NoSaint Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 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? i believe we still dont know on this week, and anything beyond that is an even bigger mystery.
Kelly the Dog Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 I agree with the concept that this is the Peters playbook. The Bills did it before with Parker, why wouldn't he do it again? Byrd wants to be paid in the top few safeties in the game and Parker is probably not going to back down, so he is playing his last chit. Byrd, however, pretty much has to play very good though for it to work. Whaley may not want to start his tenure with agents bullying him. The Bills don't have to trade him at all, and Marrone and Pettine are going to know pretty early whether or not he is trying hard and playing well. So far, Marrone has been effusive in his praise for Byrd's effort. That may or may not be true. If I'm the Bills, there is no way I trade him for less than a #1 pick. It sets a terrible example and precedent. They got a pretty good deal for Peters. I don't at all think that Byrd is necessarily a cancer, that we should punish him, or that he is not going to play well. I expect him to play and play well in hopes of a trade to a team willing to pay him what he wants. There are probably a few teams in the league that are, like the Peters situation. They should have to pony up a very high draft choice, too, or don't let the agent walk all over you, set a precedent.
mannc Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 The 9 interception season came about from plenty of poorly thrown balls. I'm not saying that he isn't good but top safety money is for guys like Ed Reed or Polamalu. I have never heard anyone talk about Byrd they way they talk about guys like Reed and Polamalu. Other teams fear safeties like that. He isn't in the same class. Reed and Polamalu are both first-ballot hall of famers--among the very best ever to play their position--but they are both very much on the downside of their careers. It's true that Byrd is not as good as they were when they were in their prime, but it's also true that he is in the discussion for the best safety in the league right now, along with Eric Weddle and a couple others. Safety has become a very important position in the modern NFL. Someone like Byrd who, unlike Reed or Polamalu, is at his peak, is worth a lot. If the Jets could get a first-rounder for Revis, who is older than Byrd and was coming off an ACL replacement, then the Bills should be able to get a least that for Byrd. Because he is playing under the franchise tag, the team trading for him would have to a tacit agreement with Parker/Byrd on the terms of a long-term deal that would get done after the season. People saying that Byrd is only likely to bring a third-round pick are delusional. Whaley should be run out of town if he accepts less than a first for him.
Meatloaf Sandwich Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Well maybe Byrd will have a career ending injury and we won't have to worry about him. Inb4"omg he must be serious saying something like that"
hondo in seattle Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 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. He claims to have PF. PF tends to linger for months. IR seems appropriate - at least enough so that counterarguments wouldnt' get very far.
BillsWatch Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 From NFL.com: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000238562/article/jairus-byrd-reportedly-wants-buffalo-bills-to-trade-him That won't be easy. Interested parties will be asked to hand draft picks to Buffalo and an expensive new contract to Byrd. You don't see teams standing in line for a high-priced safety with a foot injury.Byrd played through the pain of plantar fasciitis last season, according to Rapoport. Back then, the defender held out hope for a new contract, a deal that would keep him in town for years to come. The Bills have shown no interest in making long-term promises, and it comes as little surprise to hear that Byrd wants out. Really? The Bills have not been trying to get one all off season with Byrd. Quite a one sided article. I expect NoSaint to be quoting it a lot.
Jamie Nails Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 (edited) Can we trade Parker? Asking price: two Stingers from Jim's or a Super Pack from Mighty. Edited September 5, 2013 by Jamie Nails
NoSaint Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 He claims to have PF. PF tends to linger for months. IR seems appropriate - at least enough so that counterarguments wouldnt' get very far. he hasnt even been ruled out for a game yet and you are arguing IR is appropriate. is it that crazy to simply accept that we do not know what is going on medically or in negotiations? From NFL.com: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000238562/article/jairus-byrd-reportedly-wants-buffalo-bills-to-trade-him Really? The Bills have not been trying to get one all off season with Byrd. Quite a one sided article. I expect NoSaint to be quoting it a lot. i think the bills have an interest, but i think the fan reaction right now is emotion based and not logical in MANY cases. again, we have no idea whats going on behind closed doors - so what makes this source any less accurate than any other - simply that we said we wanted to sign him? my point is the reporters tend to suck at this game, and fans are adding an extra layer of cherry picking the ones with opinions they like. dont expect me to quote that one for anything factual, beyond the fact that we dont know if the bills gave a fair long term offer or not. they have all the leverage, and its possible they decided to try to use it to lowball him. parker might be unreasonable. it could be both at the same time as well.
K-9 Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 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. Can the Bills make the case that his preparation and play is negatively impacted by his condition? I'm not looking for an argument here. I'd really like to know what the guidelines are regarding "appropriate" placement of a player on IR. Seems the Bills and other teams have placed guys on IR knowing full well those injuries would heel before the season ended, but they needed the roster flexibility at the time. Of course, I don't recall a player as talented as Byrd being placed on IR if there was a chance he'd be able to come back before the season ended. And being in contention in November is a consideration as well. Regardless, at some point he has to test it on the field and we'll all have a better idea then I guess. GO BILLS!!!
