T master Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 Nope with all his injury history maybe a veteran minimum contract loaded with playing time incentives & production incentives ...
greengrocer13 Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 time to move on, he cant stay on the field...............he made our offense better, but
KD in CA Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 The problem is you can't count on him so you need a plan B ready to go which is very difficult with a 53 man roster. Also, you spend time designing plays for a guy who then can't get on the field and now you need to replace him with someone who never practices with the team. No thanks. That's a dumb way to operate a team. It's time to give up on the fantasy that Harvin will ever be more than a flash in the pan. And $3MM is an appreciable difference when you are pricing out FA WRs.
GunnerBill Posted December 31, 2015 Posted December 31, 2015 It's time to give up on the fantasy that Harvin will ever be more than a flash in the pan. It is long past that point for me.
26CornerBlitz Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 Bills 'still not sure what's going on' with Harvin "Percy Harvin was supposed to be a big help for us and we're still not sure what's going on," Jim Monos, the team's director of player personnel, told WGR-AM on Tuesday, per ESPN.com's Mike Rodak. "He's got to make some decisions here coming up. We need to get somebody opposite of (wideout) Sammy (Watkins) to be a real threat to that defense. I think that's a big key for our offense, to take one more step."
reddogblitz Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 No. It's time to cut bait and move on. I say release him and sign someone who can suit up in a regular basis. Same goes for Goodwin. Both of them have long checkered injury histories.
billsfan_34 Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 Rex said today Harvin wants to still play. There is no way we keep him at his contract. There is no way IMO anyone pays him a decent contract next year based on his injury history and production history and various other factors. Personally I would have no problem signing him to a smallish deal with incentives for games active, starts and production. I think he would entertain re-signing here. At 3m I still know it is a risk and less than 50% chance he plays 15-16 games but it's a risk I would take. I wouldn't want it to dissuade us from finding another #2 or #3 or #4 WR in FA or the draft though. And I totally understand why people would say no or not worth the risk. The problem is he takes up a valuable roster spot then gets injured. This guy is a great player when healthy but he just has a hard time staying on the field. IMO it is time to turn the page on him and focus on finding a WR in the draft and another in free agency.
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 I'd say we already kind of moved on with the little/boykin signings.
Maury Ballstein Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 I'd say we already kind of moved on with the little/boykin signings. Yep.
NoSaint Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 I'd say we already kind of moved on with the little/boykin signings. You might not see either make the team. These aren't first day of free agency signings they are street free agents in January to fill out a camp roster. Probably over Percy but those two hardly illustrate it
QCity Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 I wouldn't sign him for vet minimum. He takes away time and 1st team reps from someone that can actually stay on the field, then leaves the team holding the bag in October. He's gone on February 12th.
Fan in Chicago Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 Bills 'still not sure what's going on' with Harvin Just dump him. Waste of a roster spot
Rockinon Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 Harvin was not the only WR injured this year. Woods played through an injury most of the year. Woods is a good #2 and better than he is given credit for. Even hurt he put up some decent numbers this year. Our WRs as a group, even without Harvin, is pretty strong. That being said, I would still like to see Harvin come back. Question is just a matter of what kind of contract. Many seem to think we need to draft another top WR. I am not one of them. Also, this Salas kid stepped right in nicely against the Jets. I believe the WR group we have can improve a lot by simply giving them another year working with Tyrod. Hope they all get together in the off season.
Jerry Jabber Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 Nope. Given Harvin's injury history, he's too much of a risk.
Augie Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 Vet minimum (max) with serious incentives. I don't know that he wants to play, he just wants to get paid. I'd love to see him play, maybe more than he would.
Kelly the Dog Posted January 21, 2016 Author Posted January 21, 2016 I think every single one of our WR receivers was injured this year, except for the scraps. So I don't see how it is so much of a risk. You just don't pay him much. You don't count on him to be the focal point of your offense (which he wouldn't be anyway). If he plays and is healthy he's a weapon. If not, next guy up like it always is.
Augie Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 I think every single one of our WR receivers was injured this year, except for the scraps. So I don't see how it is so much of a risk. You just don't pay him much. You don't count on him to be the focal point of your offense (which he wouldn't be anyway). If he plays and is healthy he's a weapon. If not, next guy up like it always is. I pretty much agree with that. I'd lean toward something heavily incentive based. Our WR's had plenty of injuries, but he has a history. It's not the roster space as much as the cap space for me. He can play if he stays healthy and WANTS to play. Two big if's. Make him even wealthier if he earns it. Not for sitting (though $900k or whatever the vet min is is no chump change).
NoSaint Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 (edited) I think every single one of our WR receivers was injured this year, except for the scraps. So I don't see how it is so much of a risk. You just don't pay him much. You don't count on him to be the focal point of your offense (which he wouldn't be anyway). If he plays and is healthy he's a weapon. If not, next guy up like it always is.Right. In a 6 man squad- do you prefer harvin 8 games and possibly a street free agent cycling into a depth role if he gets hurt (as a bad outcome, but you could see harvin all year) or the proverbial hogan type player for 16 games (with him also being a risk of missing time) I don't know if his stock is that low yet, but if we are talking about a 1 year deal worth a fraction of 1% of our cap then it's almost the proverbial darick vs hogan debate but knowing very well what each guy involved is in the NFL Still blows my mind that Seattle traded and paid what they did for the guy but I can't deny that when on the field he's explosive Edited January 21, 2016 by NoSaint
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts