The cap situation McBeane inhereted

[Dadonkadonk]

12 hours ago, K-9 said:

Kind of a moot point, though. Nobody ever denied he was a good player who could dominate at times and make it difficult for opposing offenses, but he lost interest in being here, wanted a fresh start, and we obliged. Why would they want to keep a malcontent when they were trying to establish something? Never mind. We beat this dead horse and then some after the deal went down, no sense in rehashing it now. 

Isnt that what a coach does?

[BeginnersMind]

4 hours ago, pop gun said:

He knew about Wood in January and there was plenty of time to address it. Oh wait he did with Bodine, I guess McBeane should have done better than that, which he could have but chose not to. 

 

You picked one point out of the many I mentioned, and you missed the real point with respect to Woods. He adds to Beane's headache because not only did he have to fill a hole, he has to pay the guy who retired--and he lost one of the team leaders and better talents. That is not Beane's fault but it added to the turdstew that Ryan and Whaley were cooking.  

 

He could have addressed it but this team had giant holes at WRs, QB, OL, D-line, aging RB, and a CB...with very little cap space to work with. 

 

2018 was going to be hard. It is. 

[ngbills]

Nobody can predict what is going to happen. How good the team will be in a few years. What they will do with the top 5 draft pick and ton of cap to spend.

 

What we do know is they have made many questionable decisions thus far. They have made the cap situation worse. They have appeared to added some bad contracts, The free agent signings have failed for the most part. They do not seem to have a good read on players - Davis this year, Boldin last year, etc. 

 

So we all have reason to be worried, With all the money in the world and picks to make what have we see that gives us confidence? Who is to say with $100M to spend we dont wind up with a bunch more of Star, Davis, Boldin, Coleman, AJM, Murphy,  Bodine, Newhouse, Ivory, K Benjamin, J Matthews, etc. What signings or trades have worked?

[reddogblitz]

18 hours ago, joesixpack said:

 

Myles jack, jalen Ramsey come to mind.

 

Myles Jack was drafted in the second round.  We could have taken him ourselves without tanking.  The SB Champs could have had him.

 

Jalen was drafted after Gus got fired.

Edited September 18, 2018 by reddogblitz

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Myles Jack was drafted in the second round.  We could have taken him ourselves without tanking.  The SB Champs could have had him.

 

So in your mind, their **** record over the past 10 years has nothing to do with the talent level on the team?

Got it.

 

 

[reddogblitz]

Just now, joesixpack said:

 

So in your mind, their **** record over the past 10 years has nothing to do with the talent level on the team?

Got it.

 

 

 

You said their D is good because they tanked for 4 1/2 years.  I'm just pointing out that most of the those guys were taken past the top 5 picks or after the tank or they got from somewhere else.

 

They did get Blake Bortles out of the deal though.

 

[VW82]

Is it possible to sticky this thread and perhaps alter the title so as to help lower clutter on the first page on why it was such a dumb idea to rebuild? 

[Bing Bong]

23 hours ago, Batman1876 said:

A bit misleading, no? Was there a guy that could cover the whole field?

No. But we're clearly not in cap hell if we can sign star. My criticism is the GM. Why sign star who.. to your point.. can't cover the whole field and sign a few front 7 guys that can cover the whole field! Because there's multiples of them. 

 

Here's a scouting report on us: "well they spent all this money on this Star dude. We could probably try to run through him but how about we just run towards that guy I saw on my practice squad last week?"

[Batman1876]

2 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

No. But we're clearly not in cap hell if we can sign star. My criticism is the GM. Why sign star who.. to your point.. can't cover the whole field and sign a few front 7 guys that can cover the whole field! Because there's multiples of them. 

 

Here's a scouting report on us: "well they spent all this money on this Star dude. We could probably try to run through him but how about we just run towards that guy I saw on my practice squad last week?"

I don’t think his 6 mil could have helped reinforce that much. 

[Bing Bong]

2 hours ago, VW82 said:

Is it possible to sticky this thread and perhaps alter the title so as to help lower clutter on the first page on why it was such a dumb idea to rebuild? 

Can we sticky whatever fits our agenda to help lower clutter on how awesome it is to suck? 

 

 

[Batman1876]

3 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

Can we sticky whatever fits our agenda to help lower clutter on how awesome it is to suck? 

 

 

I don’t think many think it’s awsome to suck, just that it’s not much worse that being perpetually mediocre.  

[Bing Bong]

34 minutes ago, Batman1876 said:

I don’t think many think it’s awsome to suck, just that it’s not much worse that being perpetually mediocre.  

I disagree. Mostly that mediocrity isn't perpetual or that sucking is indication of any probability that it leads to better than mediocrity. Anyways, regarding Whaley's involvement in this let's dig deeper: 

It's not black and white. We can have a smooth transition by not picking up Coleman dead cap, McCarron dead cap, hang on to those dudes in the trenches, Glenn and Dareus rather than having.. nothing.

 

If you really want to clean house on Whaley's players, are you saving yourself from Whaley's mess? Or are you just dumping talent (albeit overpaid) and creating your own mess? It looks like you can make a pretty bad team by dumping expensive players and paying for it with dead cap. It goes both ways. We can exchange cap figures all day but all we know is what we see on the field. The worst team in the league.

