CommonCents Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 Are you insinuating that if they thought Raglands injury was not serious they would have signed lesser players intentionally for camp bodies? It's not like Spikes or Hawthorne cost more than veteran minimum. Two veterans is alarming, they wouldn't throw money out the window. That indicates too me that both these guys will be on the 53 if healthy. If Ragland was coming back soon we would have seen a camp body for one of those spots. We will know soon enough.
26CornerBlitz Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 Two veterans is alarming, they wouldn't throw money out the window. That indicates too me that both these guys will be on the 53 if healthy. If Ragland was coming back soon we would have seen a camp body for one of those spots. We will know soon enough. Too soon to say that with the preseason games not even starting. They have to be prepared with more than just camp bodies if Ragland is out for any significant length of time. It makes sense to be proactive by getting experienced players and if Ragland is back they can makes cuts with nothing lost in the way of cap money.
BarleyNY Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 They signed two veterans, they didn't sign camp bodies. It's good that we now have adequate replacements for RR but it's very telling about the severity of that knee. That second ILB signing really seals. One could have been something else. Two is because Ragland is out for an extended time. Maybe the delay in telling the world how severe his injury is was so that they could get guys signed. Are you insinuating that if they thought Raglands injury was not serious they would have signed lesser players intentionally for camp bodies? It's not like Spikes or Hawthorne cost more than veteran minimum. If Ragland was expected back soon they wouldn't have signed two stopgap vets who could start if needed. Maybe one. Maybe. But not two. They won't be expensive, but I'm not sure if either was given more than vet minimum or not.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 Two veterans is alarming, they wouldn't throw money out the window. That indicates too me that both these guys will be on the 53 if healthy. If Ragland was coming back soon we would have seen a camp body for one of those spots. We will know soon enough.They don't count as anything now. It's not like they got big signing bonuses. I don't know whether Ragland is out long term or not. Part of the reason you sign veterans and not camp fodder at this point is because you are still installing what is basically a new defense. Your first game is in less than a week. You don't want to hold up the installation or preparation of the other positions because you have to teach a camp body what to do every play. A guy like Spikes or Hawthorne can walk right in and play and not disrupt what you are trying to accomplish.
Chilly Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 RR is seeking a second opinion. If the first one were implying F5 then he wouldn't be seeking a second one. You're drawing a ton of conclusions from an inconclusive MRI. Rex Ryan requested it? Generally an inconclusive MRI means there was too much swelling to be able to see the injury on the MRI. It could definitely mean a tear still, and likely the Bills doctors have the best idea when they physically examined him, but drawing a conclusion that they're seeing a second MRI because they didn't like the answer on the first one is reading too much into the situation. Two veterans is alarming, they wouldn't throw money out the window. That indicates too me that both these guys will be on the 53 if healthy. If Ragland was coming back soon we would have seen a camp body for one of those spots. We will know soon enough. What money have they thrown out the window by signing these guys?
Wayne Cubed Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 They don't count as anything now. It's not like they got big signing bonuses. I don't know whether Ragland is out long term or not. Part of the reason you sign veterans and not camp fodder at this point is because you are still installing what is basically a new defense. Your first game is in less than a week. You don't want to hold up the installation or preparation of the other positions because you have to teach a camp body what to do every play. A guy like Spikes or Hawthorne can walk right in and play and not disrupt what you are trying to accomplish. Exactly. Vet minimum for camp is like $1,800 a week. UFA is $900. You aren't breaking the bank to bring these guys in. But it does mean you can carry on installing the defense and not worry about getting a young guy up to speed.
Wayne Cubed Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 Two veterans is alarming, they wouldn't throw money out the window. That indicates too me that both these guys will be on the 53 if healthy. If Ragland was coming back soon we would have seen a camp body for one of those spots. We will know soon enough. Throwing money out the window? Vet minimum for training camp is $1,800 a week. They have to actually make the roster to get the Vet minimum for the season.
CommonCents Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 If David Hawthorne isn't a camp body, who is? Hawthorne has 600 something career tackles, 12 sacks and 8 interceptions. He has been in the league 8 years and was on a team each and every year, that would seem to me he is more than a camp body. No one is happy about the Ragland injury, heck I hated the Ragland pick and went to bat against the majority of the board. He was still the best ILB we had and any amount of time he misses makes us worse overall. The contract details for Spikes and Hawthorne haven't been released but it's probably safe to assume both are close to the vet minimum. It's alarming that the front office grabbed two veterans before the "second opinion" on Ragland's knee. Anything short of starting the season on the PUP list would be a pleasant surprise at this point.
White Linen Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 Two veterans is alarming, they wouldn't throw money out the window. That indicates too me that both these guys will be on the 53 if healthy. If Ragland was coming back soon we would have seen a camp body for one of those spots. We will know soon enough. We will know soon enough but you already do, that's cool.
