Brandon talks with AP about Byrd's contract

[thebandit27]

The question is more nuanced than simply signing a team's own players. It's re-signing the right players and I consider elite talent to be those who are voted to NFL All-Pro Teams as voted on by the Associated Press. Players voted to the Pro Bowl are in a similar grouping.

 

Let's face it, Scott Chandler, Erik Pears, Kraig Urbik, Fred Jackson, Alan Branch, and Steve Johnson aren't in that category. I would consider them at or slightly above replacement level. OTOH, replacing Mario Williams or Jairus Byrd is exceedingly more difficult, so letting them is a lot more challenging to fill their shoes.

 

In the past 8 off-seasons, Buffalo has traded away or permitted players to leave via UFA far too many times. I needn't list the names, but each time we were told that it was the best option and this approach has helped then to 9 straight 9 or more loss seasons.

 

This is what I'm getting at...who are you referring to?

 

It seems that you're arguing against the FO staff of 8 years ago, which is no longer in place...I'm asking you who the current FO staff (dating back to Buddy Nix, since this is Whaley's first offseason as GM) has let go?

[papazoid]

 

 

This is what I'm getting at...who are you referring to?

 

It seems that you're arguing against the FO staff of 8 years ago, which is no longer in place...I'm asking you who the current FO staff (dating back to Buddy Nix, since this is Whaley's first offseason as GM) has let go?

 

Good Moves: McGee, Brad Smith, Mark Anderson, Colin Brown, Choice, Troup, Sheppard

 

Ques Moves: Fitz ($13 mil dead money), Lindell (worked out though), DaRick Rogers

 

Bad moves: Levitre

[GG]

3/22 vs. 2/15 is about as equal as you can get.

 

The worst solution here would be to let Byrd walk away.

Next would be a trade. (you don't know what that/those pick(s) will turn into.

Next would be tagging him again.

Next would be tagging him again after next season. (that would drive the cost to 3 years 27M)

Best would be signing him to a multi-year deal.

 

Nobody argues these points.

 

You wanna bet?

 

 

And a few years, did anyone see Peyton leaving Indy?? So, what if by some freak of events Aaron Rodgers became available for ANY reason and the BILLS would LOVE to pursue Rodgers but due to over paying for good, but not players who will make a long-term difference, and all their cap money is leveraged for the future, they are unable to make a solid and blockbuster offer to get Rodgers here?? I know it will most likely never happen, but again who thought Peyton was leaving Indy, under any circumstances??? So, if those dollars are tied up and a player of Rodgers' caliber comes available that would absolutely make a difference on this team, what say you then?? So many assumptions are made about what is available and what can be done, but poorly planning for contingencies and spending to the ceiling every year is a mismanagement of funds...let....Byrd....go. And get trade value in return, maybe for a real impact player.

 

Your argument would have merit if Bills actually had spent up to the cap every year and had zero flexibility for the once in a decade event when a franchise QB was available in the market. And please tell me in what fantasy world would a team give up an impact player for Byrd. No team is going to trade a good player or a high pick and pay Byrd the top free agent deal.

[GA BILLS FAN]

This is what I'm getting at...who are you referring to?

 

It seems that you're arguing against the FO staff of 8 years ago, which is no longer in place...I'm asking you who the current FO staff (dating back to Buddy Nix, since this is Whaley's first offseason as GM) has let go?

I think the majority of us who remain negative or are not willing to give the Bills FO the benefit of the doubt or a do over are talking about Brandon/Littman and Overdorf. The post a couple pages back that went through the moves over the last 12 months certainly applies to Whaley and Marrone. It however, can't apply to the B-L-O trio as they have been a part of this franchise for a very long time. We can debate the role that trio has played in the 15 straight years without a postseason, but it is not up for debate that they have been around the past 10+ years. I personally have no issue resetting the clock on Whaley and Marrone to January 2013. I have a big issue doing that with the B-L-O trio. If you, like others feel, the three of them had no role in the failures of this franchise, we should open a separate thread and hash it out or continue with that debate.

Edited January 29, 2014 by TXBILLSFAN

[Dawgg]

 

And a few years, did anyone see Peyton leaving Indy?? So, what if by some freak of events Aaron Rodgers became available for ANY reason and the BILLS would LOVE to pursue Rodgers but due to over paying for good, but not players who will make a long-term difference, and all their cap money is leveraged for the future, they are unable to make a solid and blockbuster offer to get Rodgers here??

 

Wow. You're really grasping at straws here. I defer to what GG said above.

[BillsVet]

And a few years, did anyone see Peyton leaving Indy?? So, what if by some freak of events Aaron Rodgers became available for ANY reason and the BILLS would LOVE to pursue Rodgers but due to over paying for good, but not players who will make a long-term difference, and all their cap money is leveraged for the future, they are unable to make a solid and blockbuster offer to get Rodgers here?? I know it will most likely never happen, but again who thought Peyton was leaving Indy, under any circumstances??? So, if those dollars are tied up and a player of Rodgers' caliber comes available that would absolutely make a difference on this team, what say you then?? So many assumptions are made about what is available and what can be done, but poorly planning for contingencies and spending to the ceiling every year is a mismanagement of funds...let....Byrd....go. And get trade value in return, maybe for a real impact player.

 

Nice straw man argument, but it carries little, if any weight. Peyton Manning is merely using the exception to prove the rule because franchise QB's with career-threatening injuries don't hit the market like he did.

 

BTW, who'll replace the turnovers Byrd creates from the safety position? Aaron Williams, Duke Williams, Jonathan Meeks, or Da'Norris Searcy? Those 4 safeties have a combined 1 season starting experience in the NFL.

 

This is what I'm getting at...who are you referring to?

 

It seems that you're arguing against the FO staff of 8 years ago, which is no longer in place...I'm asking you who the current FO staff (dating back to Buddy Nix, since this is Whaley's first offseason as GM) has let go?

 

I'm referring to the above average or better players who were allowed to leave when Buffalo didn't have adequate replacements. This has been mashed to death over the years, but specifically, Clements, Fletcher, McGahee, Greer, Peters, Lynch, Posluszny, Levitre, and perhaps Byrd. Not all are top 5 at their position, but the team lacked a suitable replacement for them at the time they departed.

 

People also fail to comprehend that personnel decisions are financial ones. And the individuals controlling finances remain in place as senior managers. Changing the GM, Pro Personnel Director, College Scouting Director or National Scout does not change the team's financial goals and objectives. Far too often the personnel people have not had a full hand to play when their own top UFA's are at or near the end of their contract.

 

Marv Levy, Russ Brandon, Buddy Nix, and now Doug Whaley. The results have been the same, if not in decline. Whaley has time but not retaining Byrd more than likely indicates he still operates under a restrictive rules of engagement implemented by senior management in both Detroit and Buffalo.

[Hazed and Amuzed]

 

 

We have Meeks, Williams and Leonhard. The dropoff would be significant. If you're gonna play this kind of game you had better hit on your draft picks - we don't.

 

Almost every starter on our defense was drafted by us, including 3 out 4 of our pro bowlers. 2 of those drafted pro bowlers have been to multiples. Nobody's drafts are perfect, but I think we've done well over the last couple of years.

 

Eric Wood

Jarius Byrd

Andy Levitre

Kyle Williams

Aaron Williams

Leodis McKelvin

Marcel Dareus

Kiko Alonso

Stevie Johnson

Stephen Gilmore

CJ Spiller

 

Again their not perfect but to say they don't hit on the draft is wrong.

 

[thebandit27]

I'm referring to the above average or better players who were allowed to leave when Buffalo didn't have adequate replacements. This has been mashed to death over the years, but specifically, Clements, Fletcher, McGahee, Greer, Peters, Lynch, Posluszny, Levitre, and perhaps Byrd. Not all are top 5 at their position, but the team lacked a suitable replacement for them at the time they departed.

 

People also fail to comprehend that personnel decisions are financial ones. And the individuals controlling finances remain in place as senior managers. Changing the GM, Pro Personnel Director, College Scouting Director or National Scout does not change the team's financial goals and objectives. Far too often the personnel people have not had a full hand to play when their own top UFA's are at or near the end of their contract.

