NoSaint Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 If you are keeping him you are guaranteeing him $31M. He has said that he isn't taking a pay cut. You may resturcture but that doesn't lessen the money. It moves the year that it hits the cap. The guys that throw and catch both get yards and TDs. That's a bad example. The team accounts for the entire game. A guy that throws the ball accounts for the passing yards. A guy that runs the ball accounts for the running yards. A guy that sacks the QB gets credit for sacks. The sum of all plays by all players leads to wins and losses. Here's my question-- if the cash out stays the same, and guarantees stay the same, what's the incentive for the bills to restructure money earlier? They could just carry over unused cap to protect for the potential dead money You only lose flexibility in how you portray it so far
Hyphe23 Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Franchise QB money, bridge QB product 20th highest salary cap number amongst QBs is definitely not franchise money. The $30 million is misrepresented because it's cash with how it was structured and it's not all this year. Cap number is what matters.
BuffaloRebound Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Guaranteed money is much more important than cap if we're talking about drafting a QB in the first 2 rounds this year or next year, which seems like the only thing everyone can agree on.
Andrew Son Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Guaranteed money is much more important than cap if we're talking about drafting a QB in the first 2 rounds this year or next year, which seems like the only thing everyone can agree on.Only if you are then going to cut him
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 20th highest salary cap number amongst QBs is definitely not franchise money. The $30 million is misrepresented because it's cash with how it was structured and it's not all this year. Cap number is what matters.Cap hit matters and also how much does it cost to get out of it? I see you though thank you for the correction.
Hyphe23 Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Guaranteed money is much more important than cap if we're talking about drafting a QB in the first 2 rounds this year or next year, which seems like the only thing everyone can agree on. Next year his contract will be very movable so long as he keeps producing like he has the past 2 years should we decide to do that. In the meantime he's not killing our cap situation and you are getting better production than you can count on from any of the rookies this year.
FireChan Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 sucked his way right into the pro bowl and espns free agent aquisition of the year 2 awards that are highly coveted by all. Lol. Can you give us parameters for what determines if a QB 'sucks' or not? I'd say being at 22nd or lower in any stat means you suck at that stat.
K-9 Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Franchise QB money, bridge QB product More like average starting QB money, which is exactly what his deal represents.
TPS Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 1-6 vs .500 teams with win coming vs 3rd stringer Jacoby Brissett is probably a good measure of suckitude. Of the teams better than .500 (all but Balt), the offense averaged 25 ppg, which would rank 10th; the defense gave up 33 ppg, which would rank them last. It must be Taylor...
Maury Ballstein Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 (edited) Of the teams better than .500 (all but Balt), the offense averaged 25 ppg, which would rank 10th; the defense gave up 33 ppg, which would rank them last. It must be Taylor...Very impressed with his Oakland, Miami 1 and Pitt performances huh ? Garbagetime vs Pitt after 70 yards passing in 3 qtrs is where pro bowlers are made! TD and two point conversion when Miami game was over was solid too! Stoned by raiders cellar dwelling defense = great success! This is a layup line. Edited February 22, 2017 by Ryan L Billz
John from Riverside Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 2 awards that are highly coveted by all. Lol. I'd say being at 22nd or lower in any stat means you suck at that stat. Go ahead dismiss anything positive...makes you look foolish
John from Riverside Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Of the teams better than .500 (all but Balt), the offense averaged 25 ppg, which would rank 10th; the defense gave up 33 ppg, which would rank them last. It must be Taylor... Dont you know....wins and losses are not a team stat they are soley a qb stat Mid level qbs are supposed to overcome anything thrown at them like top 5 guys
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 You know it's funny. I started to read your response, got to the point I posted below and was thinking you were going to say next was that his outcome is better than average. But you went the other way. Everyone brings up his passing stats at being average at best which I don't disagree with. While that is true, I don't think it's purely coincidence that the Bills were one of the top rushing teams and top scoring teams and has nothing whatsoever to do with TT. He does bring certain intangibles to the position that can't be statistically measured but all the TT haters completely ignore that part. I'm not a TT lover or hater, just looking at it from the standpoint, they have a much better chance at getting worse without him than better. They can still draft a QB, just not a #10 and stick with TT I think there's a distinction to be drawn here: Taylor is STATISTICALLY an average QB (I'd argue a bit below average but whatever). Thing is, to my eyes his brand of play does not translate into the outcomes I would expect an average NFL quarterback
FireChan Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Go ahead dismiss anything positive...makes you look foolish John why does he suck at YAC?
