ganesh 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... There has been no proof to indicate whether they are trying or not trying. They say that you need TWO hands to clap. Everyone is chastising the Bills. However, there is no indication that Byrd wanted to stay in Buffalo. Byrd is a WC guy and I am sure is looking at a WC team to make his home for the next 4-5 years. Probably, a winning franchise is also in his mind. I am sure Byrd would rather go to a team that will pay him 28M in guarantee than the Bills 30, if it is a Warm Weather place and has less Income Tax and is a winning franchise. The Bills while holding the advantage with the Tag know very well that Byrd wants to play somewhere else. The Bills did the right thing and hope that they get a 3rd rounder as a compensation in next years draft.
Deranged Rhino Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 (edited) 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... I think you're missing my point. Price is irrelevant. I'm not saying the Bills should keep Byrd (though I do believe they should), what I am saying is that they have the ability to sign and trade him for picks (at the VERY least). That's what the Franchise Tag is for. Letting an asset, and that's what he is, walk away for nothing when there most certainly will be a market for his services, someone WILL pay 10 mill for him, is the terrible part of what went down today. They willingly gave up their leverage (and equity) for nothing. That's not how you run a franchise. That's not how you run a business. That's a failure of epic proportions and a sign (to me at least) that despite it all, nothing has changed. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. 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. Incorrect. Someone would, and someone can. Edited March 4, 2014 by GreggyT
Bad Things Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 I say good riddance. It's a shame that we couldn't tag him and get at least something in return, but if we did, the idiot probably would've sat out 10 games with his bad foot and only played the minimum games required. Time to move on. Go Bills!
maryland-bills-fan Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 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. No we didn't mismanage it. The deck is just stacked against us. The NFL rules are fair to player and teams IF a franchise player plays in good faith during the franchise year. Bird and Parker laughed at this and had him sit out 1/3 of the games last year. He might sit out 3/4 of the games if he was tagged 2014. The Bills gotta smile, while getting corn-holed and legally can not say "he has a serious injury" (because he doesn't and this would be taken as slander of Byrd's ability to get a good paying contract elsewhere), nor can they say "he is faking it" even if it is obvious he is, for similar reasons of getting sued. Neither road would help the situation (although the temptation to strike back is there) and (although morally justified) would not be a good route for keeping good general player relations and trust. Sorry, sometimes sleezeback lawyers win. 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. Don't do it. She snores and farts in her sleep.
1B4IDie Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 (edited) I wholeheartedly believe that. I think if they gave him the biggest contract in the league for a safety, a contract that some other team is going to offer him, IMO, he would be signed right now. He wanted to be paid for what he was worth. He wasn't a #1 pick. His contract has been peanuts for four straight years. He wants to be paid at the top of the league, which is what the market will dictate IMO. And then they could have released him after 3 years, or kept and overpaid him if they were on the verge of something big years from now. You've been pretty consistent with your opinion. However I think it is pretty clear that it is NOT about money. Byrd wanted out of Buffalo and made it clear to Parker and the Bills FO. It's that simple. Which requires a trade partner to give you more than what you'll get from the conditional. Won't happen on a one year deal Exactly correct and yet soooo many people just can't seem to understand that basic point. A franchise tag is not a one year deal. This seems to be the basic point that so many people don't understand. A Franchise tag is a placeholder; That is all. It gives the team and the player until June to work out a long term deal. Edited March 4, 2014 by Why So Serious?
Mr. WEO Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 This is, as others have pointed out, not a crippling move. This guy totally dogged it last year for more than half the season. He's a safety--not the best either. Easily replaced. The best outcome is that this thread will soon sputter and fade off the front page.
BarleyNY Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 The man is checking out his options. As with virtually every other player that gets to his current position he is going to test the market for his services. If the Bills gave him what he asked for he'd probably sign the contract today. Since that's not happening he will see what he can get elsewhere. He'll go to the highest bidder or simply chose his preferred city or team if more than one team have similar offers. Which of us wouldn't do that? The odds of Buffalo retaining him are slim, but not nonexistent.
