Kelly the Dog Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 I know this is about Byrd, but the only thing that really matters to Buffalo's success is EJs development. If he takes a step forward, this team wins more. If not, Byrd, Watt, Sherman, Keuchley, and Sheldon Richardson wouldn't get this team to a Super Bowl. While that is very true, and EJ's play is far more important, it is equally true that in the last two years, the Baltimore Ravens didnt win the SB until they got good QB play, and wouldn't have won the Super Bowl without their great safety play. The Seahawks got good QB play and wouldn't have got to let alone won with SB without, but wouldn't have won the SB without great safety play, too. Antre Rolle played a big role in the Giants season and playoffs the year before that, too.
birdog1960 Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 If the Bills get a comp pick for Byrd it would mean that the did very little in free agency, since the players you sign count against you. and the bills are in the best position to know what they'll do in fa. we'll see if they change their colors and do very much in fa. if they do lots, which the optimists here expect, then not tagging him makes little sense. if they do little or nothing, it's still bad news.
RuntheDamnBall Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 and the bills are in the best position to know what they'll do in fa. we'll see if they change their colors and do very much in fa. if they do lots, which the optimists here expect, then not tagging him makes little sense. if they do little or nothing, it's still bad news. Bingo. I'll eat plenty of crow if they fill holes with capable starters. History suggests they'll do this to an extent, but not enough to make the team a winner.
NoSaint Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 Bleh. That's a ridiculously weak answer by Whaley for not using the tag. More Whaley: How is the non-bold part at all an adequate answer for the bold part? The question wasn't why can't we keep everybody... I am so over Kraig urbik (or chandler) being brought up in the Byrd debate.
Reed83HOF Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 Transition tag was used twice this year; should have been 3. Could have had the right to match any offer... I just see this being one of the last nails in our coffin....sad
Deranged Rhino Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 Continued failure to protect your assets is no way to do business. It's no way to build a winning team. It's no way to reward the fans. It's just bad business all around.
papazoid Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 the Byrd ship has sailed. the odds of him signing with buffalo in a couple weeks is about the same as one of our posters dating kate upton. so yes, you have a chance, just not a very good chance. the Bills have about $25 mil to spend. let's see what they do with it before giving up on 2014.
Deranged Rhino Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 the Byrd ship has sailed. the odds of him signing with buffalo in a couple weeks is about the same as one of our posters dating kate upton. so yes, you have a chance, just not a very good chance. the Bills have about $25 mil to spend. let's see what they do with it before giving up on 2014. It's not about giving up on '14, it's more about what sort of signal this sends to the fans and players. There is no excuse for letting a pro bowl asset who is just entering his prime walk away without getting any compensation in exchange. It adds another hole to a roster that's in a constant state of "rebuilding". It shows once again that despite the rhetoric, this team is not committed to winning titles, they are only committed to their own bottom lines. Worse, it shows players like Spiller, Woods, Glenn, Alonzo etc that if they want to get off the team and chase their rings, all they have to do is threaten to sit out. I would say this is a low point for the franchise, but it's not. It's just bad business as usual.
johnnywo Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 (edited) Bingo. I'll eat plenty of crow if they fill holes with capable starters. History suggests they'll do this to an extent, but not enough to make the team a winner. Not sure spending $10M on a safety was gonna make the team winners either....On the plus side, we do have a bunch of cap space and they are not afraid to spend it. Not necessarily on the right talent, but they still spend. In any event, I would spend that money shoring up the run defense... It's not about giving up on '14, it's more about what sort of signal this sends to the fans and players. There is no excuse for letting a pro bowl asset who is just entering his prime walk away without getting any compensation in exchange. It adds another hole to a roster that's in a constant state of "rebuilding". It shows once again that despite the rhetoric, this team is not committed to winning titles, they are only committed to their own bottom lines. Worse, it shows players like Spiller, Woods, Glenn, Alonzo etc that if they want to get off the team and chase their rings, all they have to do is threaten to sit out. I would say this is a low point for the franchise, but it's not. It's just bad business as usual. When they become a winning team it won't be a problem keeping talent......i know, i know.....it's been 14 years but spending $10M on a safety is ludicrous... Edited March 4, 2014 by johnnywo
Reed83HOF Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 Not sure spending $10M on a safety was gonna make the team winners either....On the plus side, we do have a bunch of cap space and they are not afraid to spend it. Not necessarily on the right talent, but they still spend. In any event, I would spend that money shoring up the run defense... When they become a winning team it won't be a problem keeping talent......i know, i know.....it's been 14 years but spending $10M on a safety is ludicrous... Again this team needs to change its perception, which is letting players leave for little or nothing...today fixes that how? what cap implications does it have for us today? We can't sign them all, but if we let Levitre go we will use the money to sign Byrd....riiiiight
marioc Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 Continued failure to protect your assets is no way to do business. It's no way to build a winning team. It's no way to reward the fans. It's just bad business all around. Exactly. What exactly was there to lose by using the transition tag at the very least? Even if they knew there was no way Byrd would sign with the Bills, it would show the fans and the existing players they cared about retaining talent. By not using it, they send all the wrong messages to everyone. "If you blossom into a great player and outgrow your contract, your best bet is to hardball the franchise and they will just release you". And to the fans, "Watch and root for this great young talent, the better he gets the closer he gets to leaving the organization". That's not gonna sell jerseys.
