mrags Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Lol yea teams only pay one player... Seriously this is your argument. Pay Byrd now so you don't have a problem when you have to pay someone else later. PTR this statement doesn't make sense. "Pay Byrd now so you don't have a problem when you have to pay someone else later" ?!?!?!?!?!? Are you BatChit crazy? So what happens next year when wood wants a contract? What about in a few years when CJ is in the running for MVP of the league? What about another year or so after that when EJ starts turning into Colon Kaepernick and leading us into the playoffs? Oh, because we signed Byrd, they'll all sign for less. Got it. You don't make sense dude. Same topic, different argument, I don't have any clue about this, can someone please explain it to me? If Byrd doesn't get a new contract and is franchised (and I say IF becauae he doesn't have to sign it, but that's a different argument altogether) why is there a July deadline to negotiate a contract? Other players have been resigned during the season. Why can't this happen with Byrd? What's the reason for the July deadline? Can anyone explain that?
Delete This Account Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 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. the Bills franchised him for a reason, fully well knowing this wasn't going to be an easy negotiation. don't know how Byrd suddenly agreeing to take less for whatever purpose enters the equation at this point. Bills are going to have to either come up on money, or down on years. jw
NoSaint Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Same topic, different argument, I don't have any clue about this, can someone please explain it to me? If Byrd doesn't get a new contract and is franchised (and I say IF becauae he doesn't have to sign it, but that's a different argument altogether) why is there a July deadline to negotiate a contract? Other players have been resigned during the season. Why can't this happen with Byrd? What's the reason for the July deadline? Can anyone explain that? if i had to guess, to discourage holdouts and such. you arent getting anything better by sitting 3 weeks to try and force a negotiation.
Ralph W. Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 (edited) this statement doesn't make sense. "Pay Byrd now so you don't have a problem when you have to pay someone else later" ?!?!?!?!?!? Are you BatChit crazy? So what happens next year when wood wants a contract? What about in a few years when CJ is in the running for MVP of the league? What about another year or so after that when EJ starts turning into Colon Kaepernick and leading us into the playoffs? Oh, because we signed Byrd, they'll all sign for less. Got it. You don't make sense dude. Same topic, different argument, I don't have any clue about this, can someone please explain it to me? If Byrd doesn't get a new contract and is franchised (and I say IF becauae he doesn't have to sign it, but that's a different argument altogether) why is there a July deadline to negotiate a contract? Other players have been resigned during the season. Why can't this happen with Byrd? What's the reason for the July deadline? Can anyone explain that? You franchise Byrd this year you will still have to worry about him next year on top of the CJ and Woods will need to be paid. Having to pay 3 guys two of which big money in one season isn't good getting Byrd out of the way this year setting up the structure for down the road. As for your second part Byrd is given an exclusive franchise tag which if no deal gets done by July 15 and he signs his franchise tag then they cannot negotiate until the end of the league year. Previously, the window for a team signing its franchise player to a long-term deal closed not long after the free-agency period started and then opened again on July 15. Now, the window remains open until July 15. After July 15, the franchise player can sign only a one-year deal with his current team. It can be for more than the franchise tender, and it can include other terms, like playing-time or performance triggers that would prevent the tag from being used again. But the duration can be no more than one year.[/Quote] http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/28/10-things-to-know-about-the-franchise-tag/ Edited June 19, 2013 by EJ3
thebandit27 Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 the Bills franchised him for a reason, fully well knowing this wasn't going to be an easy negotiation. don't know how Byrd suddenly agreeing to take less for whatever purpose enters the equation at this point. Bills are going to have to either come up on money, or down on years. jw I never broached that subject.
jumbalaya Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 I love how the Bills are using their standard negotiation tactic. -- Aaron Williams is looking great in practice. -- If Byrd leaves they have a crutch, until Williams is picked apart in the first real game. If Byrd signs, Williams may not even make the team. I have a dollar that says Byrd blows a knee within three weeks of when he signs either his tender or a new contract and sits for the year.
mrags Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 You franchise Byrd this year you will still have to worry about him next year on top of the CJ and Woods will need to be paid. Having to pay 3 guys two of which big money in one season isn't good getting Byrd out of the way this year setting up the structure for down the road. again, you don't make sense. If you sign him to a ridiculous contract tomorrow, you will still have to pay him next year. Doesn't make sense. If your referring to franchising him again next year and that's why you don't have the money, to that I will argue that there is no way in hell he's franchised again next year after this years holdout. He will either be traded or sign a long term deal. IMO, he will be traded as ive said before.