 

Marv Levy, Russ Brandon, Buddy Nix, and now Doug Whaley. The results have been the same, if not in decline. Whaley has time but not retaining Byrd more than likely indicates he still operates under a restrictive rules of engagement implemented by senior management in both Detroit and Buffalo.

 

Clements, Fletcher, McGahee, Greer, & Peters were all efforts from a previous regime, so I have a hard time giving the current GM the blame for that. I totally understand why they jettisoned Lynch despite his ability, and there's no way I'd have given Poz $6M/year, nor Whitner the $5M+/year he wanted, nor Levitre his insane contract. Yes, those were all partially financially-related decisions...good ones. The mistake, as you point out, was the personnel side not being prepared with replacements already on the roster.

 

As for the comment about guys like Littman, etc. still being in their posts; yes, they are. However, with Russ running the ship, they don't have anywhere near the pull they used to...football decisions are Whaley's to make now. He gets "approval" from Russ, which basically means he tells Brandon "this is what we're doing", and as long as it isn't something akin to "selling the franchise to martians", Russ approves it.

 

Like it or not, Whaley and Marrone are empowered to run the football side of things, and the bean-counters have zero input. They're there to make the money side work in concert with what the football people want--not the other way around.

 

Lastly, I don't think it's fair (or accurate) to blast Whaley for not keeping Byrd. For starters, they kept Byrd. Add to that the fact that he's still going to make him a contract offer, and I think you're jumping the gun.

 

I think the majority of us who remain negative or are not willing to give the Bills FO the benefit of the doubt or a do over are talking about Brandon/Littman and Overdorf. The post a couple pages back that went through the moves over the last 12 months certainly applies to Whaley and Marrone. It however, can't apply to the B-L-O trio as they have been a part of this franchise for a very long time. We can debate the role that trio has played in the 15 straight years without a postseason, but it is not up for debate that they have been around the past 10+ years. I personally have no issue resetting the clock on Whaley and Marrone to January 2013. I have a big issue doing that with the B-L-O trio. If you, like others feel, the three of them had no role in the failures of this franchise, we should open a separate thread and hash it out or continue with that debate.

 

If that is the case, and folks have no issue resetting the clock on Whaley/Marrone to 1 year ago, then I think they need to be consistent with that thought process and not draw conclusions about Byrd's fate based on what happened with FAs back in 2008.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Almost every starter on our defense was drafted by us, including 3 out 4 of our pro bowlers. 2 of those drafted pro bowlers have been to multiples. Nobody's drafts are perfect, but I think we've done well over the last couple of years.

 

Eric Wood

Jarius Byrd

Andy Levitre

Kyle Williams

Aaron Williams

Leodis McKelvin

Marcel Dareus

Kiko Alonso

Stevie Johnson

Stephen Gilmore

CJ Spiller

 

Again their not perfect but to say they don't hit on the draft is wrong.

 

I don't want to suggest anything about your list of names. In fact, I agree there are some very good players listed.

 

However, a side comment: drafting starters is a pretty low bar to set. Specifically, just because a player starts does not make the player even so much as mediocre. Also, drafting starters is easy when the cycle is to gut the roster and change schemes every 3 years. When you cut and trade your entire offensive line, for example, it's not hard to imagine draft picks coming in and starting. Some years ago, there was even a discussion that credited players who played significant minutes (by whatever the definition was) due to other player's injuries to the drafting and team building prowess of the organization. (Slippery slope?) For me, I'd like a better barometer, like if the players being acquired, developed, and retained are turning the team around from a bottom-feeder into a perennial powerhouse.

[GG]

Clements, Fletcher, McGahee, Greer, & Peters were all efforts from a previous regime, so I have a hard time giving the current GM the blame for that. I totally understand why they jettisoned Lynch despite his ability, and there's no way I'd have given Poz $6M/year, nor Whitner the $5M+/year he wanted, nor Levitre his insane contract. Yes, those were all partially financially-related decisions...good ones. The mistake, as you point out, was the personnel side not being prepared with replacements already on the roster.

