johnwalter Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 would the 30/2 contract allow a gilmore signing?
John from Riverside Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 the 2 year total on this would be more than the current year plus a tag... no? ie we would be giving him both a raise and likely some guarantees to free up the tag and possibly avoid holdout next year (at least kick those 2 cans down another year). Im not sure....I was thinking it might be a 2 year extension meaning AFTER this year.
Heitz Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 would the 30/2 contract allow a gilmore signing? When Whaley was on Sirius Tuesday he mentioned they feel they have the dollars to get both Tyrod and Gilmore done this year. Let's hope...
thebandit27 Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 would the 30/2 contract allow a gilmore signing? Yes. Assuming it's equal cap hit for both years, it'll add $12M this year and $15M next year. Since Gilmore already counts for $11M against the cap, his new deal would likely lower that amount, and they'd still have around $20M left under next year's cap (assuming it continues to rise at the expected rate).
8-8 Forever? Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 (edited) team is in a tough spot.... lets see how they come out... I like it as a middle ground bridge type deal the team can live with ... lets face it, they have no one else to play the position, the league is very short on QB quality, forget about starters ( the Jets are starting freakin fitz for pete's sake) , they know they cannot walk from TT until at LEAST 2018, so might as well lock him up for 2 years (3 if you consider the tag in 2018). The cost is you have to pay starter $ starting now. even if the team sucks , TT will still be the starter next year and prob the year after that.. who else you gonna get?? another re tread and hope you get TT2 for cheap for a couple more years? crappy way to run a railroad Seems reasonable ( by NFL skyrocket salary standards) to me. They had him cheap last year and he worked out. This is just a tough call. The good news is it could be worse and EJ could be the only guy they have and they would have to pay HIM, as he is at the back end of his contract as well. What a mess THAT would be. Big time shortage of NFL starting QB talent out there. If you are any good, you get paid, bc the alternative is usually even worse. Edited August 4, 2016 by 8and8-->NoMore
John from Riverside Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 But the downside of all of this (and it was gonna be the case anyway) We HAVE to keep hitting on draft picks because we are basically using all our money to sign our own people...... No high priced free agencies.
chris heff Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 But the downside of all of this (and it was gonna be the case anyway) We HAVE to keep hitting on draft picks because we are basically using all our money to sign our own people...... No high priced free agencies. I'm good with that.
Virgil Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 If this doesn't have a team option after 2 years, this makes no sense. Is the idea to throw money at him in good faith and hope he returns the favor if earns a long term deal? If not, he's getting 3 this year and the tag is 22ish next year. So what's the point in this? If they want to do 2 years for 20 mil, I'd be better with that. The first reference to a 3 year deal with a team option for more makes the most sense to me.
Augie Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 The downside of having a real QB. Cap gets tight, but it beats the alternative! Get enough time to fully evaluate then work out something longer.
Beerball Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 If this doesn't have a team option after 2 years, this makes no sense. Is the idea to throw money at him in good faith and hope he returns the favor if earns a long term deal? If not, he's getting 3 this year and the tag is 22ish next year. So what's the point in this? If they want to do 2 years for 20 mil, I'd be better with that. The first reference to a 3 year deal with a team option for more makes the most sense to me. When does the current CBA expire? I believe that the current deal will be in place to allow Buffalo could tag him if necessary. It's a lot of cash, but, not for a good QB...hopefully Taylor proves to be one.
CommonCents Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 When does the current CBA expire? I believe that the current deal will be in place to allow Buffalo could tag him if necessary. It's a lot of cash, but, not for a good QB...hopefully Taylor proves to be one. CBA expires in 2020.
Virgil Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 When does the current CBA expire? I believe that the current deal will be in place to allow Buffalo could tag him if necessary. It's a lot of cash, but, not for a good QB...hopefully Taylor proves to be one. I still don't see the benefit here. If TT proves his worth this year, we he's going to get a deal next year and we need the franchise tag for Gilmore next year. So, the only reason to get a deal done now is to prevent needing the tag next year and not hosing ourselves ala Fitz style. Pushing the deal down two years is even worse in my opinion. If he's the guy two years down the road still, it's only going to cost us more
thebandit27 Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 I still don't see the benefit here. If TT proves his worth this year, we he's going to get a deal next year and we need the franchise tag for Gilmore next year. So, the only reason to get a deal done now is to prevent needing the tag next year and not hosing ourselves ala Fitz style. Pushing the deal down two years is even worse in my opinion. If he's the guy two years down the road still, it's only going to cost us more Yes it'll cost more, and we'll be overjoyed to pay it if he's the real deal
Augie Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 I still don't see the benefit here. If TT proves his worth this year, we he's going to get a deal next year and we need the franchise tag for Gilmore next year. So, the only reason to get a deal done now is to prevent needing the tag next year and not hosing ourselves ala Fitz style. Pushing the deal down two years is even worse in my opinion. If he's the guy two years down the road still, it's only going to cost us more I'd think the deal would get done before the second year. It just gives him a safety net.
Virgil Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 I'd think the deal would get done before the second year. It just gives him a safety net. I can dig it
DrDawkinstein Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 I still don't see the benefit here. If TT proves his worth this year, we he's going to get a deal next year and we need the franchise tag for Gilmore next year. So, the only reason to get a deal done now is to prevent needing the tag next year and not hosing ourselves ala Fitz style. Pushing the deal down two years is even worse in my opinion. If he's the guy two years down the road still, it's only going to cost us more You answered your own question. If Tyrod plays well, and we need to tag Gilmore, then it's probably 50/50 that we lose Tyrod in FA. I wouldnt play with those chances if I was a FO that has struggled to find a QB for decades.
John from Riverside Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 I still don't see the benefit here. If TT proves his worth this year, we he's going to get a deal next year and we need the franchise tag for Gilmore next year. So, the only reason to get a deal done now is to prevent needing the tag next year and not hosing ourselves ala Fitz style. Pushing the deal down two years is even worse in my opinion. If he's the guy two years down the road still, it's only going to cost us more I cant believe I am saying this as I am a total TT supporter.....but a bridge deal also protects the bills from a Fitz situation? It is not TOTALLY going to be a bills friendly thing....that is why it is a negotiation.
NoSaint Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 Im not sure....I was thinking it might be a 2 year extension meaning AFTER this year. i do not think he is committing to a 3 year 33m deal, making him essentially the lowest paid starting qb in the league (of the guys you would expect to start). possible i suppose, but not what i would expect.
Rockinon Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 I actually think 2 years 30mil is a bit low, but what do I know?
John from Riverside Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 i do not think he is committing to a 3 year 33m deal, making him essentially the lowest paid starting qb in the league (of the guys you would expect to start). possible i suppose, but not what i would expect. yeah I am asking questions more then giving answers....contracts are definately not my thing. We just cant let him get away
Recommended Posts