Cook getting the paid in a few weeks? Only the Bills can do so as Cook has another year left.

[YodaMan79]

4 hours ago, Sharky7337 said:

Some of these takes really surprise me.

 

Cook is not a complete back. At least not right now. Therefore I would not pay him complete back money.

 

He's more like a budget mans kamara with bad hands.

 

Over 9 million I pass. Yes he can be explosive, and he's a good player.

 

He's no Saquon, Jacobs, or Henry.

Spot on.  I read the posts on this forum and wonder if these individuals that claim he's a top 5 back watch any other games besides Bills ones.  

[Sierra Foothills]

35 minutes ago, BillsFan130 said:

Ya that's fair, My point was separate from predicting James cooks future.
 

Just observing what I have noticed from the bills utilizing Ty Johnson more over cook compared to last year in the passing game

 

Yeah it'll be interesting to see how the team values Cook and Johnson.

 

Johnson played this year on a 1 year, $1.3 million contract. If his price tag were to double (or more) next year the team could theoretically choose to move on and simply give that money and those 3rd down snaps back to Cook with the hopes that he can take the next step in his development as a dependable 3rd down receiving option.

 

[Beck Water]

1 hour ago, Sierra Foothills said:

The topic of my post is the ability for Cook to improve... as stated he's improved his pass protection, his ball protection, and his short-yardage, goal-line running.

 

The point is that catching the ball is the final area of untapped improvement. He's actually dropped 3 TD passes that I can remember... against the Dolphins, the Jaguars, and the Eagles. What these TD drops also mean is that he's uncoverable. If he can regain trust as a receiver, the sky is the limit for him.

 

And we can't simply assume Ty Johnson will be back with the Bills next year either so that's another moving part that in the long term, affects Cook's usage and his upside.

 

Fair points.  IF Cook can regain trust as a receiver, it would increase his value to the team as a player....and his value on the open market.

 

Problem is, he won't show if he has or has not done this until next season...and at that point, he may be in the "let's test free agency" mode, teams big bargaining chip being "hey, we'll pay you before your contract year which could mean you're taking less, but then you're paid and it's in the bank in case of injury"

 

Fair point on Ty Johnson.

[Sierra Foothills]

7 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

Fair points.  IF Cook can regain trust as a receiver, it would increase his value to the team as a player....and his value on the open market.

 

Problem is, he won't show if he has or has not done this until next season...and at that point, he may be in the "let's test free agency" mode, teams big bargaining chip being "hey, we'll pay you before your contract year which could mean you're taking less, but then you're paid and it's in the bank in case of injury"

 

Fair point on Ty Johnson.

 

Which brings us back to the original discussion of this topic and the general truth that it's cheaper to extend players earlier than it is to try to sign them as free agents later.

 

[Mike in Horseheads]

I like him a lot but this team is always in cap trouble and has bigger mouths to feed in the next few off seasons

Edited Saturday at 04:54 AM by Mike in Horseheads

[benderbender]

The first season without Diggs and now a different player’s brother is stirring up cryptic stuff on social media? Figures

[Richard Noggin]

20 hours ago, Aussie Joe said:

 
So … you are saying he will play his 4th year then ? 

Makes sense  

 

Wish I knew. Sure, it seems smarter to play it out if the team doesn't wow you with an extension first. But I don't know how this guy and his representation will handle the 4th year without the bag. 

[Richard Noggin]

2 hours ago, BillsFan130 said:

I agree. The best example I can give you to illustrate your point:

Eagles game last year: Cook on the 1st or 2nd drive is sent on a wheel route and drops an easy touchdown

 

Lions game this year? They had Ty Johnson in running a very similar route on that 1st drive, and completed a 40 yard pass.

 

Their messaging is pretty clear that they prefer having Ty Johnson in on passing downs. (Pass pro and running routes)

 

Something to consider here is that anything the Bills offense has been specifically rostered to do in recent years, such as Harty being a dynamic weapon early on, or Curtis Samuel being a similar dynamic weapon early on, or now James Cook being someone who can leak out of the backfield without deliberate eyes on him, has not worked early on as desired. The Bills have had to prove their ability to attack all quadrants of the field before defenses were going to back off those motion-based and near the LOS plays for these obvious McKittrick-style players. The Bills offense was not effectively diverse enough and multiple enough to back defenses off of some of these personnel-based downhill reads for a while there (mostly in 2022 and 2023). 