 

As for the comment about guys like Littman, etc. still being in their posts; yes, they are. However, with Russ running the ship, they don't have anywhere near the pull they used to...football decisions are Whaley's to make now. He gets "approval" from Russ, which basically means he tells Brandon "this is what we're doing", and as long as it isn't something akin to "selling the franchise to martians", Russ approves it.

 

Like it or not, Whaley and Marrone are empowered to run the football side of things, and the bean-counters have zero input. They're there to make the money side work in concert with what the football people want--not the other way around.

 

Lastly, I don't think it's fair (or accurate) to blast Whaley for not keeping Byrd. For starters, they kept Byrd. Add to that the fact that he's still going to make him a contract offer, and I think you're jumping the gun.

 

 

 

If that is the case, and folks have no issue resetting the clock on Whaley/Marrone to 1 year ago, then I think they need to be consistent with that thought process and not draw conclusions about Byrd's fate based on what happened with FAs back in 2008.

 

While I agree with most of your post, it seems that Overdorf is still fully in charge of the contracts. The real question is, as always, Does he still have stealth personnel power if a certain player's contract no longer fits the scheme?

[GA BILLS FAN]

Clements, Fletcher, McGahee, Greer, & Peters were all efforts from a previous regime, so I have a hard time giving the current GM the blame for that. I totally understand why they jettisoned Lynch despite his ability, and there's no way I'd have given Poz $6M/year, nor Whitner the $5M+/year he wanted, nor Levitre his insane contract. Yes, those were all partially financially-related decisions...good ones. The mistake, as you point out, was the personnel side not being prepared with replacements already on the roster.

 

As for the comment about guys like Littman, etc. still being in their posts; yes, they are. However, with Russ running the ship, they don't have anywhere near the pull they used to...football decisions are Whaley's to make now. He gets "approval" from Russ, which basically means he tells Brandon "this is what we're doing", and as long as it isn't something akin to "selling the franchise to martians", Russ approves it.

 

Like it or not, Whaley and Marrone are empowered to run the football side of things, and the bean-counters have zero input. They're there to make the money side work in concert with what the football people want--not the other way around.

 

Lastly, I don't think it's fair (or accurate) to blast Whaley for not keeping Byrd. For starters, they kept Byrd. Add to that the fact that he's still going to make him a contract offer, and I think you're jumping the gun.

 

 

 

If that is the case, and folks have no issue resetting the clock on Whaley/Marrone to 1 year ago, then I think they need to be consistent with that thought process and not draw conclusions about Byrd's fate based on what happened with FAs back in 2008.

I have zero issues resetting Marrone/Whaley. I think the reason we are bringing up 2008 is because Brandon/Littmann and Overdorf were around at that time and had something to do with the restraints placed on the football people at that time and still do. I think it's as simple as that. Maybe Brandon is unshackled now and wasn't then, let's hope.

[Sisyphean Bills]

I have zero issues resetting Marrone/Whaley. I think the reason we are bringing up 2008 is because Brandon/Littmann and Overdorf were around at that time and had something to do with the restraints placed on the football people at that time and still do. I think it's as simple as that. Maybe Brandon is unshackled now and wasn't then, let's hope.

Is there any evidence that the financial side of the business is sitting in the backseat now? This thread started about Jairus Byrd, and I don't think the Bills inability to sign him to a deal last year would support the conclusion the financial people are in the backseat or have little to no input anymore. We could throw in the Levitre situation and lack of a backup plan. Or the decision to jettison Fitzpatrick because he wouldn't play ball on renegotiating his contract after Cellphonegate.

[GA BILLS FAN]

Is there any evidence that the financial side of the business is sitting in the backseat now? This thread started about Jairus Byrd, and I don't think the Bills inability to sign him to a deal last year would support the conclusion the financial people are in the backseat or have little to no input anymore. We could throw in the Levitre situation and lack of a backup plan. Or the decision to jettison Fitzpatrick because he wouldn't play ball on renegotiating his contract after Cellphonegate.

No evidence yet. Even the Schwartz hire came cheap to Bills because he's under contract with Detroit for next 2 years and will make $6M/year regardless of his salary from Buffalo, i.e. Buffalo could pay him $1/year or $5M/year, he'll still make $6M/year.

[thebandit27]

While I agree with most of your post, it seems that Overdorf is still fully in charge of the contracts. The real question is, as always, Does he still have stealth personnel power if a certain player's contract no longer fits the scheme?

 

Of course he is...every team has a chief negotiator and a contracts specialist. Does he have any authority over what the team can and will pay? My understanding, based on what I've been told, is no.

 

I have zero issues resetting Marrone/Whaley. I think the reason we are bringing up 2008 is because Brandon/Littmann and Overdorf were around at that time and had something to do with the restraints placed on the football people at that time and still do. I think it's as simple as that. Maybe Brandon is unshackled now and wasn't then, let's hope.

 

This is the case.

 

Is there any evidence that the financial side of the business is sitting in the backseat now? This thread started about Jairus Byrd, and I don't think the Bills inability to sign him to a deal last year would support the conclusion the financial people are in the backseat or have little to no input anymore. We could throw in the Levitre situation and lack of a backup plan. Or the decision to jettison Fitzpatrick because he wouldn't play ball on renegotiating his contract after Cellphonegate.

 

You could also throw the fact that Eric Wood got a new deal well before his contract expired into the mix, as well as McKelvin's new deal, to show that finances are not being restricted.

 

Byrd didn't get a new deal because he held out and asked for the moon. At the time, the team didn't think he was a smart investment at $8M-$9M/year; it's entirely possible that's changed. If it has, they'll pay him accordingly.

 

No evidence yet. Even the Schwartz hire came cheap to Bills because he's under contract with Detroit for next 2 years and will make $6M/year regardless of his salary from Buffalo, i.e. Buffalo could pay him $1/year or $5M/year, he'll still make $6M/year.

 

At the same time, getting Schwartz doesn't exactly speak to a financially-restricted hire.

[GA BILLS FAN]

Of course he is...every team has a chief negotiator and a contracts specialist. Does he have any authority over what the team can and will pay? My understanding, based on what I've been told, is no.

 

 

 

This is the case.

 

 

 

You could also throw the fact that Eric Wood got a new deal well before his contract expired into the mix, as well as McKelvin's new deal, to show that finances are not being restricted.

 

Byrd didn't get a new deal because he held out and asked for the moon. At the time, the team didn't think he was a smart investment at $8M-$9M/year; it's entirely possible that's changed. If it has, they'll pay him accordingly.

 

 

 

At the same time, getting Schwartz doesn't exactly speak to a financially-restricted hire.

On the surface, getting Schwartz is a good sign, high profile DC with HC experience, certainly better than promoting an assistant or running to the college ranks. The fact that the Lions will cover the first two years of his contract tempers my enthusiasm a bit, but overall it's a positive sign.

[RuntheDamnBall]

And a few years, did anyone see Peyton leaving Indy?? So, what if by some freak of events Aaron Rodgers became available for ANY reason and the BILLS would LOVE to pursue Rodgers but due to over paying for good, but not players who will make a long-term difference, and all their cap money is leveraged for the future, they are unable to make a solid and blockbuster offer to get Rodgers here?? I know it will most likely never happen, but again who thought Peyton was leaving Indy, under any circumstances??? So, if those dollars are tied up and a player of Rodgers' caliber comes available that would absolutely make a difference on this team, what say you then?? So many assumptions are made about what is available and what can be done, but poorly planning for contingencies and spending to the ceiling every year is a mismanagement of funds...let....Byrd....go. And get trade value in return, maybe for a real impact player.

If Aaron Rodgers could and wanted to come here, and it only took Byrd, Mario and Kyle Williams restructuring their contracts to do it, you bet your ass it would happen.

[Sisyphean Bills]

You could also throw the fact that Eric Wood got a new deal well before his contract expired into the mix, as well as McKelvin's new deal, to show that finances are not being restricted.

 

Yes, but the same group of financial suits re-signed Chris Kelsay back in day, etc. I'm underwhelmed that these two contracts demonstrate the fundamental overthrow of business operations that was alluded to.

[BigBuff423]

If Aaron Rodgers could and wanted to come here, and it only took Byrd, Mario and Kyle Williams restructuring their contracts to do it, you bet your ass it would happen.

 

That's being presumptive about the money the BILLS "might" have if they were to do that. My point is that over paying for a *POSITION* and not just a player is what puts teams in a strapped cash category. Someone said I was grasping at straws, but the very point of not over-committing to one player, that is not a value *POSITION* is exactly my point...you can NOT know what will happen in six months, let alone next year. And yet, committing all that cash to a player who is NOT worth it, fails to meet the financial reasonability test. There are and will be great players that can truly help this team in the next year or two to come into FA, not to mention their own, and paying a player such as Byrd just is not the smart money. Don't believe me? Look at the teams who are consistently successful...how do they do it? They pay the *POSITIONS* of true value and let other guys walk or trade them for value to replace them because a Safety is a dime-a-dozen in the NFL. Will you be able to get an immediate impact player at Safety to replace Byrd? Probably not, but you will get similar production for signficantly less money...however, the trade-off for a Pro-Bowl, All-Pro, LT or Center pales in comparison to that value...spend the money on the O Line and D Line, the QB, and Corners, maybe a LB...not WRs, not RBs, not TEs, and not Safeties...these are all skill-set guys that depend on the aforementioned players in their positions of value. Getting caught-up in paying a single player, who does not play at a *POSITION* of value is where teams like the Redksins, et. al, get into cap trouble and are frequently scrambling to find ways to stay below the cap and then paint themselves into a corner.

 

If you want to disagree about paying Byrd, fine...then feel free to vocalize your support in paying him...but realize you're paying a *PLAYER* at a *POSITION* that does NOT hold that value in the NFL...

 

Furthermore, take into consideration the following information:

 

Top 10 paid Safeties in 2013: **Denotes Playoff Team

 

1. Polamolu

2. **Berry

3. **Goldson

4. **Weddle

5. Rolle - Giants

6. Jones - Dolphins

7. **Chancellor

8. Griffin - Titans

9. Byrd

10. Branch - Raiders

 

4 Safeties that are in the top 10 paid and in playoffs.

 

Lowest Paid Safeties in 2013: **Denotes Playoff Team

 

1. Miles - Ravens

2. Cyprien - Jags

3. Doughty - Redskins

4. **Spillman - 49ers

5. Landry - Jets

6. **Bruton - Broncos

7. **Wilson - Patsies

8. Elam - Ravens

9. **Dahl - 49ers

10. Smith - Vikings

 

Now also consider, Earl Thomas is 21st, Ryan Clark is 23rd, McCourty is 35th, and Adams (Broncos) is 38th.

 

Tell me where the money is best spent...there are 4 Safeties, 2 on the 49ers who had one of the best Defenses in the game, that are in the bottom 10 paid Safeties while there are a littany of good to great Safeties in the middle tier, some still working on Rookie Salary wage, which only bolsters my argument that you can Draft a Safety and get nearly the same production at a much cheaper rate.

 

Of the Offensive Line salaries: the Seahawks spend the 2nd most on the Offensive Line and the Broncos spend the 4th most on the Offensive line. OH, and the BILLS spend the 4th L-E-A-S-T!!!

 

Here's a link to a site that allows an interactive demonstration of exactly where the money is spent. you can hover over the position and see the players and their salaries for this year. Quite interesting. Broncos spent money on Corners and LBs, while saving money on DT and Safeties. Seahawks spent most of their Defensive money on DE and DT. They are relying on Rookie salary contracts for their incredible Corners. But good info to have...

