TC in St. Louis Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 I believe that he will do just what Levitre did, and sign with another team about 3 minutes into the Free Agency period. i don't understand why he wants to leave his teammates. I'm really upset that this guy thinks he's more important than the team. If he doesn't want to be here, let him go. Tired of it. Jason Peters is a punk. Levitre? Punk. Byrd? Punk. No team concept any more. Bunch of punks.
thebandit27 Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Ah. Yes. Another day of the Bills proving their ineptness. Sweet. I still don't understand what's so inept about this...the only thing I consider a mistake is not tagging him, and I'm willing to concede that they're more knowledgeable about his attitude toward playing under a 2nd tag than I am.
Dorkington Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 you revel in this all some how dont you ? Is sarcasm hard to detect on the internet or something? "Sweet" isn't me joyously cheering for the Bills losing a Pro Bowl Free Safety. "Sweet" is me being sarcastic. As I've communicated multiple times on this forum, I'd rather keep Byrd. If not, I'd hope we tag him and trade him. Instead, he leaves for nothing. There is no good that comes out of this. There is nothing literally "sweet" about this. At best, we hope we can pick up some mid level guy who can replace Byrd to some extent, and he isn't missed THAT much. But knowing our team, we just created another hole to fill, completely unnecessarily.
thebandit27 Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 I believe that he will do just what Levitre did, and sign with another team about 3 minutes into the Free Agency period. i don't understand why he wants to leave his teammates. I'm really upset that this guy thinks he's more important than the team. If he doesn't want to be here, let him go. Tired of it. Jason Peters is a punk. Levitre? Punk. Byrd? Punk. No team concept any more. Bunch of punks. I get the frustration, I really do. I cannot fault the kid for wanting to make as much as possible though; it's his one shot.
HelloNewman Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Forgive me if this was said already but I am not up to reading 76 pages of posts,,,,,it takes 2 sides to make a contract work.......if the player does not want to be here then there is nothing the team can do no matter how much is offered....his rejection of the contract basically told the Bills he is no longer interested in being part of the team so they let him go. Would any supervisor want to keep a disgruntled employee around?
Dorkington Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) I still don't understand what's so inept about this...the only thing I consider a mistake is not tagging him, and I'm willing to concede that they're more knowledgeable about his attitude toward playing under a 2nd tag than I am. I fully suspect a tag would have resulted in him holding out of camp, and not playing for at least the first few games of the season, like last year. But still, we'd have FS covered for over half the season...which we don't now. So here's hoping the Bills, in their infinite wisdom of creating holes, actually fill the hole this time. But if the LG situation last year tells us anything, I'm not overly optimistic. Edited March 3, 2014 by Dorkington
BADOLBILZ Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Because they wanted him to play and there was still a chance to sign him long term. Not to mention you don't screw a guy over, you play hardball within the rules, both letter and spirit. Remind us again where nice guys finish. The Patriots did Lawyer Milloy much worse many years ago.....cutting a captain and team leader at the last second over a contract squabble. They went on to win a SB. Good teams play hardball when it is to their advantage. The Bills got played by Eugene Parker once again. You gotta' hand it to the man, he has used a variety of negotiation tactics. The guy is good.
3rdand12 Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Is sarcasm hard to detect on the internet or something? "Sweet" isn't me joyously cheering for the Bills losing a Pro Bowl Free Safety. "Sweet" is me being sarcastic. As I've communicated multiple times on this forum, I'd rather keep Byrd. If not, I'd hope we tag him and trade him. Instead, he leaves for nothing. There is no good that comes out of this. There is nothing literally "sweet" about this. At best, we hope we can pick up some mid level guy who can replace Byrd to some extent, and he isn't missed THAT much. But knowing our team, we just created another hole to fill, completely unnecessarily. I dont know . Is it : ) They planned on this when they doubled down with Duke and Jonathan. Will that be good enough? I do not know that.
BADOLBILZ Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 I believe that he will do just what Levitre did, and sign with another team about 3 minutes into the Free Agency period. i don't understand why he wants to leave his teammates. I'm really upset that this guy thinks he's more important than the team. If he doesn't want to be here, let him go. Tired of it. Jason Peters is a punk. Levitre? Punk. Byrd? Punk. No team concept any more. Bunch of punks. it's not the team or the town. It's the losing. If you want loyalty, put a winning team on the field. Everyone wants to be associated with winning.
3rdand12 Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) I fully suspect a tag would have resulted in him holding out of camp, and not playing for at least the first few games of the season, like last year. But still, we'd have FS covered for over half the season...which we don't now. So here's hoping the Bills, in their infinite wisdom of creating holes, actually fill the hole this time. But if the LG situation last year tells us anything, I'm not overly optimistic. see , thats sarcasm.with a negative spin . How'd i do ? it's not the team or the town. It's the losing. If you want loyalty, put a winning team on the field. Everyone wants to be associated with winning. I dont think thats true. How many people here still hang on ??? Edited March 3, 2014 by 3rdand12
dailar Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 it's not the team or the town. It's the losing. If you want loyalty, put a winning team on the field. Everyone wants to be associated with winning. I hear this a lot but it doesn't work out that way. Look at the Ravens team that won the superbowl, the next year they lost a lot of their defence to free agency. Players want to get paid. If someone is willing to pay more they are going to take it.