Kirby Jackson Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Here's my question-- if the cash out stays the same, and guarantees stay the same, what's the incentive for the bills to restructure money earlier? They could just carry over unused cap to protect for the potential dead money You only lose flexibility in how you portray it so far They'd have to carry quite a bit over the next 2 years to get out of the current deal. They'd need to roll $15M (ish) to year 2 or $9M or so into year 3. In my scenario you'd have about $22M cap in year 1 (as opposed to $15.7M or whatever it is). You could keep it at $15.7M and roll the $6.3M that you saved forward to cover the dead cap hit. Now if he is cut in year 2 it would be $15M (ish). In my scenario you'd have a $10M hit in year 2 and nothing after. The only difference (if I am doing this right) is that if you spend $15.7m and roll $6.3m forward you are tying up the same $22m in cap space. In your scenario that $6.3M would offset the $15m (ish cap space in year 2). Your dead hit would essentially be $8.7M vs. $10m in my scenario. In my scenario though you would have that $6.3M to spend in year 2. Again, this assumes that my mind is still working (have had a few glasses of wine).
purple haze Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 I'd rather they wait till 2018 draft where the QB pool is reported to be a better one....they did the same thing when drafting some other QB's like EJ...EJ was drafted in a year that the QB pool was reported as weak..the next year both Teddy Bridgewater and Derek Carr could have been had in the 1st and Jimmy Garoppolo we could have taken in the 2nd...the Bills did the same thing in an earlier draft, cant remember if it was the Losman or Edwards draft, but they took a QB then the next draft better QB options where there...most teams don't draft a QB in round 1 then turn around and grab another the next year... You don't wait. If there's a guy they like they should take him. If there is a guy they like next year, take him too. You wait until 2018 you might have waited on nothing. Players get injured or don't play as well. we could start a rookie QB and have a better shot at the top pick, is that what you want? How about we improve the defense/ST and try to make the playoffs? Yeah, I don't get the tank crowd. Too many good pieces on the roster for that. Tanking worked out real well for the Sabres... I don't mind the idea of tanking if they're as sure as they can be about a guy in 2018. They are at a crossroads no doubt, but single "down year" to shed some dead cap weight and reload isn't necessarily a bad idea. How could they be sure about any guy in 2018? No games have been played. Because players are "forecast" to do well does not mean they will. Or that they won't get injured. Banking on 2018 is a fools errand.
#34fan Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Dooomed, hope the restructure will allow us to walk away if he regresses again. I've never been opposed to TT doing what he does best... Backing up a legitimate starting QB... If they start him in September, we go nowhere... Again!
NoSaint Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 They'd have to carry quite a bit over the next 2 years to get out of the current deal. They'd need to roll $15M (ish) to year 2 or $9M or so into year 3. In my scenario you'd have about $22M cap in year 1 (as opposed to $15.7M or whatever it is). You could keep it at $15.7M and roll the $6.3M that you saved forward to cover the dead cap hit. Now if he is cut in year 2 it would be $15M (ish). In my scenario you'd have a $10M hit in year 2 and nothing after. The only difference (if I am doing this right) is that if you spend $15.7m and roll $6.3m forward you are tying up the same $22m in cap space. In your scenario that $6.3M would offset the $15m (ish cap space in year 2). Your dead hit would essentially be $8.7M vs. $10m in my scenario. In my scenario though you would have that $6.3M to spend in year 2. Again, this assumes that my mind is still working (have had a few glasses of wine). Has any team ever pulled the cap hit forward instead of pushing it back?
Recommended Posts