SBUffalo Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Isn't their a clause where the Franchise Tag mandates two first round picks, or has that passed? Not sure. I thought maybe you could sign him to a long term deal then trade him, but we aren't allowed to do that now that the date has passed. Can somebody help me clear this up Kind of. The clause is that if you franchise tag a player non-exclusively then other teams can negotiate. If he signs a deal elsewhere then the original team has the right to either match or take the first rounders. In negotiated trades you can give up far less.
billsgpr88 Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 This is sort of a positive development. With his injury, Byrd is going to have to play and prove to other teams that he is healthy and effective and deserving of a long term deal. If he does that, then we will get the value of his play and then potentially some trade options, which we can take or leave. this
TheBackupQB Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 I like Byrd, I think heis a very good players, and i was happy when he started to get praised for it But go back and watch the film, he isnt a game changer.... Now he isnt a leader.... He'd be great on this roster with the right attitude, but if not so be it... The bills have to handle this the right way...good thing we arent currently considered to be a really good time and he isnt a really high profile player. So theres no real media pressure... so the bills can take their time and do whats best
John from Riverside Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Its a business. I'm not mad at Byrd, I would love to have him on the team, more disappointed to hear something like this I think this has moved from "business" to "personal" for Byrd......and I dont think the Bills should help him out at ALL
Justice Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Whaley is a new GM in this league. He needs to send a message to Byrd and whoever else wants to play this game. Don't trade him. Don't pay him next year either. Franchise his ass again. Make him suffer so no one else tries this crap again.
billykaykay Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 If this was Facebook, I would create a "Like x 1,000,000,000" button, then hit it every hour on the hour for this post. Byrd is a douchebag. Plain and simple. I'd pay the team doctor to never clear his ass to play and then see how much his lame ass gets. Bum. If the doctor clears him to play, and he refuses, then he doesn't get paid.
hondo in seattle Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Whaley is a new GM in this league. He needs to send a message to Byrd and whoever else wants to play this game. Don't trade him. Don't pay him next year either. Franchise his ass again. Make him suffer so no one else tries this crap again. I agree completely. If Byrd gets traded, the Bills send the message that players (and their agents) drive personnel decisions rather than Whaley and the front office. It'll encourage other players to hold out, fake injuries, and otherwise behave badly when they think more money might be found elsewhere. Whaley needs to send a different message: contracts are binding and we expect players to respect them.
RCOHEN13 Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 He's gotta perform to get a trade. He's gotta perform to expect a long term deal. If he's gone 10/29, then so be it. He'll be the best safety in the league till then. Dont know about that... His heart isnt here and this is huge concern. Even if he plays, and doesnt play as well as he should, i doubt it would deter teams from wanting him cuz they know the talent is there and will attribute it to him not being happy or the foot. 1 thing is for sure, if we trade him we better get a PLAYER not just a pick for him. With Leonard signing and 2 rookies we drafted this yr, we dont need a safety and Leonard is used to this D and will probably start over the rookies this week if Byrd doesnt play. We must a starting caliber corner or an extra OL plus a pick for him. Honestly, i loved this guy. Its terrible how this has happened. We have the cap space and there is no reason they didnt re-sign him to a long term deal in off-season and he would have came to camp a "happy camper"! It's too bad business got in the way but at this point, with a new regime in there, i'd say get rid of him and do so smartly and get best deal possible to have guys that want to be here and can produce. Hopefully some Safeties(go down this week in opener and they will reach out to us to try and get Byrd. If we are making the calls, teams will try and take advantage of situation and try and steal him from us for way under his value.
Homey D. Clown Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 shocking news.... I didn't see this coming.... no way this could have been predicted.... right out of left field...
hondo in seattle Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 I'm tempted to say that if he won't be happy playing with the Bills (and I'm still hoping the situation is salvageable), then we should just put him on IR. It's an expensive decision but sends the message, "Don't fxck with Whaley." Byrd wants to be traded and if he is, he wins. Being placed on IR takes away his chance to showcase his skills for other suitors. And if he's going to pretend like he's injured, we ought to treat him like he really is.
dave mcbride Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 (edited) Woah, what curse of McLoughlin brought you out? I think the above doesn't get discussed much. What constitutes a win for each side? It's easy to gauge a win for the player/agent - to get the best long term contract. But what is a win for the team? Get the best contract from its side, or to build a winning program, knowing that sometimes you need to pay more than your comfort level? A win for the team is, quite literally, an increasing number of wins. The Bills only win if they win. The question is whether Byrd will help them get more wins or whether they'll do OK on the field without him. Given the abundant cap space, his salary has very little bearing on whether the Bills can continue to add pieces to the puzzle. In the immortal words of Rico, "just win, don't spin." Whoever wins the contractual battle is irrelevant to the larger goal. Edited September 5, 2013 by dave mcbride
DDD Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 shocking news.... I didn't see this coming.... no way this could have been predicted.... right out of left field... Right. Next we're going to hear Manuel will start against the Pats.
