I’d like to advocate some opinions on contracts, especially in regards to Edmunds’.

[ColoradoBills]

13 minutes ago, PrimeTime101 said:

Its not hindsight when SOME of us wanted an extension bigger then the 1 year rookie extension. Some of us slammed for wanting a bigger contract last year and now you call it hindsight? how very convenient 

 

I can see your point, but the 5th year option had to be decided the previous year and they used it exactly the way it was designed for.

None of us are privy to what Edmunds and his agent thought his worth was back in year 4.

 

My hindsight comment was more about that.  Beane might have known Edmunds wanted too much back then.

[Mr. WEO]

13 hours ago, MrEpsYtown said:

My stance is that they could have extended or re-signed him. They chose not to. To me, they didn’t value him at that number the Bears gave him. Doesn’t mean he sucks. 

 

This.   I posted this yesterday after hearing Beane's presser.

 

The Bill simply didn't value Edmunds the way that many here do.  If they thought he was worth the investment long term, they would have done so last year--at a cheaper price than the Bears coughed up.  When they chose not to last off-season, they tipped their hand.  They were prepared to move on all season.

 

[BillsVet]

19 minutes ago, Tipster19 said:

Are you a moderator?? I find your statement inaccurate. Btw, whenever I post a thread THAT is my opinion, it’s not always needed to elaborate on it.

 

The second point of your response really doesn’t make sense. The point of this thread is contracts and if they are good ones but according to you if the Bills are drafting players in the mid 1st rd that “provided less than ideal value at a position of lesser importance” than we got bigger issues than I have realized! Lol!

 

The 3rd point that you’re trying to make is oh well if we whiff on a 1st rd pick and do nothing to minimize that mistake then that’s ok, that’s the price you pay. Do I have that right?? 
 

Anyways how did I do?? Did I engage and argue enough for you?

 

I'm not going to debate message board etiquette with you.  If you can't understand that there's responsibility as a good poster to engage people within a thread you created then I'm sorry.  Take the constructive criticism and move on.  Or not.  It's up to you. 

[Southern_Bills]

13 hours ago, PrimeTime101 said:

Last year and this time of year, I got roasted for suggesting extending Edmund's contract then because IF Edmunds had a really good year... we would not of been able to afford him. Imagine that,,, Now he had one of his best seasons, his contract numbers go up and the same people regret not extending him last year...  Just annoying to me and that's why this topic gets my anger face... 

 

Hindsight is 20/20. Who knows he may go to Chicago and give them what he gave us the first 4 years. Does he have a monster year if it wasn't a contract year? Who knows.

 

Also who's to say they didn't talk to his agent and his number was already more than they were willing to pay?

 

Alot of unknowns to claim you had the situation all figured out and our front office was clueless.

[DCbillsfan]

My take on Edmunds - the Bills decided last offseason he wasn't the playmaker they thought they were getting when he was drafted.  They signed a playmaker in Von Miller, picked up Edmunds option year, and drafted Bernard.  If they thought he was truly a playmaker they would have extended him last year.  Edmunds' train left last year and Oliver's is leaving this year imo.

[Rocbillsfan1]

14 hours ago, Chaos said:

Alternatively, do not draft 19 year olds. 

This

[Matt_In_NH]

Signing and or roster bonus proration is not wizardry.  The Bills have been taking from future years cap to use in the current year, lots of teams do it.  There is no magic way of creating extra space rather just different thresholds teams are willing to go over for how much to take out of future years.

[DCofNC]

I think the OP has a point to a certain extent on contract management by the Bills.  Beane made a great move getting Josh’s deal done, and that was a risk well rewarded.  On the opposite end of it all, I feel like Edmunds and Oliver’s deals have been poorly managed.  

The advantage to a fifth year option is obvious in being able to lock a guy up at a relatively reasonable price for 5 years, but it’s also a negotiation point for earlier extensions AND you don’t have to use it on questionable players.  The problem the Bills had was both Oliver and Edmunds were kind of tough to evaluate their value.  Edmunds has all the potential in the world and just isn’t great.  Oliver, well, I’m not a fan.  The thing is, I would not have used the option on either guy because of their under performance leading up to that time.  Had you not activated the option, you still had franchise tags to use, even if non-exclusive where you could get them back for a similar pay rate for that 5th year or gotten picks for them.  Instead, you got a situation where you wound up over paying them both for the 5th year of service and then Edmunds actually played well enough to get a raise, now you go into the same problem with Oliver.  If he balls out, he’s gone, if he continues his current pace, he’s still probably gone and you overpaid AND both will be gone for nothing.   The better option would have been either a tag if you were in love after year 4 or an extension that locked them up at actual market value. You could have had Edmunds for 10-12M a year for another 3-5 years and Oliver would be looking at 7-9M (and I still wouldn’t do it).   The 5th year option is a bit of a trap if you activate it and I think the Bills fell into it twice.

[DrBob806]

All 32 teams basically play Russian Roulette with the salary cap. It's a gamble on many levels. 

 

Let's face it, continuity is very hard in today's NFL. Letting go of productive players is real tough, but teams do it all the time.

[Dopey]

5 hours ago, BillsVet said:

 

Yeah...start a thread with your opinion, let others debate, and then never return to engage with those who replied.

 

If you believe something enough to start a thread then have the common decency to defend your argument.  If not, I'll assume you didn't think it through much.  

 

 

He made his point when he started the thread and let others debate over a point he made. What’s the need to argue with you? Maybe he doesn’t want to rehash his original post. Maybe your opinion isn’t as important to him as it obviously is to you. Maybe you’re just not that important to him. You appear to be butt hurt he’s not engaging in your “debate “. Instead of being an ass with your assumption, you can always just move on to a “better “ poster. 

