bigdogtim Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 ThAt would be awesome. Especially if he outlasts the afternoon gr55 clowns. Karma is funny that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsxfirefighter Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 Not sure of the cap situation but are you comparing 2 EJ years to one Cassel year? If you keep Cassel over EJ, unless the bills cut him off decide not to resign him at the end of the year, he won't be playing for free next year. In my uneducated opinion it makes sense to pay EJ for two years because I think he is a very decent backup QB vs 2 years of a Cassel contract or a year of Cassel and a 2nd year of some other QB. I'm sure the Bills could use the money elsewhere. You saw the same thing I did as I was writing it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickelCity Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 I really don't think Cassel makes it on to the team. That savings is not trivial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsxfirefighter Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 Does EJ have a 5th year option? Like RG3 did? Just curious as that may play into whether we keep, or make him more viable in a trade. I don't know so asking the question here. I do believe that the 5th year options are available to all 1st round players at the Teams discretion. Its like a mini-franchise tag. They have to declare it before the 4th year starts. Like they did with Marcell (last year) and now Gilmore (this year). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luxy312 Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 $4.15m versus $1.20m is the comparison and $2.95m is not chump change as the OP would allude. The Bills are trying right now to free up enough cap space to get the deal done with Dareus. Notwithstanding the notion of cutting EJ, the Bills save $4.15m of this years cap by getting rid of Cassel, if they so choose. Nobody could convince me that that's NOT a decent chunk of money for what amounts to a 3rd string quarterback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted September 2, 2015 Author Share Posted September 2, 2015 Not to rain on your parade. Your numbers may be right for savings, but your logic is flawed. Yes, Cutting EJ will save 2.8 million over 2 years. Cutting Cassel will save 4.15 million for 2015 and additionally 4.15 will be available for 2016 as it is not tied to anything So: If you cut EJ and keep Cassel this year and next year at ~3 Mil; its a savings of 3.95 Million over 2 years. If you cut EJ, and keep Cassel just for this year, its a savings of 6.95 Million over 2 years (Minus whatever you have to pay a backup QB...~1-3 MIL) So say savings of 4.95 Mil (assuming 2 Mil for the year for backup QB) If you cut Cassel, but keep EJ, its a savings of 8.3 Million over 2 years Cutting Cassel is a 3+ Million better option from my point of view. That's fair. But you have to look at 2016 differently. If Simms progresses and TT does well. then maybe that's the 2016 option with a drafted rookie to PS. Same costs, and now you also freed up the 2016 money to re-sign TT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsxfirefighter Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 (edited) That's fair. But you have to look at 2016 differently. If Simms progresses and TT does well. then maybe that's the 2016 option with a drafted rookie to PS. Same costs, and now you also freed up the 2016 money to re-sign TT. With that logic, wouldnt it make more sense to: keep EJ for this year and cut Cassel (cap savings of 4.15m for 2015). then draft said rookie in 2016 and cut EJ. So only his 1.X million cap hit from that year hits us. So we have the savings from his contract plus the 4 mil freed from Cassel. (~ 5+ Mil Cap savings) But resigning TT is assuming he figures out how to throw a TD in a game setting. Edited September 2, 2015 by rsxfirefighter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted September 2, 2015 Author Share Posted September 2, 2015 With that logic, wouldnt it make more sense to: keep EJ for this year and cut Cassel (cap savings of 4.15m for 2015). then draft said rookie in 2016 and cut EJ. So only his 1.X million cap hit from that year hits us. So we have the savings from his contract plus the 4 mil freed from Cassel. (~ 5+ Mil Cap savings) I don't know. My point was though that the cost difference is minimal and 1.35 million will not save Dareus. It also is meant to imply that either could be on the cut/trade block and the Bills have options. Personally, I am not sold on either of the guys and wouldn't be shocked to see both gone and another QB brought in to back up Taylor. Someone who has similar style/ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fridge Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 That's fair. But you have to look at 2016 differently. If Simms progresses and TT does well. then maybe that's the 2016 option with a drafted rookie to PS. Same costs, and now you also freed up the 2016 money to re-sign TT. Pretty sure teams don't draft players to intentionally place them on PS. If you would rather have Simms than EJ on your roster in an attempt to save what you yourself believe to be a small amount then I really have nothing to say to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsxfirefighter Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 I don't know. My point was though that the cost difference is minimal and 1.35 million will not save Dareus. It also is meant to imply that either could be on the cut/trade block and the Bills have options. Personally, I am not sold on either of the guys and wouldn't be shocked to see both gone and another QB brought in to back up Taylor. Someone who has similar style/ability. i agree 1.35 wont save Dareus, however the additional 4.15 this year and next is a good chunk of what will be needed to help save him compared to the ~1.4 Mil each year savings from EJ would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 Keep all 3 QB's. Tyrod and EJ are a solid pair, and keeping Cassell in case of injury and to give both young players a vet to lean on seems like a good idea. No need to make a cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 (edited) I don't know. My point was though that the cost difference is minimal and 1.35 million will not save Dareus. It also is meant to imply that either could be on the cut/trade block and the Bills have options. Personally, I am not sold on either of the guys and wouldn't be shocked to see both gone and another QB brought in to back up Taylor. Someone who has similar style/ability. Wut ? This is too funny. You want Dennis Dixon and Joe Webb ? Edited September 2, 2015 by Ryan L Billz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 Amateur capologist work. Lets leave it to the pros! The fact that the team is seriously considering cutting Cassel means they feel the savings is worth it. The logic seems flawed as others have pointed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 IN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 I don't know. My point was though that the cost difference is minimal and 1.35 million will not save Dareus. It also is meant to imply that either could be on the cut/trade block and the Bills have options. Personally, I am not sold on either of the guys and wouldn't be shocked to see both gone and another QB brought in to back up Taylor. Someone who has similar style/ability. The cost difference would be well in excess of the $1.35M you stated because there would have to be another player on the roster in 2016 to take Cassel's spot as backup QB. That player would be paid backup QB money, which is not insubstantial - likely an additional $3M-$5M. Or a draft pick would have to be used, which is also a cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art in PNS Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 Just to make sure things are clear and accurate. Cassel already earned a 500K bonus. That's his, it counts against the cap. If we cut/trade him he would count as a 4.15 million dollar savings. EJ Manual if traded would save 1.2 million this year and 1.6 next year. That's a savings of 2.8 million. On top of that is EJ is cut and then signed by another team, EJ doesn't double dip. Any contract from another team would reduce the Bills outlay and also their cap hit. So the difference is only 1.35 million and wouldn't be a deciding factor. The rumor is the front office want to keep EJ, the coaches want Cassel. Just like Whaley wanted Ej to start, and Pegs wanted Fred to stay, I think in the end the coaches probably win the battle. EJ showed a lot in pre-season and got a lot better. Still has to show more consistency and ability to run the offense for a full 60 minutes. This makes no sense. Both are on the roster now and both are accounted for under the cap. If you cut Cassel the bills save 4.15 MM this year, he has no exposure for next year . It does not matter what they do with EJ.If they cut EJ then yes you have to account for this year and next under this years cap, but they wont cut both . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBills Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 Logic is wrong here. This is all about 2016 salary cap implcations. Keep both = 7.15 mil cap number this year; 2.8 cap number in 2016(EJ) 2016 cap effect: -4.75 mil(cassel contract coming off books; EJ under contract for 2016) Keep Cassel; cut EJ: 7.15 mil cap number(includes ~2.4 mil EJ dead money) this year; 2.8 cap number in 2016(EJ dead money) 2016 cap effect: -4.75 mil(cassel gone; ej dead money) Keep EJ; cut Cassel: 3 mil cap number this year( includes 600k Cassel dead money); 2.8 cap number in 2016(EJ) 2016 cap effect: -4.75 mil(cassel gone; EJ still here); reduces 2015 cap number by 4.15 mil which will rollover into 2016 Net 2016 cap effect: -8.9 mil That extra 4 mil is a starting G or resigning Bradham or half of resigning Glenn. This is year one for this coaching staff. They are not sacrificing mid 20s homegrown talent for a year of Cassel insurance(or Fred Jackson for that matter). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 Logic is wrong here. This is all about 2016 salary cap implcations. Keep both = 7.15 mil cap number this year; 2.8 cap number in 2016(EJ) 2016 cap effect: -4.75 mil(cassel contract coming off books; EJ under contract for 2016) Keep Cassel; cut EJ: 7.15 mil cap number(includes ~2.4 mil EJ dead money) this year; 2.8 cap number in 2016(EJ dead money) 2016 cap effect: -4.75 mil(cassel gone; ej dead money) Keep EJ; cut Cassel: 3 mil cap number this year( includes 600k Cassel dead money); 2.8 cap number in 2016(EJ) 2016 cap effect: -4.75 mil(cassel gone; EJ still here); reduces 2015 cap number by 4.15 mil which will rollover into 2016 Net 2016 cap effect: -8.9 mil That extra 4 mil is a starting G or resigning Bradham or half of resigning Glenn. This is year one for this coaching staff. They are not sacrificing mid 20s homegrown talent for a year of Cassel insurance(or Fred Jackson for that matter). ' Why would keeping Cassell and letting him expire be a negative cap gain for 2016? I guess the question I am asking is, would cutting Cassell this year be beneficial towards the cap next year? If so why? Wouldn't just keeping him and letting him expire have the same effect on the 2016 cap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooklynBills Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 (edited) ' Why would keeping Cassell and letting him expire be a negative cap gain for 2016? I guess the question I am asking is, would cutting Cassell this year be beneficial towards the cap next year? If so why? Wouldn't just keeping him and letting him expire have the same effect on the 2016 cap? By releasing him now, the Bills save 4 mil on this year's cap. Any cap savings will rollover into next years cap, increasing the total money the Bills are allowed to spend. Cutting him now rather than letting his contract play out essentially allows the Bills to spend $4 million more on players next season. This is essentially why Jackson was released as well and why a player like Manny Lawson could be on the bubble. The more the Bills save this year against the cap, the more they can spend next year. With so many guys needing extensions, the Bills need all the cap they can get for next season. This really was never an issue when the Bills were owned by Wilson. Actual cash spending was more important than what we were spending against the salary cap. With an influx of cash due to Pegula owning the team, we should expect the Bills to trying to "game" the cap in any way they can. Edit: Also, the negative numbers represent how much more money we can spend in 2016 Edited September 2, 2015 by BrooklynBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 Bye-bye Cassel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts