hondo in seattle Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 (edited) @RapSheet The #Bills had tried for months to trade DT Marcel Dareus. Finally get it done in exchange for a #Jaguars 6th rounder in 2018. This tells you everything. It was clear to McD and Beane thought Dareus was a waste of cap space. Probably just a negative influence in general. They wanted him gone. And after months shopping him, the best offer they had was for a 6th. Now we know what the NFL thinks of Marcel. Edited October 28, 2017 by hondo in seattle
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 26CopyPaste Is this a new poster? RKO...outta nowhere on a mobile thats a quick way to blow past 50 plus unread pages.
Patrick Duffy Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 26CopyPaste Is this a new poster? on a mobile thats a quick way to blow past 50 plus unread pages. Oh, well dam. Thought we were getting into wrestling finishing moves.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 I am really tired of this misleading people that we are "saving" money. The Bills pay Dareus's salary. Dareus leaves. The Bills have to still pay a portion of Dareus's salary, but no Dareus. The portion of what people are calling "savings" is the difference between what we *were* paying him, and what we *still* have to pay him. So to sum it up, we are in fact spending millions on nothing but being glad we didn't spend a bit more on Dareus. Why do you think the Bills "still have to pay a portion of Dareus salary"? Players are paid by the game during the season. Normally, the remaining salary becomes the responsibility of the trade partner, and I haven't seen anything announced to the contrary with Dareus. If you're thinking of Dareus signing bonus, that was paid when he was signed, but there's a bookkeeping question around what part of it is charged to which year's cap. My understanding is with a trade close to the deadline, only this year's amortized cap will be charged against us, the rest defers to next year.
Tenhigh Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 We already drafted him this year! -SaviorPeterman Yuck. Don't do his trolling for him....
The Wiz Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 Yuck. Don't do his trolling for him.... it was coming so I took it from him. Now he can't. The only way to kill a troll, is to take his ability to troll away.
leonbus23 Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 Although he was a high pick and expensive, still good to see him gone.
The Dean Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 The 14.5 m hit next year will be mitigated by the 8.5m cap roll over from 2017. So if we do the math its 14.5 - 8.5= 6m in dead cap for next year. Are you certain that's what happens to this year's cap savings? I asked this question earlier, and didn't get any response. I'm no cap expert, but I thought you had to make some sort of arrangement to roll over unused cap from one year to the next. But I could very well be mistaken. I can only assume that Dareus was a serious cancer in the locker room. Agreed, you can only assume, because I've seen/heard no evidence of that---just fans concluding it. I tell you what, if he was a "cancer" it doesn't seem to have metastasized.
Chuck Schick Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 Thats my fear. I like a lot of what is happening on the field. I believe in McDermott as a coach. I have some real questions about the way that the roster has been managed. Its a balance between talent and character. You cant abandon one or the other. You need both.You 2 guys are really missing the big picture. Just because there's some name recognition and (fairly distant) past success with a player doesn't mean crap in today's NFL. Beane or any other GM is not going to make a move like this unless there is clear value to the team, even if we don't exactly know what that value is. We spent years trying to get the big name guys (Bledsoe, TO, Mario) and that formula just doesn't work.
The Dean Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 You 2 guys are really missing the big picture. Just because there's some name recognition and (fairly distant) past success with a player doesn't mean crap in today's NFL. Beane or any other GM is not going to make a move like this unless there is clear value to the team, even if we don't exactly know what that value is. We spent years trying to get the big name guys (Bledsoe, TO, Mario) and that formula just doesn't work. Chip Kelly says to say, "Hello."
John from Riverside Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 it was coming so I took it from him. Now he can't. The only way to kill a troll, is to take his ability to troll away. They don't die till you cut off the head and burn the body (not that I am condoning that)
Buffalo86 Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 It's as if Doug Whaley never existed. Love it!
26CornerBlitz Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 How long are you going to live in the past? Onward and upward my friend I agree with this There are people that are upset that we lose Marcel and his "anchor" ability from this DL....... You don't pay a guy 100 million dollars to do that....there is no shortage in the league of guys that can do that job. You pay a DT 100 million dollars because they have the ability to take on double teams.....still win....and put pressure on the passer. Guys....marcel was not doing that.....I have said it before.....Worthy provides you the exact same production that Marcel was giving us. I honestly wish it wasn't true....i really expected a Marcel resurgence this year with the change in scheme......it just didn't happen. We'll see how stout the remaining 4 DTs are beginning tomorrow against the OAK OL.
John from Riverside Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 Are you certain that's what happens to this year's cap savings? I asked this question earlier, and didn't get any response. I'm no cap expert, but I thought you had to make some sort of arrangement to roll over unused cap from one year to the next. But I could very well be mistaken. Agreed, you can only assume, because I've seen/heard no evidence of that---just fans concluding it. I tell you what, if he was a "cancer" it doesn't seem to have metastasized. I am wondering if it was not so much "he was a cancer" as it was the whole DNA/buy in thing One theme about this team that seems to be really evident is everyone needs to be about the team first/themselves second......and a 100 million dollar oft hurt/often in trouble/not vastly outproducing guys behind him guy like Marcel just didn't seem to be for long with this group. There is something special about this team......even when we don't win we are in every game....they don't appear to be beating themselves.....there is a culture change happening here
Hapless Bills Fan Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 I love this front office, purging Whaley is almost complete. One might just consider that "purging Whaley" (or purging Whaley acquisitions) is not a desirable end unto itself.
oldmanfan Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 One might just consider that "purging Whaley" (or purging Whaley acquisitions) is not a desirable end unto itself. Well. Sammy isn't doing much in LA. Gilmore isn't doing much in NE. Trend might continue with Dareus.
Buffalo86 Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 Dareus wasn't buying into a D that's 4th in points allowed per game. That tells you all you need to know.
The Dean Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 Dareus wasn't buying into a D that's 4th in points allowed per game. That tells you all you need to know. Just curious. Where do you get this stuff? What is your evidence he wasn't "buying in"?
Recommended Posts