TallskiWallski83 Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 I'm gonna take a different outlook on this whole situation. I think that once Byrd gets on the field and starts to play the game again a lot of this bad juju that's been hanging over this whole situation will blow over. Parker is notorious for using every piece of leverage he has to get top dollar for his clients, but reality is the bills hold all the cards so Byrd is better off just producing on the field and keeping his nose to the grindstone. I know it seems really bad to a lot of fans right now but I think Byrd will end up being signed here long term in the end...its a business and this is all part of it unfortunately
dave mcbride Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 You can tag and trade him You can withdraw the tag before he signs if its a train wreck There's almost no way he's not signed or tagged unless this season goes in a nearly unheard of direction Whatever happens, he will not be earning $8.3 million for the Bills next season. Ironically, his highest trade value will be in October 2013 given the inevitability of injuries for competing teams. Incidentally, the Bills can't simply put him on IR as retaliation: "Teams may also place a player on injured reserve with a minor injury designation, but the team must release the player once he is healthy." If he passes a physical while on IR, the Bills have to release him. So we can throw that option out the window. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Injured_reserve_list#cite_note-5 http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/oct/30/nate-kaeding-passes-physical-be-waived/
dave mcbride Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 This notion intrigues me. Is this true, can the Bills do this for "plantar fascitiis"? If so, the Bills hold the ultimate trump card if he is truly sandbagging it to get traded or not franchised again. He would sit on the sidelines and his value would diminish because he's been away from a real game for an entire year. can't happen. See above.
HamSandwhich Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Whatever happens, he will not be earning $8.3 million for the Bills next season. Ironically, his highest trade value will be in October 2013 given the inevitability of injuries for competing teams. Incidentally, the Bills can't simply put him on IR as retaliation: "Teams may also place a player on injured reserve with a minor injury designation, but the team must release the player once he is healthy." If he passes a physical while on IR, the Bills have to release him. So we can throw that option out the window. http://en.wikipedia....ist#cite_note-5 http://www.utsandieg...ical-be-waived/ That is really strange. Well, I wouldn't consider it mild if it keeps him out of games. Is this not subjective?
Big Turk Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Surely you can point to some mid 20's guys that were big time players that had careers ended by PF? I genuinely can't think of any offhand and am curious, not being argumentative with that one I posted a link to an SI article talking about PF being "the most maddening injury in sports" and how it derailed the careers of a number of athlete, not just football... You can find it in the Jairus Byrd thread or just google SI plantar fasciitis
dave mcbride Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 (edited) That is really strange. Well, I wouldn't consider it mild if it keeps him out of games. Is this not subjective? Hard to say, but the Bills would be very foolish to risk placing him on IR because if he passes his physical he gets paid AND immediately receives a get out of jail for free card. He'll have hit the proverbial jackpot. Edited September 5, 2013 by dave mcbride
Big Turk Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Whatever happens, he will not be earning $8.3 million for the Bills next season. Ironically, his highest trade value will be in October 2013 given the inevitability of injuries for competing teams. Incidentally, the Bills can't simply put him on IR as retaliation: "Teams may also place a player on injured reserve with a minor injury designation, but the team must release the player once he is healthy." If he passes a physical while on IR, the Bills have to release him. So we can throw that option out the window. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Injured_reserve_list#cite_note-5 http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/oct/30/nate-kaeding-passes-physical-be-waived/ Trade value will not be high if his condition continues to worsen If Byrd in deed had plantar fascitiis last year and played through it, the best course of action may have been to get a long term deal for Byrd before it becomes worse (in case it did get worse). THAT would have been in the best interest of the player and the agent. If he's broken, value goes down quickly! Yeah, PF is a degenerative condition its not like a simple one off injury he will heal from...he had to take shots to play last season and the more you play the worse it gets...
K-9 Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 I'm gonna take a different outlook on this whole situation. I think that once Byrd gets on the field and starts to play the game again a lot of this bad juju that's been hanging over this whole situation will blow over. Parker is notorious for using every piece of leverage he has to get top dollar for his clients, but reality is the bills hold all the cards so Byrd is better off just producing on the field and keeping his nose to the grindstone. I know it seems really bad to a lot of fans right now but I think Byrd will end up being signed here long term in the end...its a business and this is all part of it unfortunately I like this take. I've said all along that Byrd doesn't strike me as the kind of player to phuck his teammates on the field, between the lines. And that's where it matters most to him, the team, and his teammates. GO BILLS!!!
KOKBILLS Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 No agent should accept $1.5mil less than what (s)he feels is fair market value for their client. If Parker felt he could get that much and a long term deal elsewhere then he not only had the right to play it the way he did, but he had the obligation to Byrd as well. Meh...Tell that to Stevie's agent...Look at Stevie's deal in comparison to Dwayne Bowe's...Then look at their production the last 3 years... It's an agent's job to represent his clients to the best of his ability based on what his client is looking to achieve financially...If a client is obsessed with being the best paid at his position, and has that kind of ability, then...yes...it's his agents job to get that kind of a deal for him...If the client is more than happy to make $7.5 mil a year and get $20 million dollars guaranteed because he wants to stay in Buffalo and play with his buddies then...well...That's an entirely different story... Ultimately it's up to the client whether or not they want to allow their agent to push the envelope...Not to mention in this case how debatable it is that a FS with PF in one foot is worth $9 million annually... Don't get me wrong...I understand the Bills are trying to get a home-town deal for Byrd...But I get the feeling there is no flexibility on the other side of the table...That makes me believe Byrd simply does not want to be back bad enough...
GG Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Whatever happens, he will not be earning $8.3 million for the Bills next season. Ironically, his highest trade value will be in October 2013 given the inevitability of injuries for competing teams. Incidentally, the Bills can't simply put him on IR as retaliation: "Teams may also place a player on injured reserve with a minor injury designation, but the team must release the player once he is healthy." If he passes a physical while on IR, the Bills have to release him. So we can throw that option out the window. http://en.wikipedia....ist#cite_note-5 http://www.utsandieg...ical-be-waived/ I see zero logic in the IR talk, other than vindictiveness on the team's part. It would also be a foolish business and football decision. You'd be paying the guy $6.9 million to do nothing, and he would come out next year with more leverage because he'd still be young, healthier and Bills wouldn't be as eager to franchise him in 2014. Bills best option is that Byrd plays well in 2013 and they get to extend him in 2014, while using the 2013 salary as a down payment on a long term contract. I don't see a high probability of a trade now because the trade value is very low right now as the trading partner won't be able to sign Byrd to a long term deal this year.
Malazan Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 HAHAHAHAAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHA. Good joke. The Buffalo News reporting...that's a good one. Oh, man, I am literally crying over here.
A Dog Named Kelso Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 The bills should keep him on the team, at least for the remainder of the season. What he wants is not really relevant, this a chance for Whaley to show the Bills will not be held hostage by Parker or anyone else. And if they really want to go all Al Davis they let him ride the bench al el Marcus Allen. Although I don't see any team taking that stance again.
dave mcbride Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 (edited) I see zero logic in the IR talk, other than vindictiveness on the team's part. It would also be a foolish business and football decision. You'd be paying the guy $6.9 million to do nothing, and he would come out next year with more leverage because he'd still be young, healthier and Bills wouldn't be as eager to franchise him in 2014. Bills best option is that Byrd plays well in 2013 and they get to extend him in 2014, while using the 2013 salary as a down payment on a long term contract. I don't see a high probability of a trade now because the trade value is very low right now as the trading partner won't be able to sign Byrd to a long term deal this year. As for the reason behind the IR rules, I was reading recently that it stemmed from protests by some teams in the 1980s (the Niners) that others (the Raiders and I think even the Bills) were stashing promising young players on IR who weren't really hurt. It was a problem and the way to deal with it was to say that if a healthy guy was on IR, he had to be released. Makes a lot of sense, actually. It's the sort of thing that you just know Belichick would exploit if he were allowed to. Edited September 5, 2013 by dave mcbride
NoSaint Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 HAHAHAHAAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHA. Good joke. The Buffalo News reporting...that's a good one. Oh, man, I am literally crying over here. a little odd how itll get killed all offseason and they NEVER have the scoop but this piece is gospel for many. im not saying its wrong, just that i think its funny how the board reacts when they hear something they want to hear.