 

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/interactive/2013/nfl-salaries-positions-2013-2014#denver-broncos,denver-broncos

Edited January 30, 2014 by BigBuff423

[BillsVet]

That's being presumptive about the money the BILLS "might" have if they were to do that. My point is that over paying for a *POSITION* and not just a player is what puts teams in a strapped cash category. Someone said I was grasping at straws, but the very point of not over-committing to one player, that is not a value *POSITION* is exactly my point...you can NOT know what will happen in six months, let alone next year. And yet, committing all that cash to a player who is NOT worth it, fails to meet the financial reasonability test. There are and will be great players that can truly help this team in the next year or two to come into FA, not to mention their own, and paying a player such as Byrd just is not the smart money. Don't believe me? Look at the teams who are consistently successful...how do they do it? They pay the *POSITIONS* of true value and let other guys walk or trade them for value to replace them because a Safety is a dime-a-dozen in the NFL. Will you be able to get an immediate impact player at Safety to replace Byrd? Probably not, but you will get similar production for signficantly less money...however, the trade-off for a Pro-Bowl, All-Pro, LT or Center pales in comparison to that value...spend the money on the O Line and D Line, the QB, and Corners, maybe a LB...not WRs, not RBs, not TEs, and not Safeties...these are all skill-set guys that depend on the aforementioned players in their positions of value. Getting caught-up in paying a single player, who does not play at a *POSITION* of value is where teams like the Redksins, et. al, get into cap trouble and are frequently scrambling to find ways to stay below the cap and then paint themselves into a corner.

 

If you want to disagree about paying Byrd, fine...then feel free to vocalize your support in paying him...but realize you're paying a *PLAYER* at a *POSITION* that does NOT hold that value in the NFL...

 

At which point does a team like Buffalo begin keeping their developed (i.e. drafted) AND elite talent? It sends a powerful message to current players that while the team might sign a top UFA like Mario, they shy away from handing out the big contracts to players drafted and developed in Buffalo. I think it'd be akin to a company never promoting from within, but always advertising their management positions outside. You can be sure people at that company looking for promotions would wonder why the company handled it this way.

 

A few years ago when Whitner was drafted people were running to the mountain tops shouting why safeties were valuable. But noow when Byrd's deal comes up many people are saying safety play isn't as valuable. Back then it was because people wanted to defend the organizations draft day decision. And now it's because people don't like the player. My, how times have changed.

[thebandit27]

Yes, but the same group of financial suits re-signed Chris Kelsay back in day, etc. I'm underwhelmed that these two contracts demonstrate the fundamental overthrow of business operations that was alluded to.

 

I'm confused....are you comparing re-signing Wood and McKelvin to re-signing Kelsay in the spirit of blaming or crediting the financial guys?

 

I also don't see how those two re-signings don't meet the "spend money to keep your own" criteria.

 

Let's look arbitrarily at the facts: the guys that have been re-signed since Nix/Whaley took over have largely and resoundingly outnumbered the guys that left; this is undeniably true.

 

Of the bona fide starters that left, which total out to Poz, Whitner, and Levitre, 2 have found to be (so far) wildly overpaid in comparison to their impact on winning, and the 3rd has blossomed as a role player on a star-studded defense.

 

My opinion, simply looking at the facts, is that this team keeps the guys they feel will be worth their contracts, and allows the over-valued players to walk.

 

That follows quite closely with what the most successful teams have done...the biggest difference between this team and the successful teams--possibly the only functional difference--is a top-flight QB, not the way their front office does business.

 

At which point does a team like Buffalo begin keeping their developed (i.e. drafted) AND elite talent? It sends a powerful message to current players that while the team might sign a top UFA like Mario, they shy away from handing out the big contracts to players drafted and developed in Buffalo. I think it'd be akin to a company never promoting from within, but always advertising their management positions outside. You can be sure people at that company looking for promotions would wonder why the company handled it this way.

 

A few years ago when Whitner was drafted people were running to the mountain tops shouting why safeties were valuable. But noow when Byrd's deal comes up many people are saying safety play isn't as valuable. Back then it was because people wanted to defend the organizations draft day decision. And now it's because people don't like the player. My, how times have changed.

 

1st, they'll start keeping elite talent when they have some to keep. I'd argue Wood is a top 5 center in the league, a/k/a "elite", and they kept him.

 

Who else really qualifies? Mario, who they signed. Perhaps Byrd, who they kept (albeit on a 1-year franchise deal).

 

Honestly...who else qualifies in the past 8-10 years? Maybe Peters...they did re-sign him...and two years into a 5-year deal he became a malcontent. Lynch certainly wasn't an elite player when he was here...good, but not elite by any metric.