Some people are full of themselves. 

[Mat68]

You cant have 30 mil a year tied to off ball linebackers.  I like Edmunds but it was Milano or Edmunds.  Milano is cheap and makes bigger plays.

[Eastport bills]

17 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

I don’t know this for certain, so I’m really asking did anybody see anything that Edmonds was willing to be extended?

 

Because of his age, he’s going to get two solid contracts

That’s what a good GM gets done. If he replaces him with a quality player it’s fine. So far his performance after creating cap space has been underwhelming.Is this guy aware that we’ve been humiliated as a SB favorite the 3seasons. Let’s be proactive and address specific needs with proven FA instead of frantically dumpster diving with what’s left.

[QLBillsFan]

17 hours ago, PrimeTime101 said:

I am really tired of hearing this narrative that because Milano played great that they chose Milano over Edmunds... Extending Milana was cheaper than keeping Edmunds... THATS why they Edmunds is gone. 

 

My personal opinion is that Edmunds looked bad at times do to scheme more then play. The old theory is... put the players in the right place to do well... And I thought at times, Edmunds was way out of position and because of this... it allowed Edmunds to bite on plays he never would have bit on. Scheme screwed this team this year... Middle of the field was open what felt like all year long and we never adjusted... Cinci saw it and took advantage.

Hmm so the Bills who coach in the NFL are not astute enough to put Edmonds in schemes that set him up for success. And, this is based on your evaluation. Ok just want to be clear. 

Edited March 17, 2023 by QLBillsFan

[PrimeTime101]

1 hour ago, QLBillsFan said:

Hmm so the Bills who coach in the NFL are not astute enough to put Edmonds in schemes that set him up for success. And, this is based on your evaluation. Ok just want to be clear. 

Just to be Clear, The middle of the field was WIDE OPEN that playoff game. That is by play calling, scheme and having your players in the right position to make a play.

I am not saying Poyer and Edmunds are the best in the league... what I am saying is due to scheme, those guys were not in the right places all the time. So I go 50/50 not just cause of scheme. 

 

And I stand by that.

[QLBillsFan]

14 minutes ago, PrimeTime101 said:

Just to be Clear, The middle of the field was WIDE OPEN that playoff game. That is by play calling, scheme and having your players in the right position to make a play.

I am not saying Poyer and Edmunds are the best in the league... what I am saying is due to scheme, those guys were not in the right places all the time. So I go 50/50 not just cause of scheme. 

 

And I stand by that.

Fair enough. We can agree to disagree a bit. Caps are yelling at me!!! 😂 cheers 🍻 and happy St Pats ☘️ 

[T master]

The Bears WAY over paid for Edmunds but if teams got that kind of cash they are going to over pay . It would be different if it was a Butkis or a LT but not a Edmunds just saying .

[Tipster19]

12 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Traded to who, for what? That's a nice wish, but in reality you need a team willing to make that trade, and willing to offer something worthwhile.

 

No GM is perfect 100% of the time. The best ones hit at a rate slightly above 50% (and we have one of the better ones). Life has too many variables at play from so many different angles.

 

It's easy to sit in hindsight and bag on past decisions, but at the time, letting him play out was the best choice.

Sorry, I accidentally overlooked your response. The main intent of this thread is about contracts and after reviewing the evidence I’ve come to realize that there is a few holes in how Beane is handling these contracts and players. 
 

I’m not of the thinking that oh well Beane made a mistake, stuff happens. I’m really not trying to crucify Beane because I like him but it’s not ok for Beane to whiff on 1st rd pick(s) and/or player(s). I’m not saying he should be fired but as a committed fan one should question the state of affairs. It’s about learning about correcting and preventing the mistakes. Maybe there’s a better way than my suggestion on solutions but bottom line is that you just can’t have your big investment and asset just walk out the door and not receive any kind of compensation. Let’s just call it for what it is and that is just plain old bad management.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

On this one I don’t think Beane did anything wrong.

 

He’s kept this entire defense together for 5 years now.

 

If you’re going to take a stand on contracts, maybe pick on the Von Miller contract and say why wasn’t Beane on a top WR when they were all being traded, or why take a gamble on a 33-34 year old with that kind of money?

 

Or maybe point to the Knox contract and say was that necessary and did that cost the Bills Edmunds? Maybe Beane could have looked ahead to this draft and said we’ll let Knox just play it out.

 

In the end the Bills philosophy has seemed to be keep the defense together at all costs. It’s an expensive unit, and in 2023 10/11 starters are back again. 
 

Edited March 18, 2023 by Straight Hucklebuck

[Nextmanup]

8 hours ago, Eastport bills said:

That’s what a good GM gets done. If he replaces him with a quality player it’s fine. So far his performance after creating cap space has been underwhelming.Is this guy aware that we’ve been humiliated as a SB favorite the 3seasons. Let’s be proactive and address specific needs with proven FA instead of frantically dumpster diving with what’s left.

You're assuming it's a no brainer that the team wanted to retain Edmunds.

 

We don't know that.

 

 

[Eastport bills]

7 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

You're assuming it's a no brainer that the team wanted to retain Edmunds.

 

We don't know that.

 

 

I can’t speak for Bills management definitively, but they always said publicly  how they valued the guy’s contribution  and after he had his best year as signal caller in a top 5 defense, any objective observers would think they wanted him back. As an Edmunds detractor, you feel confident the Bills will be as strong at the position. Not me.