YoloinOhio Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 You think no one is willing to trade for Byrd b/c they know that ultimately he will be a FA or do you think that no one is willing to give the Bills what they're asking? Both. If Byrd is not interested in signing long-term with any trade partners that have the need and cap space and desperation to trade and pay almost 9 mill for one year and then he will go right into FA, it makes no sense for the other team. The Browns are likely interested in trading, due to their desire to have him, cap space, and # of draft picks, but if he says he doesn't want to sign there long -term, then it makes no sense to do it. Even the Browns aren't the stupid (I don't think, anyway). They are rebuilding, he isn't the "missing piece."
K-9 Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 I'd say it's a mediocre one...we don't really have to speculate, as they all played here together, and were, in fact, quite mediocre. Now, I'd love if we could keep Byrd, and I really wanted Greer over McGee. Poz and Whitner? Meh. I'd say it's less than mediocre. With apologies to Greer who was already gone, those other three players were part of a pass defense that let opposing QBs torch them to the tune of a 92.6 passer rating. That is monumentally bad. And reflects particularly poorly on our safeties more than Poz, who was busy being part of a piss poor run defense as well. GO BILLS!!!
NoSaint Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) If the reports were true, it materialized in the form of a 4th round offer from the Vikings. That was the best anyone would do. Both the Bills and Parker were free to pursue deals the entire time last year, too. And that 4th was the best anyone was willing to give up in all that time frame. While there is a team out there to give Byrd the dollars he's looking for, I doubt he will engender some mad bidding war for his services. GO BILLS!!! right, which is right about dead on what wed be looking at if we qualify for a comp pick. id rather trade him and guarantee that then worry about net losses - im by no means saying let him walk - but just pointing out that weve tested that market out a bit already, and it wasnt a big gap (a comp 3rd next year vs a 4 this year being about equal if we have a net loss). Edited March 3, 2014 by NoSaint
Maury Ballstein Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Whitner and poz = overpaid non difference makers Whitner makes a difference once the game is big....gets picked apart everytime. 49ers need to cut that cord.
K-9 Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 right, which is right about dead on what wed be looking at if we qualify for a comp pick. id rather trade him and guarantee that then worry about net losses - im by no means saying let him walk - but just pointing out that weve tested that market out a bit already. There is no market I believe. Like you said, it's been tested to death. GO BILLS!!!
Dean Cain Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Tick, tock, tick, tock....reminds me of the movie Tombstone.
Big Turk Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 ask any player drafted by the Bills that left. We are cheap. We treat our own poorly. We bring in overpriced free agents and pay them too much What do you think someone like Bryan Scott would say about Kelsey? Ask Kyle Williams, Eric Wood, Stevie Johnson, Fred Jackson, etc...Kelsay is an example FOR me not against, he received a way over worth extension from the Bills.
BillsVet Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 I'd say it's less than mediocre. With apologies to Greer who was already gone, those other three players were part of a pass defense that let opposing QBs torch them to the tune of a 92.6 passer rating. That is monumentally bad. And reflects particularly poorly on our safeties more than Poz, who was busy being part of a piss poor run defense as well. GO BILLS!!! Not much has changed since then. But they've used multiple high picks to replace Posluszny and Greer with varying results.
Beerball Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 and again would cost us the possibility of a compensatory pick They already look weak to the rest of the league and league observers. Dealing talent like Peters, Lynch, and not coming to terms with Byrd illustrate this. And "forcing" him to stay at least this year does what to that reputation?
Bill from NYC Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 His problem, let him rot in the bench. The team can't afford to look like pussies. I agree. I am not upset as others about losing Byrd. Giving a slow, injured safety 10 million per season is not a principle that I embrace. And keep in mind that the pass rush was SO good that players such as Leonhard and Searcy wee picking of passes. What bugs me is that the Bills continue to be pushed around by Parker. This continues a very bad precedent.
