Bubba Gump Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Thompson was arrested Friday, February 21, 2014, and charge with possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia, according to the Gainesville, Florida police department.[9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deonte_Thompson I hope they give him a locker as far away from Dareus as they can. Don't need them two getting too close.
RuntheDamnBall Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Averages 8TD's a season. Does nothing in a putrid Buffalo offense. I'm going go go with not the player on this one. Saint Doug is earning his nickname around here, though. I guess riding two strong DCs for two years earns you some leeway even when you can't score your way out of a paper bag.
YoloinOhio Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 He has to agree to it but yes. If he is owed the 5.2m guaranteed for next year, he will likely say no to anything that is not over, say, 2-3m. Why would he? He knows the Bills will eventually cave. They are not going to pay him 5.2 not to play. @ChrisTrapasso: Got some clarification on Mike Williams' future contract situation with #Bills from @Jason_OTC @ChrisTrapasso: "If claimed, team that takes him will assume all responsibilities. If healthy next year #Bills can cut him without consequences." @ChrisTrapasso: So Mike Williams *will not* represent $5.2M in dead money in 2015 for the #Bills if he's not on the team.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 @ChrisTrapasso: Got some clarification on Mike Williams' future contract situation with #Bills from @Jason_OTC @ChrisTrapasso: "If claimed, team that takes him will assume all responsibilities. If healthy next year #Bills can cut him without consequences." @ChrisTrapasso: So Mike Williams *will not* represent $5.2M in dead money in 2015 for the #Bills if he's not on the team. How good is OverTheCap? I assume they know but again, some people have claimed and shown otherwise. I will, however, at least believe that the 5.2 is not guaranteed until proven otherwise.
seq004 Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Gay was really bad yesterday and why not have Carpenter do the on side kick???
YoloinOhio Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 How good is OverTheCap? I assume they know but again, some people have claimed and shown otherwise. I will, however, at least believe that the 5.2 is not guaranteed until proven otherwise. it is only guaranteed if he is on the roster after a certain date in March or whenever the new league year starts.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 it is only guaranteed if he is on the roster after a certain date in March or whenever the new league year starts. Oh, I know that is the distinction that several places (the majority) are making. A few have said it's guaranteed no matter what.
YoloinOhio Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Oh, I know that is the distinction that several places (the majority) are making. A few have said it's guaranteed no matter what. hmmm, have never seen that
Kelly the Dog Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 (edited) hmmm, have never seen that A few different places state it. But there is also conflicting information on how much of his contract is guaranteed. Wawrow, today, said the 5.2m is guaranteed. http://sports.yahoo....43809--nfl.html This from Rodak, says it doesn't matter, the Bills still owe it (from an article when the trade was made) http://espn.go.com/b...lliams-contract Sportrac calls his 2015 base salary "fully guaranteed." I'm not sure cutting him before the third day eliminates that although it may. If it does, that's a terrible term for the contract. And they say the roster bonus is the third day item. http://www.spotrac.c.../mike-williams/ Edited December 9, 2014 by Kelly the Dog
Bubba Gump Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Gay was really bad yesterday and why not have Carpenter do the on side kick??? Umm...I think you might be looking for a different thread? Lol.
Mango Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 I hope Oakland or NE signs him and he goes off against the Bills for like three TDs (I know, highly unlikely). That would be the death nail for Marrone. Something that just occurred to me. For those hoping for a Marrone or Hackett fire, you would think that Whaley would keep MW and see what a new OC or HC does with him. He didn't. So it presents a few questions. 1. Who is controlling the roster, Whaley or Marrone? 2. If you are even THINKING about replacing somebody in the offensive side of the ball why not keep him?
papazoid Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Breaking down Mike Williams' contract http://espn.go.com/blog/buffalo-bills/post/_/id/8700/breaking-down-mike-williams-contract $5.2 in Dead Money....that's on whaley.....not good.
Kelly the Dog Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Something that just occurred to me. For those hoping for a Marrone or Hackett fire, you would think that Whaley would keep MW and see what a new OC or HC does with him. He didn't. So it presents a few questions. 1. Who is controlling the roster, Whaley or Marrone? 2. If you are even THINKING about replacing somebody in the offensive side of the ball why not keep him? It depends on his contract. If we do owe him 5.2m next year you hope someone takes him, although the chances are extremely slim. Breaking down Mike Williams' contract http://espn.go.com/b...lliams-contract $5.2 in Dead Money....that's on whaley.....not good. Or Marrone for not playing him. We have yet to find out if that money is going to be owed or not. Plus, we can negotiate with him and pay him perhaps half of it.
Agent 91 Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 You should be seeing how you have no clue what you're talking about. What difference does it make. As I said before... let someone tell us who is better than Mike Williams 6 TDs a year. What does Sammy have? What about Robert Woods. Anyone who says they wouldnt like Mike Williams productivity as a number 2 option is nuts. It depends on his contract. If we do owe him 5.2m next year you hope someone takes him, although the chances are extremely slim. Or Marrone for not playing him. We have yet to find out if that money is going to be owed or not. Plus, we can negotiate with him and pay him perhaps half of it. I thought that if we cut him before next year we owed him nothing. What happened to that. Was that misinformation
Kelly the Dog Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 I thought that if we cut him before next year we owed him nothing. What happened to that. Was that misinformation Some usually reliable sources say we don't owe it, some usually reliable sources say we do owe it.
YoloinOhio Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 (edited) Breaking down Mike Williams' contract http://espn.go.com/blog/buffalo-bills/post/_/id/8700/breaking-down-mike-williams-contract $5.2 in Dead Money....that's on whaley.....not good. again, I don't think that is true. It had always been communicated that if they cut him before the league year starts, they do not owe him the money.its only guaranteed if he is on the roster after that. Edited December 9, 2014 by YoloinOhio
Kelly the Dog Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 again, I don't think that is true. It had always been communicated that if they cut him before the league year starts, they do not owe him the money. It hasn't always been communicated that way. The day of the trade, which was that article said it wasn't. Several articles at that time said we owed him two years. Jw today reported we do. http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ap-source-bills-reach-deal-waive-mike-williams-204643809--nfl.html It's not known to us yet, IMO, it could be either way.
YoloinOhio Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Something that just occurred to me. For those hoping for a Marrone or Hackett fire, you would think that Whaley would keep MW and see what a new OC or HC does with him. He didn't. So it presents a few questions. 1. Who is controlling the roster, Whaley or Marrone? 2. If you are even THINKING about replacing somebody in the offensive side of the ball why not keep him? the GM controls the roster with input from the coaching staff. Or at least that's how it usually works.
K-9 Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 Something that just occurred to me. For those hoping for a Marrone or Hackett fire, you would think that Whaley would keep MW and see what a new OC or HC does with him. He didn't. So it presents a few questions. 1. Who is controlling the roster, Whaley or Marrone? 2. If you are even THINKING about replacing somebody in the offensive side of the ball why not keep him? Whaley brings in the talent. Marrone decides to use it or not, cut them or not. There is no mandate to use anyone on the roster. GO BILLS!!!
HalftimeAdjustment Posted December 9, 2014 Posted December 9, 2014 This thread is great. A few thoughts: first, we never should have benched Doug Flutie and this is more proof of the curse. Second, I wonder if Baltimore fans felt the same way about Lee Evans not making any catches with them. Now you might be saying to yourself, both of those thoughts are pretty stupid and didn't really add anything. My response is, if you read the preceding posts, I think this is the perfect place to add random, seni-coherent ramblings to dilute the thread.
Recommended Posts