John from Riverside Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 We could just roll over the cap space. Who knows what the thinking is on all our big contracts. I just wanted to point this out With all of the hand wringing of the site capologists and at the end of the day we have cap room to possibly sign a couple of guys that could help us or roll it over into next year....... We have literally NEVER been in a position where we have had to cut players due to being over the cap......yet it is a huge topic of discussion every year.
Formerly Allan in MD Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 or we do the Bills modus operandi and low ball Sammy, he bails to the Pats, and wins Superbowls. Sammy is the best player on the Bills, when healthy. There are only a few players with Watkins skill set, and their teams would never let them walk. Hopefully Sammy can stay healthy and put it all together But we're the Pats' farm team.
Dragonborn10 Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 I just wanted to point this out With all of the hand wringing of the site capologists and at the end of the day we have cap room to possibly sign a couple of guys that could help us or roll it over into next year....... We have literally NEVER been in a position where we have had to cut players due to being over the cap......yet it is a huge topic of discussion every year. Come on it is not that simple. The only reason they have cap money is because there two best FA's left in Gilmore and Woods and they restructured TT. So you can say they did not cut Gilmore and Woods but they are gone just the same, replaced with two rookies. While I agree they have always been able to make moves and big contracts like Clay's have not killed them cap-wise, the cap is still an issue and likely was a factor(not the only) in letting Gilmore and Woods walk.
machine gun kelly Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 I've never been that impressed with Woods meaning he's just average. Gilmore is a loss, but he was demanding too much money. We replaced with other cheaper players from the draft, so we can only hope they are upgrades or similar. Not picking up Barnidge or Maclin with the cap space would be sin. It's not like we have some impending large QB contract next year where we need money in reserves.
Kirby Jackson Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 (edited) Come on it is not that simple. The only reason they have cap money is because there two best FA's left in Gilmore and Woods and they restructured TT. So you can say they did not cut Gilmore and Woods but they are gone just the same, replaced with two rookies. While I agree they have always been able to make moves and big contracts like Clay's have not killed them cap-wise, the cap is still an issue and likely was a factor(not the only) in letting Gilmore and Woods walk. ...except they kept the Glenn and Dareus restructures in their back pocket. If they decided that Gilmore or Woods was worth what they got the Bills could have easily made it happen. The cap didn't dictate those decisions, their contract offers did. Edited June 4, 2017 by Kirby Jackson
Manther Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 Noooooooooo...bad attitude guy, laid down on the job his last year here. A low character guy....and slow of foot also....NEVER AGAIN!!!!!Agreed
DefenseWins Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 Whaley made no decisions this offseason. I can certainly believe that. I wonder actually whether he really made any decisions during Rex's tenure or was just following orders to make Rex "happy"... After all, wasn't Pegula heavily involved in signing Rex? So it was at least at first likely that he (Whaley) would feel compelled to bring in the players that Rex wanted... I'm not excusing Whaley for this but it would certainly fit the narrative...
Kirby Jackson Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 (edited) I can certainly believe that. I wonder actually whether he really made any decisions during Rex's tenure or was just following orders to make Rex "happy"... After all, wasn't Pegula heavily involved in signing Rex? So it was at least at first likely that he (Whaley) would feel compelled to bring in the players that Rex wanted... I'm not excusing Whaley for this but it would certainly fit the narrative... I think that Whaley made the decisions while Rex was there but through the lens of "what Rex needs." I hope that this makes sense. As an example Ragland, by all accounts, is a great fit in Rex's defense. It's certainly possible that Whaley wouldn't have traded up for him in another scheme. He just felt that, for what they were doing, he had to get THAT player. The same can probably be said for guys like Felton and the big OL. He added players specific to the scheme. This was even more evident as the Bills went "fully pregnant" and lost the scheme diversity. Edited June 4, 2017 by Kirby Jackson
DefenseWins Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 Throw some more incentive $ at Barnidge. Honestly I don't think Barnidge has a chance to be a #1 TE, at this time. Maybe he is waiting for injuries to happen or to stay healthy himself. But as it stands now I could see him starting 25% of our games cause Clay will be out or questionable. Even with Clay I can see Barnidge meeting the 40 receptions, 350-400 yds, 5 TDs. I truly feel Barnidge may be equal too Clay. Clay is obviously better, but less dependable and never practices during the season. If you were Barnidge why would you wanna come to Buffalo? Why not hope to sign with say Baltimore where there is at least a chance of catching on with a possible playoff bound team? even if the dollars were less in Baltimore. Baltimore could really use a TE assuming Barnidge is healthy and would lower his price abit (whatever his price may be)
BuffaloHokie13 Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 If you were Barnidge why would you wanna come to Buffalo? Why not hope to sign with say Baltimore where there is at least a chance of catching on with a possible playoff bound team? even if the dollars were less in Baltimore. Baltimore could really use a TE assuming Barnidge is healthy and would lower his price abit (whatever his price may be) The Ravens have won 2 fewer games than the Bills over the past 2 years.
DefenseWins Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 (edited) The Ravens have won 2 fewer games than the Bills over the past 2 years. So you (if you were Barnidge) would rather play with TT vs Joe Flacco? under a rookie HC McDermott vs John Harbough? Especially with recent hip injury that may end the career of TE Dennis Pitta? Not if I was Barnidge... Edited June 4, 2017 by DefenseWins
Kirby Jackson Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 So you (if you were Barnidge) would rather play with TT vs Joe Flacco? under a rookie HC McDermott vs John Harbough? Especially with recent hip injury that may end the career of TE Dennis Pitta? Not if I was Barnidge... He prefers Buffalo to Baltimore. Jacksonville is the only competition at the moment and that's where he wants to go if they are close in terms of numbers. If not, Buffalo is the likely landing spot.
Pete Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 Let me know "when healthy" happens. I'm not upset at him for being hurt--it sucks--but if the guy can't handle the pro life, he won't get top dollar. Fred Taylor was 8 hamstring pulls away from being Barry Sanders. fred taylor was selected with the Bills first round pick, which we traded for Rob Johnson. You had to go there
BuffaloHokie13 Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 So you (if you were Barnidge) would rather play with TT vs Joe Flacco? under a rookie HC McDermott vs John Harbough? Especially with recent hip injury that may end the career of TE Dennis Pitta? Not if I was Barnidge... Coincidentally, TT has also performed better than Flacco over the past 2 years. Also, and fortunately for us, Barnidge doesn't have BBFS and you aren't him.
Thurman#1 Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 Spotrac updated to 12.3 mil available, not sure what the numbers are for JHodges and Streater Yeah. Probably depends who got raised up to the 51 in his place. Whoever it was was apparently not a minimum salary guy. Or alternatively whoever did the figuring on how much dead money they owe for him may have missed the $4.5 mill roster bonus they gave him in 2015, if I remember correctly. $12.3 mill available now. And the Bills always keep around $6 mill or so available going through the season in case of injuries they might need FAs for. So that'll be around $6 mill they have to use. With our depth problems, that's money we can really use. It'll be interesting to see what they do with it.
John from Riverside Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 ...except they kept the Glenn and Dareus restructures in their back pocket. If they decided that Gilmore or Woods was worth what they got the Bills could have easily made it happen. The cap didn't dictate those decisions, their contract offers did. exactly outgoing Gilmore and Woods Incoming first round corner and Zay Jones Nobody was restructured to kick the can down the road except for Tyrod....which was a money saving move in itself
Thurman#1 Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 (edited) Coincidentally, TT has also performed better than Flacco over the past 2 years. That's a fair opinion, probably. But there's been a lot more pressure on Flacco in that offense than there has been on Tyrod in this one. The Ravens run game the past couple of years has sucked. Teams game-plan for Flacco, while they game-plan to stop the Bills run game. Tyrod hasn't had much success in hooking up with his TE even though Clay was open a lot. It's an interesting decision. Ought to be fun to watch it play out. exactly outgoing Gilmore and Woods Incoming first round corner and Zay Jones Nobody was restructured to kick the can down the road except for Tyrod....which was a money saving move in itself Yup, and it's a new philosophy for the Bills, one I absolutely love. No borrowing from next year's cap because of this year's problems. It doesn't save money this year, but down the road it absolutely will. Edited June 4, 2017 by Thurman#1
Thurman#1 Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 (edited) ...except they kept the Glenn and Dareus restructures in their back pocket. If they decided that Gilmore or Woods was worth what they got the Bills could have easily made it happen. The cap didn't dictate those decisions, their contract offers did. Sure, they could've kept those two, but it would've been by structuring contracts so that they would have had minimal impact this year and therefore more impact down the road, putting us yet again in bad cap shape. They've pretty obviously - and thank goodness - stopped trying to go into hock to be able to keep or bring in an extra guy or two in the short term. They didn't do any re-structures for salary cap purposes. They want to get in good cap shape, and the year to do it is this one ... we're unlikely to be a competitive team and it's the first year of the new era and with this roster fans won't be expecting much. Most likely they simply want to put this team in better cap situations and that required some surgery without anesthetic losing guys like Gilmore, Woods and Zach Brown that we'd rather have kept in better circumstances. Oh, and Gillislee. I just wanted to point this out With all of the hand wringing of the site capologists and at the end of the day we have cap room to possibly sign a couple of guys that could help us or roll it over into next year....... We have literally NEVER been in a position where we have had to cut players due to being over the cap......yet it is a huge topic of discussion every year. We have never been over the cap. Because we cut the people we needed to cut to stay under. And it was seriously painful sometimes. If you didn't see the cap purge we had to deal with at the end of John Butler's term as GM, you ought to look it up. It was a bloodbath. Has there ever been a team that was actually over the cap after the deadline? So, no, not us either, but we've absolutely cut people with cap being by far the main reason and this year it looks to have been a major factor again. Edited June 4, 2017 by Thurman#1
John from Riverside Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 Sure, they could've kept those two, but it would've been by structuring contracts so that they would have had minimal impact this year and therefore more impact down the road, putting us yet again in bad cap shape. They've pretty obviously - and thank goodness - stopped trying to go into hock to be able to keep or bring in an extra guy or two in the short term. They didn't do any re-structures for salary cap purposes. They want to get in good cap shape, and the year to do it is this one ... we're unlikely to be a competitive team and it's the first year of the new era and with this roster fans won't be expecting much. Most likely they simply want to put this team in better cap situations and that required some surgery without anesthetic losing guys like Gilmore, Woods and Zach Brown that we'd rather have kept in better circumstances. We have never been over the cap. Because we cut the people we needed to cut to stay under. And it was seriously painful sometimes. If you didn't see and understand the cap purge we had to deal with at the end of John Butler's term as GM, you ought to look it up. It was a bloodbath. Has there ever been a team that was actually over the cap after the deadline? So, no, not us either, but we've absolutely cut people with cap being by far the main reason and this year it looks to have been a major factor again. Im not ready to say we will not be a competative team......but the great thing about it is if they ARE competative they then have the resources the following year to add final pieces. The patriots are probably going to destroy us.....but I see some wins on that schedule in my opinion
Thurman#1 Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 NE overpaid for both Gillislee and Gilmore. They were good players, but not indispensible and not worth the money they got from NE. New England doesn't overpay. That may be their first commandment. Making Gillislee the 26th highest paid RB by average salary, just behind Adrian Peterson at 24th and Todd Gurley at 25th when Gillislee had the highest YPA in the league last year ... pretty close to the opposite of overpaying. It's arguable with Gilmore but looking at how the Pats have succeeded so consistently recently by bringing in some high-priced guys at CB ... Talib, Revis, etc., this unfortunately is likely to be yet another smart move by the Evil Empire. Im not ready to say we will not be a competative team......but the great thing about it is if they ARE competative they then have the resources the following year to add final pieces. The patriots are probably going to destroy us.....but I see some wins on that schedule in my opinion You're talking about wins this year, correct? I see some wins too, but probably less than most on these boards do. My guess is 5 to 6 wins with an upside of maybe eight. I probably mean something different by "competitive," too. Don't care about just making the playoffs, never really have since the Super Bowl years. Making the playoffs as a fodder team has never seemed like any real achievement to me.
Recommended Posts