papazoid Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 (edited) I don't know for certain...could be any number of reasons ranging from (a) they have a better track record negotiating with those players' agents to (b) they had a better feeling that those guys were willing to sign before testing the open market. It also might be hard to negotiate with a guy (Parker) that has a mindset of "I'll do anything necessary to make sure my guy is the highest paid". Here's a look into how Parker deals: http://www.buffalonews.com/20130602/high_stakes_hardball.html You're right, there was mutual interest. The reason no deal got done was because the two sides didn't come to terms on what the player was worth. Buffalo wanted to pay him among the top 4 or 5 at his position; Byrd wanted to be the top. I don't blame either side for their stance. You aren't exactly going out on a limb here--every team prefers easy negotiations. As for Parker, read the article...again, not in any way unique to the Bills. From the article, it's hard to imagine that they were asking for Goldson money...the quotes make it pretty clear they came in measurably above that. "Leverage," Parker continued, "depends not about what you have, but what you're willing to do." Edited January 31, 2014 by papazoid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 From the article, it's hard to imagine that they were asking for Goldson money...the quotes make it pretty clear they came in measurably above that. Exactly which quote makes it sound they were asking for measurably more money than Goldson? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 If I remember correctly the Bills did try to extend Levitre, he however was interested in testing free agency. What would you suggest the Bills should have done differently? Approached him a year earlier - instead of the eve of his UFA period - and made him a stronger offer. Do I know that they didn't try this? No, I do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 Exactly which quote makes it sound they were asking for measurably more money than Goldson? “Under the system, the Bills were allowed to pay Jairus substantially less than a Pro Bowl player at his position makes for four years,” Parker said. “The Bills, under the CBA, have the ability to restrict his free agency by making him a one-year offer, which we can accept or not accept. “He’s fulfilled every clause of his contract, and he’s played at 15 to 20 percent of what his market value is for a player at his position, and he did it for four years with no complaints. “Now, it’s time. We’ve got to figure something out.” I'm reading between the lines here--the above sounds a lot to me like Parker is saying that Byrd should be compensated above what the market value is for his position in order to make up for playing under market value for so long. Perhaps you interpret that differently...I can't definitively say you're wrong. Approached him a year earlier - instead of the eve of his UFA period - and made him a stronger offer. Do I know that they didn't try this? No, I do not. Fair enough...there is, however, some evidence that they did something akin to what you're suggesting... http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2012/6/12/3081444/andy-levitre-contract-talks-buffalo-bills Per WGR 550's Joe Buscaglia, who was informed by Levitre himself after OTA practice on Tuesday, the Bills have already reached out to Levitre's representation about the possibility of a new contract. Levitre says that preliminary talks have been held, but that he's not aware that any potential salary numbers have yet been discussed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 “Under the system, the Bills were allowed to pay Jairus substantially less than a Pro Bowl player at his position makes for four years,” Parker said. “The Bills, under the CBA, have the ability to restrict his free agency by making him a one-year offer, which we can accept or not accept. “He’s fulfilled every clause of his contract, and he’s played at 15 to 20 percent of what his market value is for a player at his position, and he did it for four years with no complaints. “Now, it’s time. We’ve got to figure something out.” I'm reading between the lines here--the above sounds a lot to me like Parker is saying that Byrd should be compensated above what the market value is for his position in order to make up for playing under market value for so long. Perhaps you interpret that differently...I can't definitively say you're wrong. Fair enough...there is, however, some evidence that they did something akin to what you're suggesting... http://www.buffaloru...s-buffalo-bills Per WGR 550's Joe Buscaglia, who was informed by Levitre himself after OTA practice on Tuesday, the Bills have already reached out to Levitre's representation about the possibility of a new contract. Levitre says that preliminary talks have been held, but that he's not aware that any potential salary numbers have yet been discussed. Parker's comments are about his negotiating position. Parker & the team also know that part of the market value of a free agent is compensating the player for past performance. Just the nature of the business. Was the Goldson contract a starting point? Absolutely. Did Parker demand a measurably higher contract? Questionable. As for Levitre, before the Buscaglia article, Levitre indicated that he wanted to stay in Buffalo. His tone changed when it became apparent that the two sides would not hammer out a deal prior to FA. Don't know how far Bills & his agent got in their conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 Your assumption is Parker was asking for Goldson money. The fact the Bills are comfortable paying him more in guaranteed money on a per season basis as a tagged player, tells me it's FAR less than what Parker was asking for. Byrd is a bargain at $15.2m in their eyes. The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced Parker thinks Byrd is the best at his position and he wants north of Berry money in guarantees because of that. So he's bargain at anything less than the $25m in guaranteed money that Berry signed for . GO BILLS!!! No. There was no assumptions being made. I used Goldson because he was the top paid free agent in last year's class of free agents. His contract is thus the high water mark of free agent contracts and can therefore be used as an authenticated