Kirby Jackson Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 So you are willing to pay Watkins around 13 mil for his 5th yr option, prob mostly guranteed? Then you are going to pay him around 15 mil a season if you cant get a contract worked out? What had Watkins done that earned him this big payday? Yes, I was willing to do that. I would have structured it front heavy too so that if you had to get out of it when he's around 30 it wouldn't be punitive. We are in a league where a guy like Matthews will get &8M. I'd pay Watkins $13M over $8M for Matthews every single time. He can make a difference in the outcome of a game!! I'm still surprised that people are missing that. If you flip flop Watkins and Matthews the Bills win in Carolina and the Rams lose last night. You pay the guys that can impact a game, pass rush, star skill players, QB and shutdown corner. I even think that the value of the "franchise LT" has diminished some.
Noogie75 Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 Are you saying Beane is rooting for the team to lose? if he's seeing what we are seeing then yes. Let go of second year CJ. Over reps over Yates. Come on Yates... Trades away Watkins. He better be right.
Wayne Arnold Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 No, I'm a fan of let's dump our young talent so that we create more holes than our draft picks can fill over the next 3 years because they don't fit into a rookie GM's and coach's "process" or "system." So trading two unproven young players, one of which was on the final year of his contract = "dumping our young talent" to you?
Perry Turtle Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 The current make up of the roster is irrelevant. If you're using cap space on players who aren't playing up to that level then you're wasting cap money and in turn hurting the team. See: Dareus So not going to argue that Dareus needs to play better, but what has his contract prevented the Bills from doing this year? What free agents couldn't they sign because of his contract? What veterans couldn't they extend because of his contract? Again, Dareus needs to play better, but his contract is nothing more than a chew toy for Jerry Sullivan and Bills message boards.
Kirby Jackson Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 (edited) So trading two unproven young players, one of which was on the final year of his contract = "dumping our young talent" to you? Who is calling them "unproven young players?" Darby finished 2nd in defensive rookie of the year voting and Watkins was the top graded player in 2 drafts. He led the league over the only 9 game stretch where he was targeted like the top wide receivers. That's not unproven. Edited September 22, 2017 by Kirby Jackson
Wayne Arnold Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 So not going to argue that Dareus needs to play better, but what has his contract prevented the Bills from doing this year? What free agents couldn't they sign because of his contract? What veterans couldn't they extend because of his contract? Again, Dareus needs to play better, but his contract is nothing more than a chew toy for Jerry Sullivan and Bills message boards. Dareus is 10% of our cap hit at $16.4 million. Are you saying we couldn't spend that $16.4 elsewhere? I honestly have no idea where you're coming from here. Do you not understand what a salary cap is? Who is calling them "unproven young players?" Darby finished 2nd in defensive rookie of the year voting and Watkins was the top graded player in 2 drafts. He led the league over the only 9 game stretch where he was targeted like the top wide receivers. That's not unproven. How did Darby do in 2016? Sammy hasn't proven that he has the durability necessary to play a 16-game NFL season. He missed half of the 2016 season. Hence, unproven.
buffalostu2 Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 he would have been gone next year. they got what they could for him while they could. btw, he's hurt again. just saying Have you heard of the franchise tag????? The CBA protects against this. This terrible argument keeps getting thrown out there.
Perry Turtle Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 So trading two unproven young players, one of which was on the final year of his contract = "dumping our young talent" to you? Watkins is a proven 1000 yard receiver who had 9 TDs two seasons ago with Taylor as his QB playing in a run first offense. He's a legit #1 receiver and has to be accounted for whenever he's on the field. He's had injuries, but several other elite receivers have suffered injuries, and their teams didn't dump them. The only reason Watkins was in the final year of his contract was due to the Bills not picking up his option year. And this isn't a "win now" complaint. When the Bills choose their baby Jesus QB next draft, he'll need a #1 receiver, and it's a gamble to believe that the team will have the picks to draft a true #1 WR. I want the new QB to look like Goff does this year, not like Goff from last year. Paying money for weapons like Watkins would have been a good investment to achieve that.
Alphadawg7 Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 he would have been gone next year. they got what they could for him while they could. btw, he's hurt again. just saying Can we stop with the non sense he would be gone next year? You realize its utter non sense right? 1. NO ONE knows how Sammy would feel NEXT year, NOT even Sammy. There is a lifetime of things between now and then that could and would impact that decision, and Sammy grew up a Bills fan something people conveniently over look. There was plenty of time for his interest to strengthen to remain here, or also weaken as well. 2. Lets assume he didn't want to stay like so many who can see into the future are certain of. There is this thing called tagging in the NFL where we could have franchised him to keep him or tagged him for compensation netting us MORE value than we got in return if he signed somewhere else. So I am sorry, NOBODY on this entire board is correct on any realm of existence when they say "we would have lost him for nothing, so they got something while they could". Its literally the single most infuriating false logic that persists on daily basis around here.
Perry Turtle Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 Dareus is 10% of our cap hit at $16.4 million. Are you saying we couldn't spend that $16.4 elsewhere? I honestly have no idea where you're coming from here. Do you not understand what a salary cap is? How did Darby do in 2016? Sammy hasn't proven that he has the durability necessary to play a 16-game NFL season. He missed half of the 2016 season. Hence, unproven. Yeah I'm saying that they couldn't spend that money elsewhere because they didn't. If McBeane said 'we could have signed Tom Brady, but we didn't, because of Dareus' contract,' then sure, Dareus' contract is a problem. But that didn't happen. In fact, the team gave their 29 year running back a raise and extended their 31 year old center, so money and cap space doesn't seem to be an issue, despite Dareus' contract.
Noogie75 Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 (edited) Eventually we are gonna suffer because of TT. I guarantee it. It all starts with the QB play and he just can't play. The coaching staff just don't wanna look bad. They don't wanna realized that TT was a mistake. But the results do not lie. You are what your record shows.With TT we are an 8-8 team at a very best. Coaches sometimes think they are genius by thinking the can change a player. 125 yards passing and he is still the starter. This is why you have Bilichek, Jimmy Johnson and Bill Parcels. The rest are just... These coaches never take nonsense. Their attitude is, I will work with you if you can get it done but not in three year. If you can't do it in the clutch I don't need you. That is the way it should be with a QB period. Yes, when Bledsoe was not making plays he was gone, no if. When Berlin didn't make plays gone, no ifs. Even when Jimmy was at the U. Kraig Erickson won a national championship and still had to compete for his job the year after. No nonsense that is why they are in the HOF. Not by sticking to a QB that can not win in clutch. They found HOF QBs. Aikman, Simms, Brady. Edited September 22, 2017 by Noogie75
Doc Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 Can we stop with the non sense he would be gone next year? You realize its utter non sense right? 1. NO ONE knows how Sammy would feel NEXT year, NOT even Sammy. There is a lifetime of things between now and then that could and would impact that decision, and Sammy grew up a Bills fan something people conveniently over look. There was plenty of time for his interest to strengthen to remain here, or also weaken as well. 2. Lets assume he didn't want to stay like so many who can see into the future are certain of. There is this thing called tagging in the NFL where we could have franchised him to keep him or tagged him for compensation netting us MORE value than we got in return if he signed somewhere else. So I am sorry, NOBODY on this entire board is correct on any realm of existence when they say "we would have lost him for nothing, so they got something while they could". Its literally the single most infuriating false logic that persists on daily basis around here. Something happened to make them decide to move Sammy.
4merper4mer Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 Something happened to make them decide to move Sammy. Yes it did. And all verifiable indications are it was a wild miscalculation on the part of the rookie FO.
Doc Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 Yes it did. And all verifiable indications are it was a wild miscalculation on the part of the rookie FO. Based off of one game, that looked like a Madden game because of the short week, and made Hoyer look like an all-pro? Like I said, we'll see where things shake out when the season is done, not after one game.
4merper4mer Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 Based off of one game, that looked like a Madden game because of the short week, and made Hoyer look like an all-pro? Like I said, we'll see where things shake out when the season is done, not after one game. Because Sammy's obvious talent level will suddenly disappear? dude. Stop with the hat and see it for what it is.