1billsfan Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 (edited) This is, as others have pointed out, not a crippling move. This guy totally dogged it last year for more than half the season. He's a safety--not the best either. Easily replaced. The best outcome is that this thread will soon sputter and fade off the front page. This sounds like denial to me. Byrd is a great safety who is highly regarded and sought after by many teams with cap space and by fans of those teams and the Bills are letting him walk away for nothing. I won't sugar coat or downplay the significance of the Bills' epic failure here. The franchise tag is there to help teams keep their great players when contract talks fall through. Byrd was the classic case of why you need to tag a player. The Bills can say "it takes to to tango" all they want. The facts are that other NFL teams are of course going to downplay interest in a trade for Byrd when the Bills haven't even tagged him yet. This is all BS talk to soothe the PR backlash that the Bills were too scared to run the risk of not finding a trade partner and having to pay Byrd 9 million for half a season of play. 9 million is peanuts compared to very real possibility of trading Byrd for a 2nd round pick. The consolation prize is that you get a pro bowl safety for 8 games. The Bills failed their team and their fans here because they didn't go to all out to get something for Byrd. They played the nice guys who saved some money, got rid of a temporary headache and are trying to pull the wool over the fans eyes now. Edited March 4, 2014 by 1billsfan
Wayne Cubed Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 This sounds like denial to me. Byrd is a great safety who is highly regarded and sought after by many teams with cap space and fans of those teams and the Bills are letting him walk away for nothing. I won't sugar coat or downplay the significance of the Bills' epic failure here. The franchise tag is there to help teams keep their great players when contract talks fall through. Byrd was the classic case of why you need to tag a player. The Bills can say "it takes to to tango" all they want. The facts are that other NFL teams are of course going to downplay interest in a trade for Byrd when the Bills haven't even tagged him yet. This is all BS talk to soothe the PR backlash that the Bills were too scared to run the risk of not finding a trade partner and having to pay Byrd 9 million for half a season of play. 9 million is peanuts compared to very real possibility of trading Byrd for a 2nd round pick. The consolation prize is that you get a pro bowl safety for 8 games. The Bills failed their team and their fans here because they didn't go to all out to get something for Byrd. They played the nice guys who saved some money, got rid of a temporary headache and are trying to pull the wool over the fans eyes now. Except they tried all last off season to find a trade partner and weren't able to. You are aware as well, to appease Byrd, he would have to actual want to go to the team he's being traded to. It's simple, Byrd won't sign the tender, and therefore the Bills can trade him if he isn't under contract, even if the Bills have lined up a couple teams. Byrd can do exactly what he did last year and not sign it. Then he can pull the PF card out and sit for the first 10 games.
K-9 Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 This sounds like denial to me. Byrd is a great safety who is highly regarded and sought after by many teams with cap space and by fans of those teams and the Bills are letting him walk away for nothing. I won't sugar coat or downplay the significance of the Bills' epic failure here. The franchise tag is there to help teams keep their great players when contract talks fall through. Byrd was the classic case of why you need to tag a player. The Bills can say "it takes to to tango" all they want. The facts are that other NFL teams are of course going to downplay interest in a trade for Byrd when the Bills haven't even tagged him yet. This is all BS talk to soothe the PR backlash that the Bills were too scared to run the risk of not finding a trade partner and having to pay Byrd 9 million for half a season of play. 9 million is peanuts compared to very real possibility of trading Byrd for a 2nd round pick. The consolation prize is that you get a pro bowl safety for 8 games. The Bills failed their team and their fans here because they didn't go to all out to get something for Byrd. They played the nice guys who saved some money, got rid of a temporary headache and are trying to pull the wool over the fans eyes now. You keep citing this high pick in a trade for a free safety. I believe you mentioned 1st or 2nd round picks yesterday. Where is the precedent for a free safety garnering a 1st round pick? I'm not asking to be a smartass, I honestly can't think of a deal where a free safety was traded for a high pick. Here's the precedent I know was established: Byrd was tagged last year, the Bills and his agent had from March to find a trading partner (and both parties looked for one) and the best deal offered was a 4th for Byrd. GO BILLS!!!
Wayne Cubed Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 You keep citing this high pick in a trade for a free safety. I believe you mentioned 1st or 2nd round picks yesterday. Where is the precedent for a free safety garnering a 1st round pick? I'm not asking to be a smartass, I honestly can't think of a deal where a free safety was traded for a high pick. Here's the precedent I know was established: Byrd was tagged last year, the Bills and his agent had from March to find a trading partner (and both parties looked for one) and the best deal offered was a 4th for Byrd. GO BILLS!!! I think some just keep missing that point. And they miss the point that the Bills can't trade Byrd if he doesn't sign the tender, it's really that simple. It'd go like this: "Hey Jairus, we found a team willing to offer us what we want in return for your services" "Who's the team?" "Minnesota" "Nah, don't think I'll sign my tender then" Well there goes the trade him route.
1billsfan Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 (edited) Except they tried all last off season to find a trade partner and weren't able to. You are aware as well, to appease Byrd, he would have to actual want to go to the team he's being traded to. It's simple, Byrd won't sign the tender, and therefore the Bills can trade him if he isn't under contract, even if the Bills have lined up a couple teams. Byrd can do exactly what he did last year and not sign it. Then he can pull the PF card out and sit for the first 10 games. Byrd was coming off two subpar seasons until his great 2012 season. So the 2013 season cemented his greatness as a top safety. Also, there are teams out there that Byrd wants clearly to go to who have the cap space that the Bills would have been able to do a sign and trade deal with. So I don't buy that he wouldn't have signed a Bills contract with the intent of being traded. If all of that fell through, the Bills would still not have a gaping hole to fill in their secondary. Now not only are they bad at stopping the run, they will be bad at stopping the pass. This was an epic fail by the Bills. Edited March 4, 2014 by 1billsfan
K-9 Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 I think some just keep missing that point. And they miss the point that the Bills can't trade Byrd if he doesn't sign the tender, it's really that simple. It'd go like this: "Hey Jairus, we found a team willing to offer us what we want in return for your services" "Who's the team?" "Minnesota" "Nah, don't think I'll sign my tender then" Well there goes the trade him route. LOL. Yeah, well, there is that one minor detail. But even tagged, the best Parker and the Bills could do last year was a 4th. GO BILLS!!!
Wayne Cubed Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 Byrd was coming off two subpar seasons until his great 2012 season. So the 2013 season cemented his greatness as a top safety. Also, there are teams out there that Byrd wants clearly to go to who have the cap space that the Bills would have been able to do a sign and trade deal with. So I don't buy that he wouldn't have signed a Bills contract with the intent of being traded. If all of that fell through, the Bills would still not have a gaping hole to fill in their secondary. Now not only are they bad at stopping the run, they will be bad at stopping the pass. This was an epic fail by the Bills. You must have inside info, because who are these teams he clearly wants to go to?
Beerball Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 I am so over Kraig urbik (or chandler) being brought up in the Byrd debate. Then why did you bring them up? 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. Nope, they should not have given him $14M, they should have given him $8.4M.
1billsfan Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 You must have inside info, because who are these teams he clearly wants to go to? The fact that he turned down an offer making him the highest payed safety in the league is a blaring siren that he and his agent know there's a team he wants to go to who has the money to pay him. I would say that there was tampering involved which unfortunately probably can't be proven. I'm not surprised the Bills' PR "calm the backlash" campaign is working so far. Many Bills fans don't want to come to grips with the truth right now.
4BillsintheBurgh Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 I really can't believe we didn't tag him and the only way I see that as being better for the future of the Buffalo Bills is financially with cash to cap. It is certainly not about wins because the team is more talented with him on the roster. And if you've already stated you are going to add "dust settles" guys why would you want those guys to guarantee you won't get a comp pick? Wouldn't it be better for the organization if you sign guys this year with the cap space you have then let him walk next year with hopefully not needing to sign those guys? I'd hate to think if we sign some core special teams guys that takes us out of the running for a comp pick. If that's in the best interest of the Bills then you're just confirming (again) the best interest of the Bills is money.
Chuck Schick Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 Byrd was coming off two subpar seasons until his great 2012 season. So the 2013 season cemented his greatness as a top safety. Also, there are teams out there that Byrd wants clearly to go to who have the cap space that the Bills would have been able to do a sign and trade deal with. So I don't buy that he wouldn't have signed a Bills contract with the intent of being traded. If all of that fell through, the Bills would still not have a gaping hole to fill in their secondary. Now not only are they bad at stopping the run, they will be bad at stopping the pass. This was an epic fail by the Bills. All joking about the ineptitude of the Bills' FO aside, do we honestly think Whaley and co. didnt know and weigh all their options? If it was a "no brainer" to tag and trade him for a high pick, why on earth wouldn't they? I am pretty sure they took all options into account and made what they figure will be the right move. Don't forget, the Bills will be rewarded a compensatory pick if some other team in fact signs him. So it won't actually be for nothing.
K-9 Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 The fact that he turned down an offer making him the highest payed safety in the league is a blaring siren that he and his agent know there's a team he wants to go to who has the money to pay him. I would say that there was tampering involved which unfortunately probably can't be proven. I'm not surprised the Bills' PR "calm the backlash" campaign is working so far. Many Bills fans don't want to come to grips with the truth right now. And if a team KNOWS they're getting Byrd, all the more reason for them not to give up a pick and all the more reason for Byrd not to sign the tag. As for coming to grips with the truth, whose truth are you referring to? GO BILLS!!!
BringBackFergy Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 Can the OP please change the thread title back to Jarius??
Recommended Posts