Edited September 19, 2018 by PetermanThrew5Picks

[reddogblitz]

2 hours ago, Batman1876 said:

I don’t think many think it’s awsome to suck, just that it’s not much worse that being perpetually mediocre.  

 

i think it's a lot worse. If you're mediocre you're at least competitve.  Games are more fun to watch. The 2014 and 2017 teams were mediocre to upper mediocre. But they were a heck of a lot funner to watch.  And they won about 1/2 the time.  Winning is a lot more fun than watching this ****.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 hour ago, reddogblitz said:

 

i think it's a lot worse. If you're mediocre you're at least competitve.  Games are more fun to watch. The 2014 and 2017 teams were mediocre to upper mediocre. But they were a heck of a lot funner to watch.  And they won about 1/2 the time.  Winning is a lot more fun than watching this ****.

 

Attaboy. Keep striving for consistent mediocrity!

[BeginnersMind]

4 hours ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

No. But we're clearly not in cap hell if we can sign star. My criticism is the GM. Why sign star who.. to your point.. can't cover the whole field and sign a few front 7 guys that can cover the whole field! Because there's multiples of them. 

 

Here's a scouting report on us: "well they spent all this money on this Star dude. We could probably try to run through him but how about we just run towards that guy I saw on my practice squad last week?"

They did not attack the middle the last two weeks. 

4 hours ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

I disagree. Mostly that mediocrity isn't perpetual or that sucking is indication of any probability that it leads to better than mediocrity. Anyways, regarding Whaley's involvement in this let's dig deeper: 

It's not black and white. We can have a smooth transition by not picking up Coleman dead cap, McCarron dead cap, hang on to those dudes in the trenches, Glenn and Dareus rather than having.. nothing.

 

If you really want to clean house on Whaley's players, are you saving yourself from Whaley's mess? Or are you just dumping talent (albeit overpaid) and creating your own mess? It looks like you can make a pretty bad team by dumping expensive players and paying for it with dead cap. It goes both ways. We can exchange cap figures all day but all we know is what we see on the field. The worst team in the league.

 

So you would rather have those guys and a 6-10 record, middle round pick, and continued cap hell than a 3-13 record, high pick, and cap freedom?I

 

Not me..

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

15 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

They did not attack the middle the last two weeks. 

 

So you would rather have those guys and a 6-10 record, middle round pick, and continued cap hell than a 3-13 record, high pick, and cap freedom?I

 

Not me..

 

Exactly. Short term thinking.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

4 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

i think it's a lot worse. If you're mediocre you're at least competitve.  Games are more fun to watch. The 2014 and 2017 teams were mediocre to upper mediocre. But they were a heck of a lot funner to watch.  And they won about 1/2 the time.  Winning is a lot more fun than watching this ****.

The 2016 Bills team started out 0-2 with  _ _.  

The 2014 Bills team started out 2-0 with EJ.   

 

Its been 2 weeks.  15 more games yet to play. 

 

[reddogblitz]

8 hours ago, joesixpack said:

 

Attaboy. Keep striving for consistent mediocrity!

 

Where did I say I want " consistent mediocrity!"?  I want my team to win as many games as possible because when I watch the games on Sunday it's a lot more fun.

 

Sure I want to win a SB, but I don't want or think it's necessary to suffer 3 or 4 years of losing to maybe have a chance.  You do evidently.

 

If this keeps up and we do end up one of the worst teams in the league it will be 2 or 3 years to even become competitive again.  Sad.

 

 

Edited September 19, 2018 by reddogblitz

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

18 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Where did I say I want " consistent mediocrity!"?  I want my team to win as many games as possible because when I watch the games on Sunday it's a lot more fun.

 

 

 

When you advocate for keeping the above mentioned people, and not fixing the cap, that's exactly what your asking for. Consistent mediocrity.

 

[reddogblitz]

10 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

When you advocate for keeping the above mentioned people, and not fixing the cap, that's exactly what your asking for. Consistent mediocrity.

 

 

I realize that's your opinion and that's fine.

 

I just don't think this kind of tank/dump talent plan works or will work.  Sure, you're gong to point Jacksonville.  We went through this yesterday, a lot of their talent came after Gus was fired or they traded for or signed.  And they had to suck for 4 1/2 years first.  People says Dallas, but Dallas was just a really bad team before Jerry bought them.  Unless you think Tom Landry tanked his last season so Jimmy Johnson could pick Troy.  they already had Michael Irvin and a at least 1/2 of the offensive line.  Indy probably did it best. but they got Luck, had a good year or two, got their doors blown in in the deflate gate AFC Championship game and then Luck's health ran out.  who knows if he'll ever be that good again?

 

No thanks.

 

I think a better plan is to build up a strong team and keep on the hunt for a QB.  Then when you finally find one (they're really hard to find), you can plug them in and you're off to the races.  In the mean time you are at least competitive which help attract better players.  NO Saints did it this way.  Hawks did it this way too.

 

Anyway, you got what you want. Have fun with it.  I hope it works but am not holding my breath.

Edited September 19, 2018 by reddogblitz