Coach Tuesday Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 This is Parker's Jason Peters playbook.
BillsBytheBay Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 (edited) Well, his team mates are the one who are going to bear the brunt of piss poor attitude. Making game day, and scheming decisions difficult. If he is on the side lines collecting 6.9 mil.....well I'm sure players will start to feel different about Bryd's "it's just the business part" stance. Nobody will ever accuse him of being a leader. Edited September 5, 2013 by JaxBills
Trader Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 So how is the trade market for 7 million dollar players with chronic injuries?
MClem06 Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Poison in the locker room. This is dangerous to keep a guy like this around for very long. I hope to god they find a viable trade option within 2 weeks. Let's get this resolved so it doesn't weigh in on other players focus on the season.
sirebors Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 I'd consider suspending him without pay. Can we do this?
dave mcbride Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Not justifying either Byrd or Parker here, because ultimately the players agreed -- grudgingly -- to allow ownership to retain the franchise tag. But players hate it, and actually for good reason. Football hasvthe highest injury rate of any major sport, yet it's the only one that allows teams to lock elite players up for one-year only deals. I'd prefer that the tag go to the dustbin of history. It's never brought anything but grief to the Bills anyway -- Wolford, Clements, and now Byrd.
CBD Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Link to actual Buffalo News story: http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bills-nfl/sources-byrd-agent-trying-to-orchestrate-trade-20130904?two-bills-drive
Coach Tuesday Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Not justifying either Byrd or Parker here, because ultimately the players agreed -- grudgingly -- to allow ownership to retain the franchise tag. But players hate it, and actually for good reason. Football hasvthe highest injury rate of any major sport, yet it's the only one that allows teams to lock elite players up for one-year only deals. I'd prefer that the tag go to the dustbin of history. It's never brought anything but grief to the Bills anyway -- Wolford, Clements, and now Byrd. Yet the players continue to vote for it as part of the CBA...
nucci Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 (edited) Can we do this? Nope. He's done nothing to warrant a suspension. His salary is also guaranteed for this year. Yet the players continue to vote for it as part of the CBA... I'm guessing it is one of those things that is not negotiable or the trade off is too much since it affects a low % of players. Plus it's usually a pretty high salary even though it's for one year. Edited September 5, 2013 by nucci
1billsfan Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Dude plays safety. No team, NONE are going to pay a huge contract for a safety unless he's Ed Reed in his prime. Byrd and his agent are so stupid. You might get away with this when you're an left tackle, but a safety???? The NFL doesn't pay safeties. That's why they're always getting drafted so high. It's a very replaceable position.
Doc Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 So how is the trade market for 7 million dollar players with chronic injuries? And a poor attitude and an !@#$ for an agent. Can we do this? They can if they feel he's gold-bricking. They might lose and have to pay him and he won't give a good effort in game, but that would anyway, and it would send a message. Not justifying either Byrd or Parker here, because ultimately the players agreed -- grudgingly -- to allow ownership to retain the franchise tag. But players hate it, and actually for good reason. Football hasvthe highest injury rate of any major sport, yet it's the only one that allows teams to lock elite players up for one-year only deals. I'd prefer that the tag go to the dustbin of history. It's never brought anything but grief to the Bills anyway -- Wolford, Clements, and now Byrd. Wolford was a matter of Polian refusing to extend him prior to hitting FA and that damn "poison pill." Clements wasn't worth it. Neither is Byrd IMHO but he's better (unfortunately) than what the Bills have to replace him.
dave mcbride Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Yet the players continue to vote for it as part of the CBA... They "vote" for it not because they approve of it, but because the owners are in a better bargaining position than them. They'd love to get rid of it, but compromises have to be made. Tat's how negotiation works. It doesn't make the designation good, at least in my opinion.
Gordio Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 I'm sure his contract next season would almost certainly warrant a 3rd round comp pick so trade value would have to exceed that at least. I'd probably want more than one pick unless somebody went all Oakland Raiders and gave up something stupid. Nobody is giving up a first or two seconds (Oakland excepted), but I might start there for negotiation purposes. I'd look for a second with a sweetener like a fourth or fifth. Maybe multiple bidders drives up the price and you get a 2nd and 3rd. The problem is that due to his tag and consequent contract situation it will have to be a team he wants to play for if compensation is going to be worth trading him. No team is going to give up much if they don't think he'll stay. You don't think you could get a 1st round pick for what everybody says is a top 5 safety in the league? I would tell Parker get a 1st round pick & the deal is done. In the meantime Byrd better stop faking the injury & get ready to suit up on Sunday.
voodoo poonani Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Don't trade him for anything less than a first. Make him run sprints until the deadline. It's B word ass **** like this that makes me hate players. He's already made more money than I can in my life doing something I wish I could do. I thought the Bills should have paid him. I also thought he'd act professional and not like a little B word. Now I hope he falls down at his home and breaks something.
plenzmd1 Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Not justifying either Byrd or Parker here, because ultimately the players agreed -- grudgingly -- to allow ownership to retain the franchise tag. But players hate it, and actually for good reason. Football hasvthe highest injury rate of any major sport, yet it's the only one that allows teams to lock elite players up for one-year only deals. I'd prefer that the tag go to the dustbin of history. It's never brought anything but grief to the Bills anyway -- Wolford, Clements, and now Byrd. I know I am in a huge minority here, but I do not hate on Byrd for this situation. #1) I think the team and Byrd and Parker have all been extremely professional to date. Seems to me, no negotiating in the press by either side...everything seems to be kept between the parties. # 2) this trade request is a rumor at best. What if the Bills are the ones putting out feelers to gauge value? #3) agree with Dave..sucks to be the player tagged...and if I am Jarius I am going for every last penny . I know the CBA gives the team this right, just sucks when you see other people getting long term security and not you. #) I am prolly only person here does not believe he is faking injury
CBD Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 Dude plays safety. No team, NONE are going to pay a huge contract for a safety unless he's Ed Reed in his prime. I don't think that's necessarily true, each of the past two offseasons have seen Weddle and Goldson get pretty large contracts.
eme123 Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 I'm in this camp, and since it isn't my money I'd franchise him again next offseason whether he contributes or not. That might seem to be a stupid business move, but, until the FO shows that they are willing to use every word in the CBA to their advantage they'll be walked on again and again. Agreed! Setting a precedent for the future is money well spent.
dave mcbride Posted September 5, 2013 Posted September 5, 2013 I know I am in a huge minority here, but I do not hate on Byrd for this situation. #1) I think the team and Byrd and Parker have all been extremely professional to date. Seems to me, no negotiating in the press by either side...everything seems to be kept between the parties. # 2) this trade request is a rumor at best. What if the Bills are the ones putting out feelers to gauge value? #3) agree with Dave..sucks to be the player tagged...and if I am Jarius I am going for every last penny . I know the CBA gives the team this right, just sucks when you see other people getting long term security and not you. #) I am prolly only person here does not believe he is faking injury It actually makes no sense to fake an injury if he wants to get traded. Florio on PFT implies as much.
Recommended Posts