boyst Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 I'm confused by this ^ You say in one sentence that the team pays FAs too much but don't pay their own, and in the next sentence you mention a guy (Kelsay) that was drafted by the Bills and given two massive contract extensions that wy panned as over-paying. I'm sure you're making a salient point; I'm just not following is all... we over pay for bad talent and extend the high risk players who don't deserve it. Fitz, Kelsey, Moorman. Kelsey did less then Bryan Scott - a player who was under appreciated and played a position easy to fill. Thus he was not appreciated by the FO. We bring in Langston Walker and take out Jason Peters. We bring in Manny Lawson to fjnally replace a role at LB when w take out Poz. We didn't seem to over pay for Lawson but no one expected him to contribute like he did in 2013 - a season in which he was still proven to be mediocre at run support. Succesful teams don't create their own holes by losing talent they developed. They continuously bring up and look to upgrade, at the least. The Pats lose a mediocre starter and they have a mediocre 2nd year man to fill in immediately. The Bills execute poor planning
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Byrd, Whitner, Greer, and Poz. That's one hell of a backfield that the Bills have let walk away just in the past 5 years. This is amazing to me. Huh? Did poz switch to safety.. .? I thought he was bad in coverage as a linebacker. I'd rather have mck and Gilmore right now than Greer
Dean Cain Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 I agree. I am not upset as others about losing Byrd. Giving a slow, injured safety 10 million per season is not a principle that I embrace. And keep in mind that the pass rush was SO good that players such as Leonhard and Searcy wee picking of passes. What bugs me is that the Bills continue to be pushed around by Parker. This continues a very bad precedent. You had me at "Old, slow, & injured."
DC Bills Backer Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 I don't see how they just let him walk without tagging him as is being reported. This is another stupid move by our terrible front office if it happens. How do they expect to end the playoff drought by continually letting a top player on the team walk away each year and either not filling the hole made or having to spend a high pick on a hole they let develop, thus continuing our decade and half rebuilding project. I fully expect this to be year 15 without any playoffs. Its so fun to be a Bills fan!
boyst Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Maybe so just so long as everyone is clear that the Bills offered to match the Jags' offer and Poz chose to go. We can disagree on how good he is. Like I said, he's adequate, imo. But nothing special. GO BILLS!!! adequate gets the job done in this team as a LB with our secondary and DL. Poz would have done well Also... ESPN - Redskins to give LB Brian Orakpo franchise tag if no deal reached by 4 ET deadline, source tells ESPN
Coach Tuesday Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Huh? Did poz switch to safety.. .? I thought he was bad in coverage as a linebacker. I'd rather have mck and Gilmore right now than Greer That is not the right way to look at it. At worst all four players are competent starters. By letting them leave, the Bills waste draft picks filling the holes their departures created, instead of fillling other holes (or adding depth). And it's not like they reinvest the money they didn't spend elsewhere, such as in the free agent market.
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 we over pay for bad talent and extend the high risk players who don't deserve it. Fitz, Kelsey, Moorman. Kelsey did less then Bryan Scott - a player who was under appreciated and played a position easy to fill. Thus he was not appreciated by the FO. We bring in Langston Walker and take out Jason Peters. We bring in Manny Lawson to fjnally replace a role at LB when w take out Poz. We didn't seem to over pay for Lawson but no one expected him to contribute like he did in 2013 - a season in which he was still proven to be mediocre at run support. Succesful teams don't create their own holes by losing talent they developed. They continuously bring up and look to upgrade, at the least. The Pats lose a mediocre starter and they have a mediocre 2nd year man to fill in immediately. The Bills execute poor planning Successful teams don't break the bank on the less critical positions. See Seattle, niners, broncos, patriots ravens, etc.
BillsVet Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 And "forcing" him to stay at least this year does what to that reputation? Not retaining him long term is an indication things are not good at OBD. Parker is tough in negotiations, but he's come to terms with teams on big deals before. Why then is there a problem with Buffalo and Parker's clients? Is Parker unreasonable or are the Bills. Given Buffalo's inability to sign two of his players and Parker's rep in the NFL community, I think the issue remains with the Bills.
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 That is not the right way to look at it. At worst all four players are competent starters. By letting them leave, the Bills waste draft picks filling the holes their departures created, instead of fillling other holes (or adding depth). And it's not like they reinvest the money they didn't spend elsewhere, such as in the free agent market. Good point. This is definitely how the franchise should be run if it is 1987. Unfortunately free agency means you have to make choices.
plenzmd1 Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Not retaining him long term is an indication things are not good at OBD. Parker is tough in negotiations, but he's come to terms with teams on big deals before. Why then is there a problem with Buffalo and Parker's clients? Is Parker unreasonable or are the Bills. Given Buffalo's inability to sign two of his players and Parker's rep in the NFL community, I think the issue remains with the Bills. this does not have to be all on Parker..What if his client wants out at all costs, what is he supposed to do..force Byrd to sign something? In the end , Byrd is the final decision maker here.
Recommended Posts