set of numbers for quantitative comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 “Under the system, the Bills were allowed to pay Jairus substantially less than a Pro Bowl player at his position makes for four years,” Parker said. “The Bills, under the CBA, have the ability to restrict his free agency by making him a one-year offer, which we can accept or not accept. “He’s fulfilled every clause of his contract, and he’s played at 15 to 20 percent of what his market value is for a player at his position, and he did it for four years with no complaints. “Now, it’s time. We’ve got to figure something out.” I'm reading between the lines here--the above sounds a lot to me like Parker is saying that Byrd should be compensated above what the market value is for his position in order to make up for playing under market value for so long. Perhaps you interpret that differently...I can't definitively say you're wrong. Ah yes, the old "retro-pay" concept. Not only to we expect to be paid as the best going forward, we expect to be compensated for being paid as less than the best previously. Hell, I don't think Parker would be happy with Berry AND Polamalu money combined! Jairus has suffered a grave act of injustice in the past and reparation must be made. GO BILLS!!! No. There was no assumptions being made. I used Goldson because he was the top paid free agent in last year's class of free agents. His contract is thus the high water mark of free agent contracts and can therefore be used as an authenticated set of numbers for quantitative comparison. Sounded to me like you were using Goldson's numbers to point out that the Bills ended up paying so much more in guaranteed money and would have been better off just paying him Goldson money to begin with. Not that I think Parker would have taken that. But I don't think Goldson's contract IS the high water mark anyway. Given that it's all about the guaranteed dollars, I believe it's Berry's contract that sets the standard for safeties and I firmly believe that's what Parker has in mind. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 Parker's comments are about his negotiating position. Parker & the team also know that part of the market value of a free agent is compensating the player for past performance. Just the nature of the business. Was the Goldson contract a starting point? Absolutely. Did Parker demand a measurably higher contract? Questionable. I agree it's open for interpretation...I'm only telling you what I believe from reading those comments and seeing how the situation played out. As for Levitre, before the Buscaglia article, Levitre indicated that he wanted to stay in Buffalo. His tone changed when it became apparent that the two sides would not hammer out a deal prior to FA. Don't know how far Bills & his agent got in their conversation. We also don't know what made him change his tone...was it that the Bills' side never made any offer? If they did, was it too low to be taken seriously? Or was it that Levitre (or his agent) got a sniff of what they'd get on the open market and became less interested? As you say, we don't know. My only point was that the team did reach out to him in an effort to get contract talks started, which Coach said he wished had gone further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 the price for Tyrd just went up. this year the bills will need to offer $10 mil/yr for 5 years and $30 mil guaranteed for Parker to accept giving up UFA. last year it was $9 mil/yr for 5 years and $27 mil guaranteed. it's going to be deja vu all over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBuff423 Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 the price for Tyrd just went up. this year the bills will need to offer $10 mil/yr for 5 years and $30 mil guaranteed for Parker to accept giving up UFA. last year it was $9 mil/yr for 5 years and $27 mil guaranteed. it's going to be deja vu all over again. Hopefully, this time through if no contract is agreed to, then the BILLS tag him and trade him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 the price for Tyrd just went up. this year the bills will need to offer $10 mil/yr for 5 years and $30 mil guaranteed for Parker to accept giving up UFA. last year it was $9 mil/yr for 5 years and $27 mil guaranteed. it's going to be deja vu all over again. But he's still a pretty good value at the franchise number. Will that be for 11 games like last year as he makes his way back to being 100%? Or will be come back healthy whenever he does report? I think I know what your answer is. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 But he's still a pretty good value at the franchise number. Will that be for 11 games like last year as he makes his way back to being 100%? Or will be come back healthy whenever he does report? I think I know what your answer is. GO BILLS!!! he's great value for the $8.3 mil tag.....if he plays all 16 games. for $8.3 mil at 11 games is like paying $12.0 mil for 16 games. I do think he will be cautious again (cough)....possibly up to the trading deadline which last year was between weeks 8 & 9. the bills have "leverage" too....they can tag him a third year at a 144% over $8.3 which would be $11.9 mil. $6.9 and $8.3 and $11.9 is $27.1 mil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 he's great value for the $8.3 mil tag.....if he plays all 16 games. for $8.3 mil at 11 games is like paying $12.0 mil for 16 games. I do think he will be cautious again (cough)....possibly up to the trading deadline which last year was between weeks 8 & 9. the bills have "leverage" too....they can tag him a third year at a 144% over $8.3 which would be $11.9 mil. $6.9 and $8.3 and $11.9 is $27.1 mil the bills have even more "leverage" let's say that in year 3 Byrd exercises his rights again to NOT sign his tender and not participate in OTA's and minicamp. let's say Byrd intends to sign his tender the week BEFORE the regular season starts, you know, so he doesn't miss any game checks. just prior to Byrd signing his tender. the Bills could have a change of heart (cough) and decide to RESCIND their franchise tag offer, thereby making Byrd an immediate UFA. maybe the bills had no trading partners. the only problem for Byrd is that most teams will have spent/allocated all their cap space and few if any teams will be in a position to pay him his big contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 