we seen a game-clinching INT dropped? It's good to have guys with a nose for the ball on the roster, and if they have a pretty complete game with just a few deficiencies, all the better.

[thebandit27]

So you're arguing with me b.c you think something codemonkey said will happen when it CANT happen... Yea OK.

 

Um, exactly why can't they set up an early season TIMELINE? I didn't say it would be an early season deadline for a deal, but they can absolutely agree to an off-season timeline during the season.

 

Come on man.

 

No you keep saying most all time b.v you want to fantasize the offer being over the top amount to justify your answer.

 

You seem to be taking this very personally...why?

Edited June 19, 2013 by thebandit27

[Ralph W.]

 

 

Um, exactly why can't they set up an early season TIMELINE? I didn't say it would be an early season deadline for a deal, but they can absolutely agree to an off-season timeline during the season.

 

Grow up man.

 

 

 

You seem to be taking this very personally...why?

 

That's OK just go back and make sure you learn what you talk about before you try and converse with us.

[Delete This Account]

the Bills had an opportunity a year ago to address this contract issue. Byrd would've been more ameniable to reaching a deal and less steadfast on sticking to a hard number because his "body of work" had not yet been established. the Bills, of course, took the risk of Byrd flaming out last season. still, a little foresight -- as what didn't happen also in the Jason Peters' case -- might have gone a long way in avoiding what's now going on.

 

the Bills will have to come up on their offer. history shows, they usually do in instances like this.

 

jw

[thebandit27]

That's OK just go back and make sure you learn what you talk about before you try and converse with us.

 

Nice post...really added a lot to the discussion.

[Ralph W.]

 

 

Nice post...really added a lot to the discussion.

pot meet kettle

Signing Byrd would make this defense just that much better.

[thebandit27]

the Bills had an opportunity a year ago to address this contract issue. Byrd would've been more ameniable to reaching a deal and less steadfast on sticking to a hard number because his "body of work" had not yet been established. the Bills, of course, took the risk of Byrd flaming out last season. still, a little foresight -- as what didn't happen also in the Jason Peters' case -- might have gone a long way in avoiding what's now going on.

 

the Bills will have to come up on their offer. history shows, they usually do in instances like this.

 

jw

 

True, but I can't blame them for doing what they did. Byrd is a great player, and at the right price should be here. He's not, however, an $8M/year player (very, very few safeties are).

 

pot meet kettle

Signing Byrd would make this defense just that much better.

 

So, the guy who thinks I don't know what I'm talking about thinks that a player that's already on the team, and cannot play anywhere else this season unless he's traded, will make the team better?

 

Dude, he has to play here this year. He can't leave. The bolded statement is very, very stupid.

[Ralph W.]

 

 

True, but I can't blame them for doing what they did. Byrd is a great player, and at the right price should be here. He's not, however, an $8M/year player (very, very few safeties are).

 

 

 

So, the guy who thinks I don't know what I'm talking about thinks that a player that's already on the team, and cannot play anywhere else this season unless he's traded, will make the team better?

 

Dude, he has to play here this year. He can't leave. The bolded statement is very, very stupid.

Now you look bad trying to pull at strings. Just stop lol I won't play this little game with you if you want to talk off topic then message me. If not then just stop, starting to get less fun and more childish.

 

FYI he isn't on the team still hasn't signed his tag. Thought you would know that.

 

Wait why am I even talking to a guy who doesn't even know the rules to what he is arguing. Be gone with you till you learn!

Edited June 19, 2013 by EJ3

[Delete This Account]

True, but I can't blame them for doing what they did. Byrd is a great player, and at the right price should be here. He's not, however, an $8M/year player (very, very few safeties are).

 

 

"true, but" doesn't fly. too often emotion plays a role in these debates and i'm leaving that out. the bills don't set the market price and neither, to a certain extent does Byrd. it comes down to what the Bills are willing to pay and what Byrd is willing to accept. that point has not yet been reached.

if/and-or-when a deal is done, it's quite likely Byrd will be regarded as being overpaid by safety standards. my point is, it didn't have to come to this.

 

jw

[thebandit27]

Now you look bad trying to pull at strings. Just stop lol I won't play this little game with you if you want to talk off topic then message me. If not then just stop, starting to get less fun and more childish.

 

Pot meet kettle.

 

And I'm curious as to why you want to take things off-topic...my intention is to discuss the topic of the thread.

 

FYI he isn't on the team still hasn't signed his tag. Thought you would know that.

 

I'm sure you understand this: he cannot play anywhere else this year. He's been franchise tagged. He has to play in Buffalo unless he's traded or the tag is rescinded (very, very unlikely).

 

He is on this team. The fact that he hasn't signed the tag simply means he cannot participate until he does, but as long as he remains tagged, he remains property of the Bills. This is not disputed in any way.

 

Look at the team roster:

 

http://www.buffalobills.com/team/roster.html

 

There he is, right there, at the bottom, under "Reserve/Franchise Player"

 

There's no reason to get upset over it.

 

He's already on the team; thus he cannot make the team better just by being signed. It's very unlikely that he'll sit out 10 week of the regular season rather than play under the tag salary, so the point you made upthread makes little sense (I probably should have said that instead of saying it was stupid--sorry about that).

[NoSaint]

 

 

"true, but" doesn't fly. too often emotion plays a role in these debates and i'm leaving that out. the bills don't set the market price and neither, to a certain extent does Byrd. it comes down to what the Bills are willing to pay and what Byrd is willing to accept. that point has not yet been reached.

if/and-or-when a deal is done, it's quite likely Byrd will be regarded as being overpaid by safety standards. my point is, it didn't have to come to this.

 

jw

 

yup, they got a year grossly underpaying him and now hes going to make sure he doesnt leave money on the table. things like this happen.

[thebandit27]

"true, but" doesn't fly. too often emotion plays a role in these debates and i'm leaving that out. the bills don't set the market price and neither, to a certain extent does Byrd. it comes down to what the Bills are willing to pay and what Byrd is willing to accept. that point has not yet been reached.

if/and-or-when a deal is done, it's quite likely Byrd will be regarded as being overpaid by safety standards. my point is, it didn't have to come to this.

 

jw

"true, but" doesn't fly. too often emotion plays a role in these debates and i'm leaving that out. the bills don't set the market price and neither, to a certain extent does Byrd. it comes down to what the Bills are willing to pay and what Byrd is willing to accept. that point has not yet been reached.

if/and-or-when a deal is done, it's quite likely Byrd will be regarded as being overpaid by safety standards. my point is, it didn't have to come to this.

 

jw

 

Of course it didn't...it never does for any impending FA, but many times, across the league, it does just the same.

 

I understand your point, and mine is simply that I don't blame the team for waiting to see if Byrd proved himself as an elite safety before paying him like one. Up until last season, I felt strongly that he was a numbers-inflated guy...last year, he proved to me that he's a very good player.

 

The question as to whether or not a safety deserves the kind of money he wants is--in my opinion--a different discussion.