Kirby Jackson Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 Dareus is 10% of our cap hit at $16.4 million. Are you saying we couldn't spend that $16.4 elsewhere? I honestly have no idea where you're coming from here. Do you not understand what a salary cap is? How did Darby do in 2016? Sammy hasn't proven that he has the durability necessary to play a 16-game NFL season. He missed half of the 2016 season. Hence, unproven. Would you agree that they are more proven than a 2nd and 3rd round pick?
Alphadawg7 Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 (edited) Something happened to make them decide to move Sammy. Actually this is not true either. They decided how they want to build a team, it does not mean something happened directly between the FO and Sammy. That is all assumption based. This regime had no allegiance to Sammy, so this notion that something must have happened is just conjecture. What is clear to me, the regime comes from the Panthers who went to the SB missing arguably their best WR for the season and got there with a lot of in expensive guys at WR who are marginal starters at best. So I think it has more to do with them as individuals not seeing the WR as much of a priority to invest in, and its not that Sammy wouldn't have resigned as much its that they did NOT want to pay any WR what Sammy would be worth after a big season. Everything they have done so far illustrates an emphasis on draft capital and they come from a team that has had success with solid guys at WR rather than Elite talent and they seem more comfortable getting more assets to build other parts of the team rather than retaining a high priced WR. Edited September 22, 2017 by Alphadawg7
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 Can we stop with the non sense he would be gone next year? You realize its utter non sense right? 1. NO ONE knows how Sammy would feel NEXT year, NOT even Sammy. There is a lifetime of things between now and then that could and would impact that decision, and Sammy grew up a Bills fan something people conveniently over look. There was plenty of time for his interest to strengthen to remain here, or also weaken as well. 2. Lets assume he didn't want to stay like so many who can see into the future are certain of. There is this thing called tagging in the NFL where we could have franchised him to keep him or tagged him for compensation netting us MORE value than we got in return if he signed somewhere else. So I am sorry, NOBODY on this entire board is correct on any realm of existence when they say "we would have lost him for nothing, so they got something while they could". Its literally the single most infuriating false logic that persists on daily basis around here. Franchise tag will be around 16 million for a WR. We will have around 35 million if we cut TT.... The following starters are UFAs: R.Humber J.Matthews K.Williams L.Johnson P.Brown E.Gaines Almost 20% (22% of projected 2018 cap) of our salary cap is tied up in 2 players - who won't even be playing tomorrow. Most people would look at our roster next year and see --- No QB, need to draft one this year Old RB, need to get younger there 1 WR, bunch of scrubs LBs, we don't have any really next year except lorax We need every pick we got, and we need to keep costs down while we ride out the terrible glenn/dareus/clay contracts.
Alphadawg7 Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 Franchise tag will be around 16 million for a WR. We will have around 35 million if we cut TT.... The following starters are UFAs: R.Humber J.Matthews K.Williams L.Johnson P.Brown E.Gaines Almost 20% (22% of projected 2018 cap) of our salary cap is tied up in 2 players - who won't even be playing tomorrow. Most people would look at our roster next year and see --- No QB, need to draft one this year Old RB, need to get younger there 1 WR, bunch of scrubs LBs, we don't have any really next year except lorax We need every pick we got, and we need to keep costs down while we ride out the terrible glenn/dareus/clay contracts. There are a LOT of things that can be done to manage the cap to keep your YOUNG ELITE talent on a team. Capitals are for emphasis, not yelling. I don't have an issue with your stance here even though I see it different, its well thought out, but my point is cap management is what these guys are supposed to do, and creating space to keep Elite players who are 24 years old should be a priority, not finding ways to get rid of them to keep aging or middling players.
transplantbillsfan Posted September 22, 2017 Posted September 22, 2017 Has anyone ever said Sammy isn't an Elite talent? Really? Have they? Some guys are just snakebit by the injury bug and Sammy looks like one of those guys. And while I would have liked us to keep him, I also totally understand trading him for (what looks to be) a solid starting CB and a 2nd round pick. I'm happy for Sammy and Woods and Robey-Coleman and Goodwin... they all had good games yesterday and I didn't dislike any of them in the same way I did McGahee when he left Buffalo. However, is it untrue that Sammy was injured yesterday?
Recommended Posts