GG Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 As for the reason behind the IR rules, I was reading recently that it stemmed from protests by some teams in the 1980s (the Niners) that others (the Raiders and I think even the Bills) were stashing promising young players on IR who weren't really hurt. It was a problem and the way to deal with it was to say that if a healthy guy was on IR, he had to be released. Makes a lot of sense, actually. I thought that they fixed that scam by requiring IR players to sit out the whole season? Also in the links you provided, there are two IR designations - and the one where you are released is the minor injury one. In any event, putting Byrd on IR if he's not totally hurt would be a very dumb move.
ALF Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 This is why a team should extend a player while under contract (last season for Byrd and Levitre ) or trade them. There would be no need for a franchise tag unless you only want a player for 1 more year.
BillsGuyInMalta Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 (edited) Man, even the perpetual optimist Chris Brown on BB.com has turned on Byrd. Also, here are some Marrone comments on Byrd during his press conference today: Buffalo Bills @buffalobills5m Marrone on Byrd: "He's been a great teammate and pro. I have zero complaints." Buffalo Bills @buffalobills4m Marrone on Byrd: Not ruled out of Sunday's game. Edited September 5, 2013 by BillsGuyInBallstonSpa
papazoid Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 you don't put him on IR....that is playing right into Tyrds hand......gets paid all his money AND eliminates risk of further injury. nope, make him come to rehab every day, let him embarrass himself to his peers and the press. when he gets healthy, you play him. if he slacks off, he's only hurting himself.
CodeMonkey Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Meh...Tell that to Stevie's agent...Look at Stevie's deal in comparison to Dwayne Bowe's...Then look at their production the last 3 years... It's an agent's job to represent his clients to the best of his ability based on what his client is looking to achieve financially...If a client is obsessed with being the best paid at his position, and has that kind of ability, then...yes...it's his agents job to get that kind of a deal for him...If the client is more than happy to make $7.5 mil a year and get $20 million dollars guaranteed because he wants to stay in Buffalo and play with his buddies then...well...That's an entirely different story... Ultimately it's up to the client whether or not they want to allow their agent to push the envelope...Not to mention in this case how debatable it is that a FS with PF in one foot is worth $9 million annually... Don't get me wrong...I understand the Bills are trying to get a home-town deal for Byrd...But I get the feeling there is no flexibility on the other side of the table...That makes me believe Byrd simply does not want to be back bad enough... Agreed. But it sounds to me like there is no flexibility on both sides of the table, not just the one. And why should Byrd want to be back bad enough to take less money than he feels he is worth on the open market? Why shouldn't the Bills want him bad enough to pay what he is asking? They sure did for "Super" Mario, and then some. The reality is they came to an impasse. Due to a poor job (in my opinion) by the players union, the Bills had the tag card to play which they did. Which led to posturing by Parker/Byrd and so on and ultimately nobody wins.
HamSandwhich Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 I see zero logic in the IR talk, other than vindictiveness on the team's part. It would also be a foolish business and football decision. You'd be paying the guy $6.9 million to do nothing, and he would come out next year with more leverage because he'd still be young, healthier and Bills wouldn't be as eager to franchise him in 2014. Bills best option is that Byrd plays well in 2013 and they get to extend him in 2014, while using the 2013 salary as a down payment on a long term contract. I don't see a high probability of a trade now because the trade value is very low right now as the trading partner won't be able to sign Byrd to a long term deal this year. I see your point IF, IF, Byrd even plays and doesn't milk the whole PF thing.
Recommended Posts