Lurker Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 If I'm the Bills, there is no way I trade him for less than a #1 pick. It sets a terrible example and precedent. They got a pretty good deal for Peters. I don't at all think that Byrd is necessarily a cancer, that we should punish him, or that he is not going to play well. I expect him to play and play well in hopes of a trade to a team willing to pay him what he wants. There are probably a few teams in the league that are, like the Peters situation. They should have to pony up a very high draft choice, too, or don't let the agent walk all over you, set a precedent. This is the rational thing to do. Don't let emotion dictate, send a message that it's "just business" and move on. The only problem I see is that safeties don't have the value that good left tackles do, so it will be a smaller group of trade partners to work with.
NoSaint Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Can the Bills make the case that his preparation and play is negatively impacted by his condition? I'm not looking for an argument here. I'd really like to know what the guidelines are regarding "appropriate" placement of a player on IR. Seems the Bills and other teams have placed guys on IR knowing full well those injuries would heel before the season ended, but they needed the roster flexibility at the time. Of course, I don't recall a player as talented as Byrd being placed on IR if there was a chance he'd be able to come back before the season ended. And being in contention in November is a consideration as well. Regardless, at some point he has to test it on the field and we'll all have a better idea then I guess. GO BILLS!!! i dont know, but im willing to go out on a limb and say you cant stash a guy who is healthy on IR. where the degree of injury line is drawn might end up being more of a "you know it when you see it" ruling than a "we diagnosed him as out X number of weeks which reaches the threshold required." you absolutely can place a guy on IR even if its not a 16 week injury though. for the folks saying IR him simply to punish him, the team would likely need to show that there was an actual need for IR.
BADOLBILZ Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 People get so wound up in their emotions for these players.....who cares if YOU like him or not.......do you care if he likes you, because I got news for some of you, a lot of these players can't stand the jock-sniffing fans. All that matters is that they are here to do a job. Byrd is unhappy.........then he can just be unhappy. If he wants to fake an injury(which I am still not convinced of) then it is a black mark on Eugene Parker and a few dollars lost for the Bills. Eugene Parker has an impeccable reputation as a negotiator......feigning an injury to get traded would be a black mark on that repuation and if that is the precedent he wants to set, then fine. Just eat the contract, pay Byrd for now.........bring a lawsuit against him or suspend him for conduct detrimental to the team......see TO in Philly years ago......... and just go about day to day business. NO MORE TRADING MALCONTENTS Moulds begged out and got traded They let Clements have a no re-tag agreement if he signed his one year tender.........THE critical turning point for this team and handling their players Takeo begged out and got traded so he could "win" Willis begged out and got traded so he could get his new contract early Peters and Parker saw this and attacked the weak willed Bills organization Then Schobel tried to leverage his way into not having to practice.........Buddy stood up to that one But then they gave Lynch his dream come true in reward for acting just like Byrd is now If they don't put an end to the nonsense of giving in to the demands of player already bound to the team then it will continue Bottom line with Byrd......time heals all wounds Other teams go thru acrimony like this, backburner it......and come out of it with a contract. It happens. If it didn't, then teams wouldn't use the tag.
PromoTheRobot Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Again...did Byrd say he wants a trade or is Eugene Parker trying to orchestrate a trade? There's a HUGE difference! Parker is just doing what little he can to apply pressure on the Bills by talking to other teams about his client. Of course he's going to tell those teams his client wants out of Buffalo, whether he really does or not. And Byrd is just letting his agent do his job. Parker can tell the media the moon is made of green cheese. It doesn't make it a fact. And the typical reactions I'm reading here play into what Parker wants...applying pressure to the Bills by panicking the easily panicked Bills fan base. Best course of action: Keep calm and carry on. PTR
KOKBILLS Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 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. No offense, but there is a crystal clear reason why Byrd was not re-signed this off season...To break it down in the simplest of terms Byrd's agent is unwilling to give the Bills a hometown discount, and the Bills refuse to make Byrd the top paid (or very close to the top paid) Safety in the league...Byrd and his agent are not like Woody, or Stevie...They are not going to take a penny less than what they have set Jairus' market value at... The Bills reportedly (unconfirmed) offered Byrd a longterm deal with an annual salary about a half a million more than the franchise tag ($7.4 annually)...The going rate for top Safeties as far as guaranteed cash is concerned seems to be a little more than $20 mil...I can't imagine the Bills offered much less than that... So...It's actually quite simple...Byrd want to be paid closer to the top paid, or maybe even be THE top paid Safety (see Adam Benigni's tweet) in the NFL...The Bills want to pay Byrd like the 4th or 5th highest Safety in the NFL...Byrd, unlike Stevie and Woody, does not want to give a hometown deal because quite obviously he does not put any value in playing for the Buffalo Bills...My guess is he would rather be on the west coast, or playing for a big time contender...Unless of course a team is willing to make him the top paid Safety...Then he'll play anywhere... So anyway...There certainly are reasons Byrd did not sign this off season...IMHO the #1 reason is named Eugene...But maybe that's just me...