3rdand12 Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) I was holding out hope. First for reconcliation then tag and trade for some value. Now i am just walking away because i dont know enough behind the scenes to have an educated guess. All pretty f'd up it seems from out here in fandom. Ps i did read every single post my f5 finger is shot !! Edited March 3, 2014 by 3rdand12
BillsVet Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Remind us again where nice guys finish. The Patriots did Lawyer Milloy much worse many years ago.....cutting a captain and team leader at the last second over a contract squabble. They went on to win a SB. Good teams play hardball when it is to their advantage. The Bills got played by Eugene Parker once again. You gotta' hand it to the man, he has used a variety of negotiation tactics. The guy is good. I had to laugh when Brandon talked about them not keeping score with EP. Hey, maybe Russ doesn't, but it's twice in 5 years that Parker has gotten exactly what he wanted for his clients. You've gotta believe that Buffalo will stay away from the clients coming up in future UFA years and the draft that Parker represents. IIRC, Sammy Watkins is one of them. Goodness, what an off-season already and we're 2 months from draft day.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Are you saying that what Byrd/Parker did last season was OK, and my scenario is somehow not OK? IF Byrd really faked an injury and didn't play in 6 games when he was perfectly healthy to do so, then what they did was not okay and all bets were off. I don't know either way whether Byrd did or didn't. If I had to guess, he had the injury, it was very hard to play on, if it were a playoff game he probably would have played. But if that were the case and he did have a legitimate injury then yes, I believe what they did was okay and what you are suggesting is not. What they did is their option, the only option they had within the rules. What we would be doing is intentionally fukking someone over because we didn't like what they were doing within the rules. Remind us again where nice guys finish. The Patriots did Lawyer Milloy much worse many years ago.....cutting a captain and team leader at the last second over a contract squabble. They went on to win a SB. Good teams play hardball when it is to their advantage. The Bills got played by Eugene Parker once again. You gotta' hand it to the man, he has used a variety of negotiation tactics. The guy is good. What the Pats did was well within the rules. Teams can cut guys whenever they want and often do it on the eve of the season. Sure it was hardball and nasty but It wasn't intentionally sabotaging him out of spite. They didn't want to pay him what he wanted and decided to let him go. It's possible that they had already decided to let him go a month before and waited, and that indeed would be a scumbag move but that doesnt mean it is just hardball and we should do the same thing. Besides, I think we should tag him and make him play.
TC in St. Louis Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 The Bills can be a winning team. They will be a winning team. Byrd could be part of that. But he is turning his back on his team.
birdog1960 Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 I'll always be a Bills fan but its painful to see the organization frequentely mis-manage assets. Byrd's the best safety we've had in a long time. The franchise tag would seemingly give us enough leverage to sign him long term. Yet the F.O. is incapable of achieving it. Not sure if its because they're cheap or incompetent but god damn good organizations seem to retain their best young players. i think the there's a difference between our definition of assets and the organization's. as fans, we see the actual team as an asset. as an organization, they see the asset as the franchise that may need to be sold relatively soon.
Saint Doug Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Doug Whaley on Not Tagging Jairus Byrd <4:50> Well, there you have it folks. It's hard to trade in the NFL. I also like how he used the existence if the salary cap to explain why they haven't been able to get a deal done. Is Doug aware how much below the cap we are?
K-9 Posted March 3, 2014 Posted March 3, 2014 Byrd gave us 4 years on a 2nd round rookie contract. He was a pro bowler and an all pro. I think we got more from him then he got from us. The guy doesn't want to be here, let em go. Nice take. Not enough high road around these parts. GO BILLS!!!
BADOLBILZ Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 I hear this a lot but it doesn't work out that way. Look at the Ravens team that won the superbowl, the next year they lost a lot of their defence to free agency. Players want to get paid. If someone is willing to pay more they are going to take it. Of course, it's a business and the Ravens were cap strapped. But if you want your players to actively try to make it work with your team then you need to show you want to win. Otherwise, if they are any good, they will have equally lucrative financial options in free agency to go along with better on-field prospects. It's no mistake that the players they have lost include All Pros and players who have starred elsewhere.......while the guys they have retained are considerably lesser. It's funny that Whaley mentioned McKelvin when comparing to Byrd. McKelvin was a reserve for almost his entire career in Buffalo......he wasn't going to hit the market and command big dollars. In fact, in last years market he would have made less. $5M turned out to be pretty generous considering the proven commodities on that market. And Fred Jackson? He was a 30 year old running back when they did that extension.......and it was a cheapo. Well, it's on Whaley now. He better nail the rest of this offseason.
Ozymandius Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 This would hurt a lot worse if I actually liked the QB and head coach. As is, the loss of Pettine and now Byrd maybe hastens the departure of EJ and Marrone. At the very least if EJ and Marrone get wins for the Bills, they will have earned it instead of having Pettine's defense carry them to victories. That's the silver lining.
Recommended Posts