 

Maybe Johnson just doesn't warrant the same defensive alert level (as James Cook), so far. But maybe he will moving forward? 

[L Ron Burgundy]

4 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

I have never seen Cook run the routes that (say) Ty Johnson has run and make the receptions he has made.

 

Cook may have been a good pass catcher in college, but he's kind of had mixed success with the Bills.  He has definitely dropped some balls that he could have caught, and if he caught them would have been difference makers in games - to the point where the Bills seem to have maybe moved on from him as a dual threat back?  He catches an appropriate RB percent of his targets, but his targets dropped off.  It seems as though last year they were having him run routes and that's stopped.

 

Maybe but I suspect a few big drops may be influencing your assessment. 

[Richard Noggin]

15 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

Maybe but I suspect a few big drops may be influencing your assessment. 

 

What if those drops are influencing most assessments? Didn't it get bad last season? 

 

Dude is so greasy good, naturally, destroying defensive angles and arm tackles with his explosive forward lean. And he runs good routes, too, so those play-action, outbreaking touch passes especially need to be hauled in. Lethal dual threat from the RB position no matter who gets the snap, ideally.

[Nephilim17]

Amari Cooper is a free agent in a couple months. 

We MUST have a capable boundary WR. This costs money unless we get really lucky in the draft. We can't count on luck for a vital position like that.

 

Everyone agrees that Cook is a good running back. The issue is that this team MUST have a good boundary WR and they cost money. The money people want to pay Cook can — and should go — to a boundary WR, whether that's Cooper or someone else.

A similar argument can be made for a one-tech DT and edge rushers. These guys cost money and the Bills free money is thin. 

The smart thing to do is replace easily and historically replaceable positions with lower draft capital. History says we have a much, much better chance of getting a good running back (running behind a good O-line and playing with Josh Allen) in the 3rd or 4th round than we do getting a starting boundary WR or edge rusher.

 

That's what people are debating. Not whether or not Cook is good or whether (on a team with lots of cap space) he's worth $8 or $10 million. He is — IF YOU HAVE THE MONEY AND DO NOT HAVE BIGGER HOLES TO FILL. That does not apply to this Bills team. 

Edited Saturday at 08:21 AM by Nephilim17

[Doc Brown]

12 hours ago, Jay_Fixit said:

Eh. Maybe long term. But if he's a good durable back, big money is fine.

 

I'd love for Cook to be paid big money. Mostly because it's not my money and I don't care.

Unlikely it will be a short term contract.  His brother signed a five year $62m ($28.2m guaranteed) extension in 2020.  The same agency is representing his brother and for some reason decided to tell the world that Cook was playing against the Jets on MNF this year and he ended up missing the game which is still weird to me.  Dalvin was more of a complete back so I don't think James will demand $12m a year.  Maybe closer to $10m and if I'm Beane I'm not extending him for 5 years $50m.  It might get awkward this off-season and into training camp with Cook.  If teams are willing to trade a 2nd day pick for him I would field those calls.

Edited Saturday at 08:21 AM by Doc Brown

[HappyDays]

19 hours ago, mjt328 said:

The NFL goes through cycles, and it's clearly starting to shift back into RBs becoming more important again.  It could be argued that Saquon Barkley and Derrick Henry were the two most important signings in the entire offseason.

 

The thing is Cook is NOT Barkley or Henry, obviously. We mostly take him off the field on 3rd downs because a guy we picked up off the waiver wire has a better 3rd down skill set. I don't mean that as an insult to Cook, I love his skill set and fit in our offense, I'm just saying he is not a permanent fixure of the offense the way the truly elite backs are.

 

17 TDs is hard to ignore though. I'm not in favor of paying RBs but I can't sit here and pretend that all of those TDs would be scored by any random RB. And I think about all the free agency money Beane has spent on complete busts and I wonder how much it would really hurt our team if we gave Cook a decent extension. Give him the money instead of the next Curtis Samuel for example.

 

Edited Saturday at 06:39 PM by HappyDays

[FireChans]

2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

The thing is Cook is NOT Barkley or Henry, obviously. We mostly take him off the field on 3rd downs because a guy we picked up off the waiver wire has a better 3rd down skill set. I don't mean that as an insult to Cook, I love his skill set and fit in our offense, I'm just saying he is not a permanent fixure of the offense the way the truly elite backs are.

 

17 TDs is hard to ignore though. I'm not in favor of paying RBs but I can't sit here and pretend that all of those TDs would be scored by any random RB. And I think about all the free agency money Beane has spent on complete busts and I wonder how much it would really hurt our team if we gave Cook a decent extension. Give him the money instead of the next Curtis Samuel.

You could pay Cook, let Cooper walk, trade for DK and go for it all imo.

Edited Saturday at 06:39 PM by FireChans

[colin]

i think he likley gets around 10mm.  he's young, proven, and noticeably better than the other backs we have had.

 

we paid samuel like 7mm per for like .75 games worth of production.  we pay dq about that much to be a literal jag.  i think the bills ink cook for a 3 year 30mm type contract.  if his production continues, he'll be a bargain for us at that price, and likely would not be as good on another team, so he'd be a bad value elsewhere, making that about the perfect contract.

[Dan]

18 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

The thing is Cook is NOT Barkley or Henry, obviously. We mostly take him off the field on 3rd downs because a guy we picked up off the waiver wire has a better 3rd down skill set. I don't mean that as an insult to Cook, I love his skill set and fit in our offense, I'm just saying he is not a permanent fixure of the offense the way the truly elite backs are.

 

17 TDs is hard to ignore though. I'm not in favor of paying RBs but I can't sit here and pretend that all of those TDs would be scored by any random RB. And I think about all the free agency money Beane has spent on complete busts and I wonder how much it would really hurt our team if we gave Cook a decent extension. Give him the money instead of the next Curtis Samuel for example.

 

Thats how I see it.   You have a known quantity, pay him in favor of bringing in more players that just don’t pan out.  
 

 

[HappyDays]

19 minutes ago, FireChans said:

You could pay Cook, let Cooper walk, trade for DK and go for it all imo.

 

Yeah we have to prirotize an X WR over anything else, whether that's re-signing Cooper or adding someone through trade. If extending Cook wouldn't get in the way of that, and wouldn't get in the way of extending Rousseau and Benford, I really couldn't complain. It's probably not what I would do but it's not a franchise altering mistake either. Cook still has relatively low career mileage and has taken his game to another level this year. He still has room to grow as a pass catcher too so there is some upside.

[Rockinon]

On 1/3/2025 at 7:53 AM, extrahammer said:

 

 

 

He's making $1.5M per year now, I'd say an increase of 6x to $7M-$8M in this offense is doable and fair for all sides. Our system isn't built for much more than that at the RB spot. 

This is what I'm thinking. Paying over 10M/yr is crazy for a RB in this league unless he's basically that team's whole offense. Cook isn't that.

[ColoradoBills]

On 1/3/2025 at 1:16 PM, machine gun kelly said:

I’m torn.  On one hand a three year deal would put him to 29, but he’s excellent.  The flip side is a tag and gets him to 27.  Most RB’s start tailing off by 27.  He’s borderline for me of an extension, but that’s an $8 mil. Extension, not more.  The tag option allows another 3rd round pick and just keep the room going.  We’ll need $ for more expensive options like extending GROOT, Benford, and so on.  These guys can keep giving contributions to this team.

 

The thing about Cook is in his first 3 years he has taken less than half of the offensive snaps.

He only has 525 rushes.  There is a lot of tread left on his tires the way the Bills use him.

[frostbitmic]

After he wins Super Bowl MVP you drop a bag of cash in his lap.

 

I believe though that they drafted Davis with the idea of him to be the #1 in 2026 after Cook leaves in FA.

 

Looks like Dorsey was just fired in Cleveland.