NoSaint Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 (edited) Again...did Byrd say he wants a trade or is Eugene Parker trying to orchestrate a trade? There's a HUGE difference! Parker is just doing what little he can to apply pressure on the Bills by talking to other teams about his client. Of course he's going to tell those teams his client wants out of Buffalo, whether he really does or not. And Byrd is just letting his agent do his job. Parker can tell the media the moon is made of green cheese. It doesn't make it a fact. And the typical reactions I'm reading here play into what Parker wants...applying pressure to the Bills by panicking the easily panicked Bills fan base. Best course of action: Keep calm and carry on. PTR frankly it could be a team that wants to give a 3rd rounder up for him trying to turn up the public pressure on the bills. it could be parker. it could be a lot of things. right now none of them really make a difference unless he starts throwing games - which isnt going to happen Edited September 5, 2013 by NoSaint
Kelly the Dog Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 This is the rational thing to do. Don't let emotion dictate, send a message that it's "just business" and move on. The only problem I see is that safeties don't have the value that good left tackles do, so it will be a smaller group of trade partners to work with. Right. I don't really expect Byrd to be traded. Any team trading for him is going to think he is one of the top 3 safeties in the game, because they obviously believe they are going to sign him long term. So perhaps they will be willing to give away a #1, too. I would find that unlikely but the Eagles did it with Jason Peters, and "all it takes is one."
MikeSpeed Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 I'd only trade him under 2 conditions 1. First round pick! Nothing less. Byrd thinks he's the best, then we should be compensated that way. 2. Put a clause in the trade saying that the team that drafts him MUST make him the highest paid safety in the league. No more of this we trade the guy and he signs for equal or less than what we offer. Let's see how many offers he gets under these restrictions.
bonechiller Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 I'm kinda sick of these guys holding teams hostage. Just because they play a little better than expected they need to "get paid" Everybody wants to be paid tops at their position, not sure if I disagree with this, but I hate that they can disrupt the team chemistry, especially when it looks like things are finally starting to turn the corner and improve. I know it cant happen but I wish their was a common salary with incentive pay for performance. It just seems the tail is wagging the dog sometimes. (or do they have it by the tail shaking it, may be better example) Just dis-heartening this stuff has to happen.
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 This scenario is ideal. Parker almost needs to rep buffalo to the other teams to negotiate not only the long term deal but also a desirable trade value and if they don't get a good enough trade offer than no long term deal for Byrd. Let Byrd stew in his brainwashed disgruntlement while Parker goes and gets the bills the best offer... And the longer he sits the more his value drops.
K-9 Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 No offense, but there is a crystal clear reason why Byrd was not re-signed this off season...To break it down in the simplest of terms Byrd's agent is unwilling to give the Bills a hometown discount, and the Bills refuse to make Byrd the top paid (or very close to the top paid) Safety in the league...Byrd and his agent are not like Woody, or Stevie...They are not going to take a penny less than what they have set Jairus' market value at... The Bills reportedly (unconfirmed) offered Byrd a longterm deal with an annual salary about a half a million more than the franchise tag ($7.4 annually)...The going rate for top Safeties as far as guaranteed cash is concerned seems to be a little more than $20 mil...I can't imagine the Bills offered much less than that... So...It's actually quite simple...Byrd want to be paid closer to the top paid, or maybe even be THE top paid Safety (see Adam Benigni's tweet) in the NFL...The Bills want to pay Byrd like the 4th or 5th highest Safety in the NFL...Byrd, unlike Stevie and Woody, does not want to give a hometown deal because quite obviously he does not put any value in playing for the Buffalo Bills...My guess is he would rather be on the west coast, or playing for a big time contender...Unless of course a team is willing to make him the top paid Safety...Then he'll play anywhere... So anyway...There certainly are reasons Byrd did not sign this off season...IMHO the #1 reason is named Eugene...But maybe that's just me... Sounds like the opposite of hometown discount. More like "foreign city premium." You know, it's quite possible the Bills simply made a fair assessment of Byrd's value relative to ability. Like they did with Stevie and more recently Wood, who is a top 5 center. Far be it from his adoring fans to even consider, but Byrd has holes in his game. No need to rehash that conversation again for the umpteenth time. But his critics are out there. GO BILLS!!!
Recommended Posts