26CornerBlitz Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 I love how the Bills are using their standard negotiation tactic. -- Aaron Williams is looking great in practice. -- If Byrd leaves they have a crutch, until Williams is picked apart in the first real game. If Byrd signs, Williams may not even make the team. I have a dollar that says Byrd blows a knee within three weeks of when he signs either his tender or a new contract and sits for the year. Spend that dollar on tomorrow's lottery Mr. Soothsayer.
Delete This Account Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 I never broached that subject. sure, but that's the nut of why we're at where we're at. jw
mrags Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Nobody's answers hold any reason why there is a July deadline. If a player under contract can sign a long term deal or extension during the season, why can't a franchised player. Sounds stupid.
thebandit27 Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 sure, but that's the nut of why we're at where we're at. jw Ah...gotcha. I missed that that's what you were implying. Sure, I see no reason for Byrd to take less than market value. If Buffalo won't come up to Goldson money, he'll play under the tag in 2013, and we'll be right back here next year. Nobody's answers hold any reason why there is a July deadline. If a player under contract can sign a long term deal or extension during the season, why can't a franchised player. Sounds stupid. They actually can negotiate, they just can't sign anything more than a 1-year deal. I personally think that it was a concession that the owner's made during the latest CBA negotiations...a clause intended to "punish" teams for tagging players and not signing them to long-term deals.
Delete This Account Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Ah...gotcha. I missed that that's what you were implying. keep up, for goodness sake! jw
NoSaint Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 I personally think that it was a concession that the owner's made during the latest CBA negotiations...a clause intended to "punish" teams for tagging players and not signing them to long-term deals. both sides lose on it, but it essentially resolves the drama before the season. it gives pressure to finish things and know where everyone stands early.
thebandit27 Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 both sides lose on it, but it essentially resolves the drama before the season. it gives pressure to finish things and know where everyone stands early. It does give some temporary resolution while still allowing teams to discuss figures with the agent in-season. I do, however, think it's somewhat silly to preclude players from signing a new deal that could--in theory--be agreed upon in principle during the season if both sides are amenable. keep up, for goodness sake! jw See what happens when one quits the AP?
K-9 Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 You don't seem to understand it is more then that. Oh, you mean the part about how re-signing and taking care of your own engenders warm and fuzzy feelings throughout the locker room? That other players on the squad will see this positive glowing example of commitment by the organization and will want to stay when their time comes? That the other players will realize THIS is the team for me? That's a nice by-product, nothing more. None of that has ANY basis in contract negotiations. But if it helps support your narrative, then by all means, have at it. GO BILLS!!!
Ralph W. Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Oh, you mean the part about how re-signing and taking care of your own engenders warm and fuzzy feelings throughout the locker room? That other players on the squad will see this positive glowing example of commitment by the organization and will want to stay when their time comes? That the other players will realize THIS is the team for me? That's a nice by-product, nothing more. None of that has ANY basis in contract negotiations. But if it helps support your narrative, then by all means, have at it. GO BILLS!!! Whatever you feel like go ahead.
mrags Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Oh, you mean the part about how re-signing and taking care of your own engenders warm and fuzzy feelings throughout the locker room? That other players on the squad will see this positive glowing example of commitment by the organization and will want to stay when their time comes? That the other players will realize THIS is the team for me? That's a nice by-product, nothing more. None of that has ANY basis in contract negotiations. But if it helps support your narrative, then by all means, have at it. GO BILLS!!! this---^ All it really does is let other players know they can hold out for more money when their time is up.
NoSaint Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 It does give some temporary resolution while still allowing teams to discuss figures with the agent in-season. I do, however, think it's somewhat silly to preclude players from signing a new deal that could--in theory--be agreed upon in principle during the season if both sides are amenable. the tag on its most basic level is to make sure stars suit up for the same team year to year. cutting negotiations off before they become a distraction in season with potential hold outs helps make sure that star suits up week one. if he could sign week 6, theres a much higher chance he sits out til he signs, in my opinion. by putting the deadline in july the player is motivated to sign early to get his long term stability, as is the team. once that deadline passes, unless a guy is willing to sit til week 11 to prove a point (rare) he will be reporting for duty week 1 - the league wins, even if the player/team both lose.
K-9 Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Whatever you feel like go ahead. Spoken like a true gentleman and scholar. The old "whatever." Next, you'll just tell me, "Tell it to the hand!" GO BILLS!!!
Ralph W. Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Spoken like a true gentleman and scholar. The old "whatever." Next, you'll just tell me, "Tell it to the hand!" GO BILLS!!! Hey you want to make up stuff go right ahead. Not my position to say otherwise.
Recommended Posts