the bills have even more "leverage" let's say that in year 3 Byrd exercises his rights again to NOT sign his tender and not participate in OTA's and minicamp. let's say Byrd intends to sign his tender the week BEFORE the regular season starts, you know, so he doesn't miss any game checks. just prior to Byrd signing his tender. the Bills could have a change of heart (cough) and decide to RESCIND their franchise tag offer, thereby making Byrd an immediate UFA. maybe the bills had no trading partners. the only problem for Byrd is that most teams will have spent/allocated all their cap space and few if any teams will be in a position to pay him his big contract. Some team would find a way to clear cap space and sign him...you can be sure of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete This Account Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 (edited) I REALLY don't want to get in the middle of this entertaining discussion --- I have one simple question to John, you state that Byrd had nothing to gain by showing up to OTA's, mini camps and training camp except to risk injury -- I get that that's probably true -- but, more than half the players on the team are in the same or similar situations --- they are either playing with one year left on their contact, playing for future salary with little or no additional guaranteed money --- why do all of them show up ? -- why did Byrd show up in 2012 when he was headed into the last year of his contract ?? -- I think what troubles fans about the Byrd situation last year, was that he chose to exercise his right under the CBA and skip OTA's, mini-camps and training camp and hurt the team -- if you don't think he hurt the team, what would happen if the other 30 or 40 players in similar situations had done the same thing ? --- if he wasn't hurting the team, why does the team find those activities necessary in the first place ? ---- let's face it, Byrd was pissed he got tagged, he wanted a long term contract with $20M+ guaranteed with the Bills or via FA -- when he didn't get it -- he exercised his right to stay away --- I get and accept all of that -- what I don't accept was that his action didn't hurt his team, it did. though his rights were protected by the Bills, Byrd was not under contract. unsigned players do not show up for practice. and that's the difference between him showing up the previous season and the players who are in the final year of their deals. his action did hurt the team, but was not all of his doing. the Bills tagged him. the two sides failed to negotiate a long-term deal. come July 15, Byrd's contract was locked in. jw Parker's players who are about to become UFA in their prime NEVER sign early. let's put this fallacy to rest. never is inaccurate. Larry Fitzgerald, a Parker client, re-upped before his contract expired. Greg Jennings, too, in Green Bay. and those are the first two players i looked up. while having his players hold out is part of any agent's strategy, including Parker's, it's has not always been the case. jw Edited January 31, 2014 by john wawrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 though his rights were protected by the Bills, Byrd was not under contract. unsigned players do not show up for practice. and that's the difference between him showing up the previous season and the players who are in the final year of their deals. his action did hurt the team, but was not all of his doing. the Bills tagged him. the two sides failed to negotiate a long-term deal. come July 15, Byrd's contract was locked in. jw let's put this fallacy to rest. never is inaccurate. Larry Fitzgerald, a Parker client, re-upped before his contract expired. Greg Jennings, too, in Green Bay. and those are the first two players i looked up. while having his players hold out is part of any agent's strategy, including Parker's, it's has not always been the case. jw your contributions to this forum are much appreciated. you bring a more "informed" opinion......not always right (laffin)...but definitely more informed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 (edited) Interesting stuff on Twitter today regarding Byrd... don't know hpw much to make of any of it, if anything, but logically I could see him going to the Eagles or Skins if the Bills didn't tag him... and if they did tag him I think we see another Byrd-free TC, with an other whole new D to learn, another 6 week "injury" plus few games to "adapt the the new system" 45] Retweeted by Rob Quinn 45] NFL_DRAFT_Bites @ NFLDraftBites 1h Anybody w pulse knows Eagles #1 FA target is Jairus Byrd. Roseman's stated its been difficult fill Dawkins void & mentioned S has evolved NFL_DRAFT_Bites @ NFLDraftBites 1h Skins & Eagles duke it out Byrd. After signs w Eagles, Skins focus CBs & LBs. Expect CAA shove Whitner or Malcolm Jenkins down their throat Rob Quinn @ RQUINN619 1h # Bills projected to get a 7th round comp pick... cc: @ BuddyNixon Rob Quinn @ RQUINN619 51m @ BillsSabres88 they don't have a choice if he doesn't re-sign. he'd probably hold out if tagged. it sounds good, but no team will trade Edited February 9, 2014 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dailar Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Buddy Nixon @ BuddyNixon Feb 8 Byrd has told the team he is more than interested in resigning. He liked the D coach hires, and loves Henderson. Excited for the future. Expand Reply Retweeted Favorite More [*] Buddy Nixon @ BuddyNixon Feb 8 Byrd told his agent he wants to have something solid before March 1st. I think the Bills step up and complete this. Via source Expand Reply Retweeted Favorite More [*] Buddy Nixon @ BuddyNixon Feb 8 Another nugget. Pepper Johnson was signed to become the future DC if and when Schwartz gets another HC gig. That was our promise. Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More [*] Buddy Nixon @ BuddyNixon Feb 8 The Bills will sign Jairus Byrd within the next 2 weeks. Count it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 (edited) I like this Buddy Nixon dude and you for finding these tweets. Less depressed now. Oh please let this come true...! Edited February 9, 2014 by Beerball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dailar Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 He's been updating the situation on twitter. Give him a follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts