Deranged Rhino Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 These statements show a total lack of understanding of cap fundamentals. Correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 No. That would be your incorrect responses to my posts that have already been called out by Spotrac, OverTheCap and other websites that deal with the NFL cap regarding the amount of dead money and what it means in regards to the Clay restructure. Do you even know what dead money is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Do you even know what dead money is? We know you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonCents Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Not really. That is an example of egregious cap management that gives the Bills no future flexibility in regards to Clay. That is the whole point on why the restructure is a bad thing. It is a prime example of sunk cost. If this was anything but the NFL you would have a better arguement. Contracts get ripped up more than Rhianna's you know what. They signed Clay with the intention of making him a vital part of this offense. None of that has changed, why should they plan on leaving an escape clause ? They essentially double down on their signing, what does that mean? They are confident in said player. I'm not a Whaley supporter, the sum of his additions looks like a scrambled mess but this deal being restructured was Common Sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8-8 Forever? Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Really makes you wonder why he was a top 100 player just the year before last? bc the freakin guy can play... you'll see this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 (edited) If this was anything but the NFL you would have a better arguement. Contracts get ripped up more than Rhianna's you know what. They signed Clay with the intention of making him a vital part of this offense. None of that has changed, why should they plan on leaving an escape clause ? They essentially double down on their signing, what does that mean? They are confident in said player. I'm not a Whaley supporter, the sum of his additions looks like a scrambled mess but this deal being restructured was Common Sense. We will see how it plays out. Keep in mind I received similar responses from the same individuals when I told them prior to the season that the Bills were going to be 8-8 this year. I try to be rational and not let the fanboy set in. Edited February 27, 2016 by BuffaloBillsForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonCents Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 (edited) We will see how it plays out. Keep in mind I received similar responses from the same individuals when I told them prior to the season that the Bills were going to be 8-8 this year. I try to be rational and not let the fanboy set in. I'm as far as fanboy as it gets but for them to differ money to relieve a stressed cap is not a surprise. Now they are committed for 3 years to a player whom they went out of their way to get less than a year ago. This restructure is not going to be the death of Whaley, he has many things going against him but this isn't the one. Edited February 27, 2016 by Commonsense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 We will see how it plays out. Keep in mind I received similar responses from the same individuals when I told them prior to the season that the Bills were going to be 8-8 this year. I try to be rational and not let the fanboy set in. That has nothing to do with this. At all. If Clay gets hurt and never plays a down again, we still can't cut him. So who cares? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 (edited) I'm as far as fanboy as it gets but for them to differ money to relieve a stressed cap is not a surprise. Now they are committed for 3 years to a player whom they went out of their way to get less than a year ago. This restructure is not going to be the death of Whaley, he has many things going against him but this isn't the one. I agree that in isolation that will not be the death of Whaley but it is the theme in which he has been operating since the death of Ralph Wilson which has been to mortgage the future for in his words "to make the playoffs" which ultimately will be his demise IMO. Edited February 27, 2016 by BuffaloBillsForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 We will see how it plays out. Keep in mind I received similar responses from the same individuals when I told them prior to the season that the Bills were going to be 8-8 this year. I try to be rational and not let the fanboy set in. The term "shameless self-promotion" comes to mind. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonCents Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 I agree that in isolation that will not be the death of Whaley but it is the theme in which he has been operating since the death Ralph Wilson which has been to mortgage the future for in his words "to make the playoffs" which ultimately be his demise. Self preservation only exists when someone else allows it.... It won't last long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Hello! @AroundTheNFL Jaguars GM: 'The nature of free agency is -- you're going to overpay' http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000638873/article/is-cap-space-a-good-thing-anymore-gms-weigh-in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 I agree that in isolation that will not be the death of Whaley but it is the theme in which he has been operating since the death of Ralph Wilson which has been to mortgage the future for in his words "to make the playoffs" which ultimately will be his demise IMO. This is just an odd statement, as are many of your posts in this thread. I'm continuously amazed by the hardline positions some posters take on issues that are anything but clear cut. Even more perplexing are the positions that go completely contrary to moves that are almost universally accepted as solid (such as the Clay restructure). Do you forget that the Bills wanted Clay for this offense in the worst way? Tying themselves to him for another couple of years (while freeing up $$ now) is bad why? Oh yeah -- because he might suffer a career ending injury. That's a good way to run a team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted February 27, 2016 Author Share Posted February 27, 2016 This is just an odd statement, as are many of your posts in this thread. I'm continuously amazed by the hardline positions some posters take on issues that are anything but clear cut. Even more perplexing are the positions that go completely contrary to moves that are almost universally accepted as solid (such as the Clay restructure). Do you forget that the Bills wanted Clay for this offense in the worst way? Tying themselves to him for another couple of years (while freeing up $$ now) is bad why? Oh yeah -- because he might suffer a career ending injury. That's a good way to run a team. don't you know that every move made by an NFL FO should be done with the proper amount of predictive doom and fear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 This is just an odd statement, as are many of your posts in this thread. I'm continuously amazed by the hardline positions some posters take on issues that are anything but clear cut. Even more perplexing are the positions that go completely contrary to moves that are almost universally accepted as solid (such as the Clay restructure). Do you forget that the Bills wanted Clay for this offense in the worst way? Tying themselves to him for another couple of years (while freeing up $$ now) is bad why? Oh yeah -- because he might suffer a career ending injury. That's a good way to run a team. Yet if we went out and signed a free agent this year to a deal that was unlikely to be terminated after 2 years it's hardly noteworthy. A guy in our system, with our doctors though is crazy to commit to for 3 of the next 4 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 In two years the cap might be $160m. In three years it could be $175m. Color me worried we won't be able to sign a new FA punter in four years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manther Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 It's because I care about winning championships and building a team that is a sustainable winner instead of a team that finally gets to the playoffs. I disagree. I feel like you like to argue and complain. I feel this way because how can you be 100% sure Whaley and company are wrong? Why are you 100% right? Otherwise you would be a GM in the NFL. This isn't Maddon. IMO you are more passionate about the cap and arguing than the Bills. And, surely don't enjoy healthy conversations with Bills fans. Please stop ruining the threads you aren't even slightly amusing, open minded, have any common sense and are just bitter!! Don't be bitter, be better!! We know you don't. Who is we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 For all those who are upset about Clay's overall numbers, understand that his usage rate was highest in our passing game in games he played. That says he's pretty damned important, to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 I disagree. I feel like you like to argue and complain. I feel this way because how can you be 100% sure Whaley and company are wrong? Why are you 100% right? Otherwise you would be a GM in the NFL. This isn't Maddon. IMO you are more passionate about the cap and arguing than the Bills. And, surely don't enjoy healthy conversations with Bills fans. Please stop ruining the threads you aren't even slightly amusing, open minded, have any common sense and are just bitter!! Don't be bitter, be better!! Who is we? That was my question.....who is we? Does this guy have a mouse in his pocket? For all those who are upset about Clay's overall numbers, understand that his usage rate was highest in our passing game in games he played. That says he's pretty damned important, to me. Another important factor People make the arguement that QBs should get paid so much because they touch the ball so many times in a game Well Clay is a primary cog in our offense on nearly EVERY play be it run or pass....he is that intregal to our offense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted March 2, 2016 Author Share Posted March 2, 2016 @mikerodak Charles Clay's new deal has been entered into system. Bills converted full amt ($10M) of roster bonus into signing bonus. No other changes. With Charles Clay's cap number reduced from $13.5M to $6M, Bills now have $9.072M in Top 51 2016 cap space, per @ESPNStatsInfo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts