ganesh Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 i don't think it's "obvious" they need cb's -- we seemed to get by just fine with what we had last season and all of those guys are returning....... 225938[/snapback] Remember the number of times the opposing team was 3rd and long (8, 9 10+ yards) and they managed to get first downs by throwing against our CBs. We couldn't stop the 3rd and huge when it counted.....CB depth is a definite priority during this offseason.
Dr. Fong Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 If it was a straight up swap Henry for Surtain I'd jump at it. Even at the higher price tag Surtain will contribute more to the team next year than Henry would. And like Simon said it'd give us the best secondary in the NFL.
gantrules Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 Remember the number of times the opposing team was 3rd and long (8, 910+ yards) and they managed to get first downs by throwing against our CBs. We couldn't stop the 3rd and huge when it counted.....CB depth is a definite priority during this offseason. 226063[/snapback] This occured more in the first few games when Wire and Reese were in the secondary and McGee was just learning the ropes. That Oakland 3rd and a mile still ticks me off....
34-78-83 Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 In what way do you agree with d wag? He seems to be saying (or so I see it) to NOT obtain Surtain, and use the money to re-sign Clements. Is this what you are saying? 226041[/snapback] I probably should have been more clear on that... I agreed with him in the sense that Clements deserves to get paid after steadily improving his skills in his tenure here, and that we should not be afraid to pay him what he's worth ( not overpay ofcourse) because successful teams have continuity and take care of their own upper level players (besides the Pats) when the opportunity comes...
scribo Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 Why not trade for Surtain quickly (before other teams get in and beging a bidding war) and then turn around and trade him for a first round pick or a top-tier o-lineman? I think this is a real possiblity. We have someone the stinkin' fish need, and they may be willing to overpay -- in the form of Surtain. In the end, we'd come away with a firt round pick for Travis Henry. I'd love it.
FTW_BillsFan Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 Surtain is in the last year of his contract. Why trade Henry for Surtain, what will we really gain? We want to get a draft pick or someone that will be in Buffalo for years for Henry (at not too high a cost). Also, if you get Surtain, we will then have 2 DBs in FA after next year. Resign NClements, let Surtain go, get pick(s) for Henry. Draft a couple of DBs (and OL and Nugent) in the draft for future depth.
scribo Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 Surtain is in the last year of his contract. Why trade Henry for Surtain, what will we really gain? We want to get a draft pick or someone that will be in Buffalo for years for Henry (at not too high a cost). Also, if you get Surtain, we will then have 2 DBs in FA after next year. Resign NClements, let Surtain go, get pick(s) for Henry. Draft a couple of DBs (and OL and Nugent) in the draft for future depth. 226161[/snapback] Look, we go over this everytime a team is talking about trading someone. A team will not trade for another player if that player has a short amount of time left on his contract and is unwilling to do a new deal immediately. In other words, Surtain must be willing to sing a new deal right away with his new team, or he can must be prepared to stay with the Fish. This is a standard for everyone. I challege anyone to find an exception.
Alaska Darin Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 same with jennings, who could walk out the door because TD couldn't get him extended......... and i'd hate to see nate go the same route just because we're being cheap...... 226051[/snapback] It takes two to tango. You don't know that the BILLS are being cheap, just as you don't know if the player is being ridiculous. The fact is, not everyone wants to live in Upstate NY and get raped in taxes. Some guys want to test the water and maybe some of them want to play close to their extended families. Big picture.
FTW_BillsFan Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 Look, we go over this everytime a team is talking about trading someone. A team will not trade for another player if that player has a short amount of time left on his contract and is unwilling to do a new deal immediately. In other words, Surtain must be willing to sing a new deal right away with his new team, or he can must be prepared to stay with the Fish. This is a standard for everyone. I challege anyone to find an exception. 226206[/snapback] Ok, I see what you are saying, but what kind of money would Surtain want and woulld that # be reasonable with his age? I guess we could go and explore that option if he is willing to sign a 3-4 yr deal w/ the trade at a reasonable price. Although, I would think trying to keep Clements at a fair market value would one of our top priorities. Also, I would bet that Ty Law will be available in the upcoming FA. Maybe we could try and sign him...
d_wag Posted February 2, 2005 Author Posted February 2, 2005 It takes two to tango. You don't know that the BILLS are being cheap, just as you don't know if the player is being ridiculous. The fact is, not everyone wants to live in Upstate NY and get raped in taxes. Some guys want to test the water and maybe some of them want to play close to their extended families. Big picture. 226212[/snapback] that's right, other teams resign their best young players, but buffalo bills are greedy and only want to test the waters........ something doesn't add up.......i don't buy the excuses -- put the money in front of the players WELL BEFORE their free agency and watch them bite........like i said, works for the eagles no problems.......all it requires is faith in the players ability and a thick signing bonus.......
shibuya Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 Why not trade for Surtain quickly (before other teams get in and beging a bidding war) and then turn around and trade him for a first round pick or a top-tier o-lineman? I think this is a real possiblity. We have someone the stinkin' fish need, and they may be willing to overpay -- in the form of Surtain. In the end, we'd come away with a firt round pick for Travis Henry. I'd love it. 226157[/snapback] A three way deal is what I had in mind as well. Surtain is signed thru 2005, he will be a UFA next year. His base salary is 5.85 million and it is the amount the Dolphins would save on their salary cap by letting him go. He counts 8.38 mil against the Dolphins cap if he stays Any team that wants Surtain is going to want to sign him to a new contract nobody is going to want to trade for him without an extended agreement in place, same goes for Travis Henry. Givin the Dolphins Salary cap predicament, and the fact they Do not have a 2nd rd pick to trade for Travis this might be a deal worth pursuing for the Bills that gets us a little more then what we expected.
Bill from NYC Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 I probably should have been more clear on that...I agreed with him in the sense that Clements deserves to get paid after steadily improving his skills in his tenure here, and that we should not be afraid to pay him what he's worth ( not overpay ofcourse) because successful teams have continuity and take care of their own upper level players (besides the Pats) when the opportunity comes... 226071[/snapback] So you favor both extending NC AND trading for Surtain (if possible) during this offesason? Bro, I am NOT splitting hairs, but trying to see if I understand you correctly.
34-78-83 Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 So you favor both extending NC AND trading for Surtain (if possible) during this offesason? Bro, I am NOT splitting hairs, but trying to see if I understand you correctly. 226367[/snapback] Yes In order to trade for a guy with a year left on his contract, he will have to reneg a new contract with the new team. This applies to both Henry and Surtain in this hypothetical circumstance, as Henry will obviously make more than the beans he makes now and Surtain would have to take a pay cut and be extended. I may be foolish to think we could "work out" having that much salary in the seconday (depends in the market value of Surtain at 28 and Clements hopefully resigning before his contract expires), that remains to be seen. But when I think about Value, you gotta make the move with TH for PS... That's what I was getting at.
Cash2Burn Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 so in other words he wants to be paid market value? shocking! pay the man......he's earned his contract, we are in good cap shape, so what is the problem here?......other teams retain their good young talent by extending their contracts (i.e. LT, sheppard, ellis, sheldon brown).........why can't we? 226009[/snapback] Uh, if I'm not mistaken, there's a team playing this weekend that doesn't follow this line of thinking. Seems like it's worked out OK for them.
d_wag Posted February 2, 2005 Author Posted February 2, 2005 Uh, if I'm not mistaken, there's a team playing this weekend that doesn't follow this line of thinking. Seems like it's worked out OK for them. 226411[/snapback] when we start getting coaches that can plug players into any position without missing a beat, maybe i'll agree with you........until then, i'd rather keep our good young talent on board by paying them....... if i'm not mistaken, that strategy has worked for the other team playing this sunday.......
34-78-83 Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 Uh, if I'm not mistaken, there's a team playing this weekend that doesn't follow this line of thinking. Seems like it's worked out OK for them. 226411[/snapback] If I may step in, I see where you're going with this and it is a valid point, but I think think teams should be very careful when trying to use the Pats as a model. I don't think it's as cookie cutter as people think it is. They have a once in a generation coach, a group of players that consistently overachieve week in and week out and play for less than market value, and a QB with a "6th sense" for playing the game. Traditionally (actually all other cases) , great teams also have healthy portions of really good players...
Bill from NYC Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 Yes In order to trade for a guy with a year left on his contract, he will have to reneg a new contract with the new team. This applies to both Henry and Surtain in this hypothetical circumstance, as Henry will obviously make more than the beans he makes now and Surtain would have to take a pay cut and be extended. I may be foolish to think we could "work out" having that much salary in the seconday (depends in the market value of Surtain at 28 and Clements hopefully resigning before his contract expires), that remains to be seen. But when I think about Value, you gotta make the move with TH for PS... That's what I was getting at. 226391[/snapback] OK, now we can talk........ How is the following for a possible plan of action........ 1) Trade Henry for Surtain is possible. You know my feelings on TH. I could be convinced to throw in a draft pick. 2) Try to extend NC now. 3) I still want a top flight LG, and there are a few out there. If PS and NC would negotiate new deals, I view this as possible, BUT, I think it would require saying good-bye to either Pat Williams, Jennings, or both....no?
Alaska Darin Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 that's right, other teams resign their best young players, but buffalo bills are greedy and only want to test the waters........ something doesn't add up.......i don't buy the excuses -- put the money in front of the players WELL BEFORE their free agency and watch them bite........like i said, works for the eagles no problems.......all it requires is faith in the players ability and a thick signing bonus....... 226267[/snapback] Yep, you're right. No good players ever leave to go anywhere else. Takeo Spikes, London Fletcher, Sam Adams, CV, Rodney Harrison, Vonnie Holiday, Terrell Owens, Jeff Garcia, Laverneus Coles, Deon Grant, Jevon Kearse, Grant Wistrom, Rod Coleman, Shawn Springs, Duce Staley, Damian Woody, ... The Eagles didn't lose All Pros Jeremiah Trotter (since returning he's probably been their most valuable playoff performer), Hugh Douglas, and Troy Vincent. Lotsa merit to that argument. Free agency is a fact of life in the NFL. The BILLS have benefitted ALOT more from it than it has hurt them.
Rico Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 Yes In order to trade for a guy with a year left on his contract, he will have to reneg a new contract with the new team. This applies to both Henry and Surtain in this hypothetical circumstance, as Henry will obviously make more than the beans he makes now and Surtain would have to take a pay cut and be extended. 226391[/snapback] I don't like trading for someone who will have to take a pay cut... sounds like more problems than it's worth.
34-78-83 Posted February 2, 2005 Posted February 2, 2005 OK, now we can talk........ How is the following for a possible plan of action........ 1) Trade Henry for Surtain is possible. You know my feelings on TH. I could be convinced to throw in a draft pick. 2) Try to extend NC now. 3) I still want a top flight LG, and there are a few out there. If PS and NC would negotiate new deals, I view this as possible, BUT, I think it would require saying good-bye to either Pat Williams, Jennings, or both....no? 226439[/snapback] I like the plan and agree with you that it may hurt the plans to resign PW and JJ. Although if both EM AND DB restructure, technically we would have the $ for all of this (depending on the cost of the upgraded guard which I agree we need).
Recommended Posts