johnnywo Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 (edited) Again this team needs to change its perception, which is letting players leave for little or nothing...today fixes that how? what cap implications does it have for us today? We can't sign them all, but if we let Levitre go we will use the money to sign Byrd....riiiiight Agree with keeping talent....however after watching Whaley's interview I am comfortable that the FO did what they could do to convince him to stay. Should they have over paid and gave him $14M? Whoever said they would use the money saved from Levitre on Byrd? Some crackpot message board post? I never read that from a credible source. Edited March 4, 2014 by johnnywo
dubs Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 Exactly. What exactly was there to lose by using the transition tag at the very least? Even if they knew there was no way Byrd would sign with the Bills, it would show the fans and the existing players they cared about retaining talent. By not using it, they send all the wrong messages to everyone. "If you blossom into a great player and outgrow your contract, your best bet is to hardball the franchise and they will just release you". And to the fans, "Watch and root for this great young talent, the better he gets the closer he gets to leaving the organization". That's not gonna sell jerseys. He wasn't signing here no matter what. Name a team that's going to trade a pick and also sign a safety to a 10+ a year contract. You probably can't. He's gone, it sucks, but hardly crippling.
Reed83HOF Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 (edited) Agree with keeping talent....however after watching Whaley's interview I am comfortable that the FO did what they could do to convince him to stay. Should they have over paid and gave him $14M? Whoever said they would use the money saved from Levitre on Byrd? Some crackpot message board post? I never read that from a credible source. Look at the actions, our cap space to sign players last off-season wasn't that great and there was a lot of articles if we could afford to sign both. Nix even said we wanted to keep both, but they were evaluating the entire team once Doug was hired and Brandon said he was in charge of all... We franchised Byrd and didn't even offer Andy a contract... who did we value over whom? Edited March 4, 2014 by Reed83HOF
jahnyc Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 Byrd is now the number one available free agent in free agency this year, just like Levitre was one of the top free agents available last year, and Poz the year before. I am not suggesting that Byrd is the greatest free agent of all time, but it is striking that other teams have been able to successfully re-sign or tag their free agents. I cannot give the Bills' front office the benefit of the doubt any longer. Making a strong offer to Byrd now (if true), when many teams have significant cap room this year and amounts that free agents will be offered may be higher than in years past, does little to convince me that the Bills did everything they could do to keep Byrd. At a minimum, the timing of the Bills' offer was off and should have been made last year or earlier. At worst, the Bills purposely go through a charade of making it seem like they were interested in signing a player, but claim that they were outbid, the player wanted to play in a particular city (or not in Buffalo), or the agent was difficult, so that they can play the victim and deflect blame for not having re-signed the player.
bbb Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 I think the subject line should go back to Jarius Byrd.
Reed83HOF Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 Byrd is now the number one available free agent in free agency this year, just like Levitre was one of the top free agents available last year, and Poz the year before. I am not suggesting that Byrd is the greatest free agent of all time, but it is striking that other teams have been able to successfully re-sign or tag their free agents. I cannot give the Bills' front office the benefit of the doubt any longer. Making a strong offer to Byrd now (if true), when many teams have significant cap room this year and amounts that free agents will be offered may be higher than in years past, does little to convince me that the Bills did everything they could do to keep Byrd. At a minimum, the timing of the Bills' offer was off and should have been made last year or earlier. At worst, the Bills purposely go through a charade of making it seem like they were interested in signing a player, but claim that they were outbid, the player wanted to play in a particular city (or not in Buffalo), or the agent was difficult, so that they can play the victim and deflect blame for not having re-signed the player. You are entirely correct. It is a marketing scheme to sell us that they are trying, when they obviously aren't...
mrags Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 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 were widely panned as over-paying. I'm sure you're making a salient point; I'm just not following is all... thats the common lack of sense that the "Ralph is Cheap" crowd has that doesn't like that you make sense of an argument.
bbb Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 You are entirely correct. It is a marketing scheme to sell us that they are trying, when they obviously aren't... Seems easier just to try..
johnnywo Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 (edited) Byrd is now the number one available free agent in free agency this year, just like Levitre was one of the top free agents available last year, and Poz the year before. I am not suggesting that Byrd is the greatest free agent of all time, but it is striking that other teams have been able to successfully re-sign or tag their free agents. I cannot give the Bills' front office the benefit of the doubt any longer. Making a strong offer to Byrd now (if true), when many teams have significant cap room this year and amounts that free agents will be offered may be higher than in years past, does little to convince me that the Bills did everything they could do to keep Byrd. At a minimum, the timing of the Bills' offer was off and should have been made last year or earlier. At worst, the Bills purposely go through a charade of making it seem like they were interested in signing a player, but claim that they were outbid, the player wanted to play in a particular city (or not in Buffalo), or the agent was difficult, so that they can play the victim and deflect blame for not having re-signed the player. Your argument is invalid. Tennessee or Jax are not progressing because they signed these two players...there was actually little or no improvement at all. If what was reported is true (3yrs $30m) how are you not satisfied with the Bills offer? Keep overpaying for talent in the wrong areas and they will end up like the Raiders. Oh wait..... thats the common lack of sense that the "Ralph is Cheap" crowd has that doesn't like that you make sense of an argument. What this guy says!!! Edited March 4, 2014 by johnnywo
Recommended Posts