Canadian Bills Fan Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 This injury thing is stupid. Has the medical staff confirmed this injury? I read in an earlier post that the medical team could not diagnose this. If I was Marrone I would make a statement every week that we asked Byrd if he feels well enough to play. That way if he wants to continue to be a baby and continue with this “injury” then at least the Bills will make it look like Byrd was the one who was not ready to play. If that goes on long enough, other teams might start to think twice about offering top dollars to a player who was injured for most of the previous season. CBF
NoSaint Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 I'm tempted to say that if he won't be happy playing with the Bills (and I'm still hoping the situation is salvageable), then we should just put him on IR. It's an expensive decision but sends the message, "Don't fxck with Whaley." Byrd wants to be traded and if he is, he wins. Being placed on IR takes away his chance to showcase his skills for other suitors. And if he's going to pretend like he's injured, we ought to treat him like he really is. and if its a situation where IR is inappropriate i have a sneaking suspicion we would be seeing a grievance filed by his agent.
GG Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 A win for the team is, quite literally, an increasing number of wins. The Bills only win if they win. The question is whether Byrd will help them get more wins or whether they'll do OK on the field without him. Given the abundant cap space, his salary has very little bearing on whether the Bills can continue to add pieces to the puzzle. In the immortal words of Rico, "just win, don't spin." Whoever wins the contractual battle is irrelevant to the larger goal. Yup, that's the question, and the answer was hinted in another thread. Byrd's play contributed to sealing two wins last year, while another safety's drops prevented two more wins. Are Bills indifferent whether Byrd is on the field vs. a combination of Leonard, D Williams, Searcy or Meeks?
K-9 Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 and if its a situation where IR is inappropriate i have a sneaking suspicion we would be seeing a grievance filed by his agent. That's an interesting concept. Are there guidelines for IR "appropriateness?" If the PF looks to be a chronic and lingering condition that requires rest as the best way to deal with it (and everything I've read suggests it does), then at what point do the Bills owe it to themselves, and Byrd for that matter, to do what's best from a personnel standpoint on the field? GO BILLS!!!
Bufcomments Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Part of me understands how Byrd feels. He played out his rookie deal. He had a good season last year. It recently came out the he played with this injury last year. He did everything the Bills asked him to do. He seen players get deals (Wood, Stevie, Fitz etc) One would think that the Bills ought to have payed him already. I understand that how that he feels jaded by the organization. But here's the deal tho. The Bills value him no doubt. But the Bills had the right to use the franchise tag on him if they could not come to an agreement on a long term deal. The Bills thought he was asking for to much and I think they were correct. Byrd is a damn good player but he is not Ed Reed . I think we can all agree on that. I think if he had came to the OTA's, mini camp and training camp on time the Bills prolly would have had chance to speak to him one - on- one and maybe worked something out. If he would have camp to camp he would had time for the Bills to properly treat his foot injury and been healthy for the start of the season. I think this is another case of a good player getting bad advice from a greedy agent. I like Byrd, he would have fit this system to a T. But now he finds himself in a no win situation because he is injured and who is gonna trade for him now with the rosters across the league set ?? I was hoping he would come in and play well then they could get a deal done at the end of the season. But if he doesnt want to be here for the turn around then I say trade him for a starting CB and a draft pick.
dave mcbride Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Yup, that's the question, and the answer was hinted in another thread. Byrd's play contributed to sealing two wins last year, while another safety's drops prevented two more wins. Are Bills indifferent whether Byrd is on the field vs. a combination of Leonard, D Williams, Searcy or Meeks? In MLB they have WAR stats - wins above replacement. Granted, I still can't quite figure out the algorithm, and football would be even harder given all of the moving parts. That said, Byrd had to have had a pretty good WAR number last year.
NoSaint Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 That's an interesting concept. Are there guidelines for IR "appropriateness?" If the PF looks to be a chronic and lingering condition that requires rest as the best way to deal with it (and everything I've read suggests it does), then at what point do the Bills owe it to themselves, and Byrd for that matter, to do what's best from a personnel standpoint on the field? GO BILLS!!! were too far outside the medical information, but if an injury isnt going to cost him significant game time, im sure his agent could make an argument that it was used as a punishment instead of roster management.
Chimp Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 In MLB they have WAR stats - wins above replacement. Granted, I still can't quite figure out the algorithm, and football would be even harder given all of the moving parts. That said, Byrd had to have had a pretty good WAR number last year. Good luck figuring that out...on the other hand the organization is probably looking at the success the Jets had with a safety like Leonard on the field. If they believe that the front four can put a serious and consistent rush on opposing quarterbacks then it becomes that much easier to replace a safety. Not that this is earth shattering knowledge. were too far outside the medical information, but if an injury isnt going to cost him significant game time, im sure his agent could make an argument that it was used as a punishment instead of roster management. Is he going to play this week? I haven't heard that he is out for sure. How much time are we really looking at him missing?
Recommended Posts