Wayne Cubed Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 (edited) Hawthorne has 600 something career tackles, 12 sacks and 8 interceptions. He has been in the league 8 years and was on a team each and every year, that would seem to me he is more than a camp body. No one is happy about the Ragland injury, heck I hated the Ragland pick and went to bat against the majority of the board. He was still the best ILB we had and any amount of time he misses makes us worse overall. The contract details for Spikes and Hawthorne haven't been released but it's probably safe to assume both are close to the vet minimum. It's alarming that the front office grabbed two veterans before the "second opinion" on Ragland's knee. Anything short of starting the season on the PUP list would be a pleasant surprise at this point. Again, they don't get the vet minimum for season UNTIL they make the 53 man roster AND are on the team Week 1. Which is the "bigger" money. Then it becomes fully guaranteed. Vet minimum for training camp is $1,800 a week. Edited August 7, 2016 by Wayne Cubed
CommonCents Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 Again, they don't get the vet minimum for season UNTIL they make the 53 man roster AND are on the team Week 1. Which is the "bigger" money. Then it becomes fully guaranteed. Vet minimum for training camp is $1,800 a week. Your making my point for me...why would two agents agree to sign with Buffalo if they knew the spots would be limited? So their client could make 1800 bucks for a few weeks? Or because they have knowledge that this is a good landing spot to get onto a 53? Do you really think Ragland is all fine and dandy and going to be on the field September 11?
The Wiz Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 Your making my point for me...why would two agents agree to sign with Buffalo if they knew the spots would be limited? So their client could make 1800 bucks for a few weeks? Or because they have knowledge that this is a good landing spot to get onto a 53? Do you really think Ragland is all fine and dandy and going to be on the field September 11?It could be that or it could be they signed because they don't know if he's coming back or not and are trying to get on a roster. Either is plausible.
chris heff Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 Hawthorne has 600 something career tackles, 12 sacks and 8 interceptions. He has been in the league 8 years and was on a team each and every year, that would seem to me he is more than a camp body. No one is happy about the Ragland injury, heck I hated the Ragland pick and went to bat against the majority of the board. He was still the best ILB we had and any amount of time he misses makes us worse overall. The contract details for Spikes and Hawthorne haven't been released but it's probably safe to assume both are close to the vet minimum. It's alarming that the front office grabbed two veterans before the "second opinion" on Ragland's knee. Anything short of starting the season on the PUP list would be a pleasant surprise at this point. So what's the definitive camp body? A guy that has never played? Guys like both Spikes and Hawthorne know that their only shot at this late date is catching on with a team that has injuries. Do you think they have some additional insight into Ragland's injury? Or is this just the prudent thing to do? They still need to have LBs in camp and for preseason games.
CommonCents Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 So what's the definitive camp body? A guy that has never played? Guys like both Spikes and Hawthorne know that their only shot at this late date is catching on with a team that has injuries. Do you think they have some additional insight into Ragland's injury? Or is this just the prudent thing to do? They still need to have LBs in camp and for preseason games. I'm sure the team was forth coming on the severity of Ragland's injury while negotiating with the agents. Sure they are getting a second opinion tomorrow but in the interest of signing the best available talent your going to tell them what you know and what they want to hear. The agents and players aren't interested in filling in for a few weeks and making peanuts on the dollar while potentially missing a better situation to make a roster. Two veterans and their agents decided to sign on the same day, you guys are all smart enough to connect the dots I'm done with this one.
YoloinOhio Posted August 7, 2016 Author Posted August 7, 2016 I'm sure the team was forth coming on the severity of Ragland's injury while negotiating with the agents. Sure they are getting a second opinion tomorrow but in the interest of signing the best available talent your going to tell them what you know and what they want to hear. The agents and players aren't interested in filling in for a few weeks and making peanuts on the dollar while potentially missing a better situation to make a roster. Two veterans and their agents decided to sign on the same day, you guys are all smart enough to connect the dots I'm done with this one. i see your point, and I do think Reggie's injury situation is looking ominous. However, the only guys available right now are veterans. It's pre first roster cut down and the only UDFAs (ie camp bodies) that have been cut and therefore available to sign are those that have been waived/injured.
Wayne Cubed Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 Your making my point for me...why would two agents agree to sign with Buffalo if they knew the spots would be limited? So their client could make 1800 bucks for a few weeks? Or because they have knowledge that this is a good landing spot to get onto a 53? Do you really think Ragland is all fine and dandy and going to be on the field September 11? Because they want a chance to play. You are talking about Spikes, who hasn't played a down since 2014. I'm sure he's willing to take any chance he can get. And yes, one of them may make the roster but to assume at this point is a bit premature. The Bills had other injuries at LB depth. This isn't just about Ragland. And now the Bills are telling agents the severity of another players injury? Really? Why hasn't it been leaked then yet? Agents certainly aren't quiet.
John from Riverside Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 Guys In what way does signing two former starters (make that 3 former starters with Zach Brown) "weaken" the team Yes....Ragland may end up being a NFL stud but what has essentially happened is they have created some pretty darn good depth at the position.
The Wiz Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 So are we less or more concerned with Reggie since they released riddick?
YoloinOhio Posted August 7, 2016 Author Posted August 7, 2016 So are we less or more concerned with Reggie since they released riddick?i don't know if it means anything more than they needed a roster spot to sign a healthy LB, and he's a PS quality LB who is out for at least the remainder of camp with an MCL sprain.
Recommended Posts