Kirby Jackson Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 They still would have had to give up more to move up to #2..... Maybe but with the number of teams looking to trade back the price is going to be less than in most years. They could have came out of the 1st with Byrd, Evans and Lewan potentially. That would be a home run for them.
HamSandwhich Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Didnt see this posted, sorry if it was. Polians take on Byrd. http://espn.go.com/blog/buffalo-bills/post/_/id/7754/bill-polians-surprising-take-on-jairus-byrd
Reed83HOF Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Didnt see this posted, sorry if it was. Polians take on Byrd. http://espn.go.com/b...-on-jairus-byrd Nice find...I didn't see that, but then again I never go on ESPN.com or even watch the channel(s) anymore I think a B- is a bit harsh though
Hazed and Amuzed Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Not tagging Byrd and trading him was a colossal blunder on the part of Whaley. If St. Louis really wants Byrd, they have plenty of good picks for a trade. Stupid Whaley! Byrd and his agent will be getting a good laugh at his expense. What a dolt that Whaley is!!! I can't believe that he would pass up a guaranteed trade with the Rams!!! It's obvious that the Rams were going to give up the 2nd pick for Byrd, I mean how could he miss it? BTW do you have the link that shows that the Rams were willing to trade draft picks for Byrd? I can't seem to find it. I mean I know that it's not just speculation on your part of what you'd like to see happen, it's something that definitely would've transpired. Teams are usually very eager to give up picks for FS's that are on a 1 year franchise tag tender without knowing if that player will sign long term. Draft picks have no real value to any team other than the Bills when we want trades to work out in their favor. So, anyways.... Do you have that link?
Kirby Jackson Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) What a dolt that Whaley is!!! I can't believe that he would pass up a guaranteed trade with the Rams!!! It's obvious that the Rams were going to give up the 2nd pick for Byrd, I mean how could he miss it? BTW do you have the link that shows that the Rams were willing to trade draft picks for Byrd? I can't seem to find it. I mean I know that it's not just speculation on your part of what you'd like to see happen, it's something that definitely would've transpired. Teams are usually very eager to give up picks for FS's that are on a 1 year franchise tag tender without knowing if that player will sign long term. Draft picks have no real value to any team other than the Bills when we want trades to work out in their favor. So, anyways.... Do you have that link? I said something similar so I will do my best to defend it. The Bills obviously gauged the trade interest in Byrd but no team was really going to be willing to give assets if he was not tagged. They would just wait for him to hit the market. Some of the teams that we talked about that made sense like Denver are now popping up as potential landing spots. They have a short window to win and are in need of help on the back end. Will Byrd make a bigger impact than the 2nd to last pick in the 1st or 2nd to last pick in the 2nd? I think so and that it makes sense for a team like that. They need guys that can contribute to a title in the next 2-3 years max. We are also talking about St. Louis here as an option. They currently have picks 2 and 13 and a need for a big offensive weapon, OT, OLB and a Saftey. What if they could walk out of the 1st round with Byrd, Evans and Lewan? That would be really good considering their needs. No team is going to offer you anything if they don't have to. The Bills should have tagged Byrd and then started gauging the interest. He would have signed a long term deal in any of those places anyways as he is looking to do now. Edited March 9, 2014 by Kirby Jackson
Hazed and Amuzed Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) I said something similar so I will do my bet to defend it. The Bills obviously gauged the trade interest in Byrd but no team was really going to be willing to give assets if he was not tagged. They would just wait for him to hit the market. Some of the teams that we talked about that made sense like Denver are now popping up as potential landing spots. They have a short window to win and are in need of help on the back end. Will Byrd make a bigger impact than the 2nd to last pick in the 1st or 2nd to last pick in the 2nd? I think so and that it makes sense for a team like that. They need guys that can contribute to a title in the next 2-3 years max. We are also talking about St. Louis here as an option. They currently have picks 2 and 13 and a need for a big offensive weapon, OT, OLB and a Saftey. What if they could walk out of the 1st round with Byrd, Evans and Lewan? That would be really good considering their needs. No team is going to offer you anything if they don't have to. The Bills should have tagged Byrd and then started gauging the interest. He would have signed a long term deal in any of those places anyways as he is looking to do now. No one is disputing the value of trading Byrd, however claiming that Whaley is stupid based on him not fulfilling someone's assumptions is ridiculous. It makes as much sense as me praising Whaley for letting Byrd walk because Jairus' plantar fasciitis will probably end his career. BTW Fans here assume that there were trade partners for Byrd. Fans here also assumed that Cordy Glen wouldn't be there in the 2nd, that Fred Jackson and Kyle Williams careers were done and that Mario would never sign. Edited March 9, 2014 by Hazed and Amuzed
Kirby Jackson Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 No one is disputing the value of trading Byrd, however claiming that Whaley is stupid based on him not fulfilling someone's assumptions is ridiculous. It makes as much sense as me praising Whaley for letting Byrd walk because Jairus' plantar fasciitis will probably end his career. Agree with all that. Who knows what he would have received. I am in the camp that we would have found out by tagging him but that may or may not be true. There are some places and scenarios that may have made sense but to your point no one knows for sure.
K-9 Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Not tagging Byrd and trading him was a colossal blunder on the part of Whaley. If St. Louis really wants Byrd, they have plenty of good picks for a trade. Stupid Whaley! Byrd and his agent will be getting a good laugh at his expense. There was talk on here of using Byrd and 9 to move to #2. It seems like that would have been the play if this is indeed true. The Bills could have leveraged Byrd to secure Watkins. Guys, as has been discussed seven ways to Sunday, tagging Byrd would have done NOTHING to facilitate a trade. Byrd would first have to SIGN his tender and AGREE to a deal, BEFORE he could be traded. You think he was gonna do any of that BEFORE testing the free agency waters? GO BILLS!!!
boyst Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Guys, as has been discussed seven ways to Sunday, tagging Byrd would have done NOTHING to facilitate a trade. Byrd would first have to SIGN his tender and AGREE to a deal, BEFORE he could be traded. You think he was gonna do any of that BEFORE testing the free agency waters? GO BILLS!!! I think it could have gone down as this:Byrd tagged w/o signing Mid March team X for whatever reason wants Byrd and calls for trade. Willing to give up pick X. The Bills call Byrd and agent and tell him " team X wants you. What ya think?" Tell him go agree to a contract and have them fax it over. Once its signed trade him. Or something like that. Or once he is signed, white out the comma to make it look like a period . 10,000,000 becomes $10. And then because he signed the contract don't trade him. Shirley it'd be that easy.
Kirby Jackson Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Guys, as has been discussed seven ways to Sunday, tagging Byrd would have done NOTHING to facilitate a trade. Byrd would first have to SIGN his tender and AGREE to a deal, BEFORE he could be traded. You think he was gonna do any of that BEFORE testing the free agency waters? GO BILLS!!! The approach is obviously important but with the tag testing the free agent waters isn't really an option. It's kind of a chicken and egg scenario. "Jarius, we are going to tag you. We will work with you to get you to a place that you want to play and a contract that you can live with but we will not do so without compensation in return." That conversation happens all the time in the NHL and NBA (it's the definition of a sign and trade). I am not saying that it would have happened. If his options were sign the tender and get traded to Denver where you sign a long term deal or play on the tag you might have had a deal. That's all that I am saying. The Bills conceded the leverage in hopes of a more amicable negotiation & the perception of a good "players" organization. I get the why (I think anyways) but wouldn't have conceded that leverage.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Guys, as has been discussed seven ways to Sunday, tagging Byrd would have done NOTHING to facilitate a trade. Byrd would first have to SIGN his tender and AGREE to a deal, BEFORE he could be traded. You think he was gonna do any of that BEFORE testing the free agency waters? GO BILLS!!! If the amount with the other team is 10-12 million a year, sure. It would have to depend on the team and the offer, but it's no different than the Jason Peters situation. The Eagles had already agreed to an amount Parker was comfortable with before the trade. It wasn't exactly the same because of the FA but the idea that some team would show up and meet Parker's demands before FA is not far fetched at all.
H2o Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 I think Byrd shops around and realizes the best deal and fit for him is with the Buffalo Bills. Byrd will re-sign with Buffalo within the first week of FA.
K-9 Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 The Bills and Parker tried looking for a trading partner since he was tagged last year. If people still need to insist there is a ready, willing, and able trading partner out there willing to give up more than the 4th the Vikings offered in order to satisfy themselves that the Bills screwed the pooch yet again, have at it. Why we insist on hoeing this old ground every other day is a mystery. Well, other than the obvious reason which is to further the point that everything the FO does is plain stupid. I'd rather people just say that than make up stuff based on nothing more than supposition. GO BILLS!!!
Hazed and Amuzed Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 The Bills and Parker tried looking for a trading partner since he was tagged last year. If people still need to insist there is a ready, willing, and able trading partner out there willing to give up more than the 4th the Vikings offered in order to satisfy themselves that the Bills screwed the pooch yet again, have at it. Why we insist on hoeing this old ground every other day is a mystery. Well, other than the obvious reason which is to further the point that everything the FO does is plain stupid. I'd rather people just say that than make up stuff based on nothing more than supposition. GO BILLS!!! +10000000 Glad to see rationality around here. You're a solid contributor to the board K-9, one of the reasons I stay around here is posters like you.
fansince88 Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 +10000000 Glad to see rationality around here. You're a solid contributor to the board K-9, one of the reasons I stay around here is posters like you. True, people need to come up with something else to gripe about. I stand strongly in your camp. They tried, they say they couldnt, move on. That said, after Byrd signs somewhere, whether here or somewhere else, get ready to see 150 pages of the same dribble.
Buffaloed in Pa Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Blah,Blahblah,Blah. Byrd hates Buffalo and will only come back if he`s low-balled in free agency. Who were his picks against and sorry he`s not a game changer. Not even close ever to Troy P. or Ed Reed. Stats sometimes don`t tell the whole story. I have never seen him make the run stopping plays of Troy P. I can`t wait till old slow foot is gone.It would be the worst money spent .
YoloinOhio Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 I think STL would be a great fit for Byrd. Good to great defense, Gregggg is back pulling the strings, he even went to HS in STL. I wonder whether Byrd looks at them as a "contender" though, in that division. They don't have the QB yet to say they are. They should be there but it has been a very long time since they have seen the playoffs and like the Bills in tne AFC East, they will always need a WC until Seattle and SF fall off. I think if Denver can pull it off cap-wise, they are the best fit for Byrd. They have a very small window with Manning so are going to spend to the cap and if they can unload Decker after parting ways with Bailey they might be able to do it but need to fix the OL first and foremost if they are going to win a SB. Plus it seems like a desireable place to be. He could win a SB next year. I do hope the rumors of him just testing the market and allowing the Bills to match are true, but I have a feeling he is hoping for an offer that will let him say a professional good-bye.
LB3 Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Didnt see this posted, sorry if it was. Polians take on Byrd. http://espn.go.com/blog/buffalo-bills/post/_/id/7754/bill-polians-surprising-take-on-jairus-byrd Lol. He ranked Bethea and Clemons higher than Byrd. Great talent evaluation.... easy to see why he got canned in Indy.
Reed83HOF Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 I think STL would be a great fit for Byrd. Good to great defense, Gregggg is back pulling the strings, he even went to HS in STL. I wonder whether Byrd looks at them as a "contender" though, in that division. They don't have the QB yet to say they are. They should be there but it has been a very long time since they have seen the playoffs and like the Bills in tne AFC East, they will always need a WC until Seattle and SF fall off. They also might be bolting ST Louis faster than the Bills leave Buffalo....
Kirby Jackson Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 The Bills and Parker tried looking for a trading partner since he was tagged last year. If people still need to insist there is a ready, willing, and able trading partner out there willing to give up more than the 4th the Vikings offered in order to satisfy themselves that the Bills screwed the pooch yet again, have at it. Why we insist on hoeing this old ground every other day is a mystery. Well, other than the obvious reason which is to further the point that everything the FO does is plain stupid. I'd rather people just say that than make up stuff based on nothing more than supposition. GO BILLS!!! I apologize if it came across that way. My point was that situations have changed (specifically Denver). They are in desperation mode and I highlighted the reasons that they may have made sense above. St. Louis has 2 1sts already and plays in the best division in football. They need to get as many good players as they can to close the gap. I am totally fine with not signing Byrd to a long term deal. I think that because of what we saw from Seattle and some teams situations that the value would have been higher for Byrd this year. Obviously, no one was going to tip their hand as to what they would have traded this year because they didn't have to.
Recommended Posts