James Cook on IG Live - "15 mill year" EDIT: Scrubbed his IG and Doubled Down on Twitter

[EasternOHBillsFan]

2 hours ago, ddaryl said:

 

if you can then yes, if you can not use the tools, that is all I have said in this thread.

BUT No matter what happens he has chosen social media to vent his frustration or make his desires known and that is something I have ZERO repsect for. Personally I honestly do not care what happens to Cook. SIgn him to a deal, Trade him or force him to play on a tag in 2026, he chose a path that I do not respect. 

I also have no clue what you are saying about bad optics, its a business and to be honest all the good optics that you say the FO is working towards hasn't done ***** for this team. We are still the team who can't get past the AFCC so every single optic be damned. Keep the best players anyway you can including using tags when needed.

 

Ever heard of attracting key free agents or keeping a good reputation when it comes to contracts? How do you expect to keep the good players or restructure contracts to be cap friendly if you piss off players? Good gravy, you are the Duke Tobin of amateur NFL GMs...

Edited Thursday at 06:58 PM by EasternOHBillsFan

[BarleyNY]

1 hour ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:

 

Ever heard of attracting key free agents or keeping a good reputation when it comes to contracts? How do you expect to keep the good players or restructure contracts to be cap friendly if you piss off players? Good gravy, you are the Duke Tobin of amateur NFL GMs...

 

So you’d just give every player everything they want? lol. And do you think that team option restructures aren’t baked into virtually every contract these days? Talk about amateur GMing. Players are happy when their teammates get paid, but they all take care of their own business. Whether or not Cook gets paid means nothing to them when it comes to their own money. 

[DrDawkinstein]

4 hours ago, ddaryl said:

 

if you can then yes, if you can not use the tools, that is all I have said in this thread.

BUT No matter what happens he has chosen social media to vent his frustration or make his desires known and that is something I have ZERO repsect for. Personally I honestly do not care what happens to Cook. SIgn him to a deal, Trade him or force him to play on a tag in 2026, he chose a path that I do not respect. 

I also have no clue what you are saying about bad optics, its a business and to be honest all the good optics that you say the FO is working towards hasn't done ***** for this team. We are still the team who can't get past the AFCC so every single optic be damned. Keep the best players anyway you can including using tags when needed.

 

To the bold, fair enough. Agree there. If it's talent you must keep and cant do it any other way, at the end of the day I am a BILLS fan not a <insert players name here> fan.

 

To the rest, I dont care about social media and neither do the teams. The latest I saw in this thread is he posted 3 emojis, and that has a bunch of folks with their panties in a bunch. 3 emojis. ok.

 

15 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

 

So you’d just give every player everything they want? lol. And do you think that team option restructures aren’t baked into virtually every contract these days? Talk about amateur GMing. Players are happy when their teammates get paid, but they all take care of their own business. Whether or not Cook gets paid means nothing to them when it comes to their own money. 

 

No the topic was about the culture and good graces the FO has built in the past 7-8 years by operating in fairness to the players. No one says give them everything they demand. But also, dont be a bunch of Mike Browns either.

Edited Thursday at 08:18 PM by DrDawkinstein

[BarleyNY]

9 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

No the topic was about the culture and good graces the FO has built in the past 7-8 years by operating in fairness to the players. No one says give them everything they demand. But also, dont be a bunch of Mike Browns either.

So who thinks that the culture and general appeal of the Bills will be significantly impacted if the Bills hold firm at a number they deem appropriate and a deal doesn’t get done? I sure don’t. I thought I was clear about that aspect of the discussion. 

Edited Thursday at 08:28 PM by BarleyNY

[DrDawkinstein]

4 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

So who thinks that the culture and general appeal of the Bills will be significantly impacted if the Bills hold firm at a number they deem appropriate and a deal doesn’t get done? I sure don’t. I thought I was clear about that aspect of the discussion. 

 

Gotta go back to the beginning of this convo on the previous page. We were talking about using the Franchise Tag and how that pisses off players.

[BarleyNY]

5 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Gotta go back to the beginning of this convo on the previous page. We were talking about using the Franchise Tag and how that pisses off players.

Okay. Franchise tag. a) that’s a long way off and a lot can happen in a year and b) it might piss off Cook, but I do not see it impacting any other player’s opinion of the Bills. 

[Low Positive]

8 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

Okay. Franchise tag. a) that’s a long way off and a lot can happen in a year and b) it might piss off Cook, but I do not see it impacting any other player’s opinion of the Bills. 

Only one player in the entire league got hit with the exclusive tag this year. There is a reason for that. 

[Mat68]

9 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

Okay. Franchise tag. a) that’s a long way off and a lot can happen in a year and b) it might piss off Cook, but I do not see it impacting any other player’s opinion of the Bills. 

It’s also more expensive.  Full amount is against the cap. An extension would be much less capwise.  

[ddaryl]

2 hours ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:

 

Ever heard of attracting key free agents or keeping a good reputation when it comes to contracts? How do you expect to keep the good players or restructure contracts to be cap friendly if you piss off players? Good gravy, you are the Duke Tobin of amateur NFL GMs...

 

LMFAO.. players line up to play for real contenders and it won't affect a damn thing regarding top FAs or resinging our own. 

 

Players screw over teams the same way and run off when it suits them just the same, this is not a one way street, its a business.

[BarleyNY]

24 minutes ago, Low Positive said:

Only one player in the entire league got hit with the exclusive tag this year. There is a reason for that. 

 

21 minutes ago, Mat68 said:

It’s also more expensive.  Full amount is against the cap. An extension would be much less capwise.  

 

The reason isn’t because teams are afraid of hurting players’ feelings. Teams have been smart enough to get ahead of signing their quality players and have been getting that done early. Cap considerations are certainly part of that. Players get security and teams get a cheaper deal. The huge jumps in the cap have been very helpful because it’s provided the space for teams to keep more of their own players. 

26 minutes ago, Mat68 said:

It’s also more expensive.  Full amount is against the cap. An extension would be much less capwise.  

Probably. But how much depends on the contract amount and structure. Also that’s IF we franchise tag him next offseason. There’s the transition tag for less. Or maybe he falls off and we sign him for a lesser contract - or not at all. Or maybe he goes off and we do franchise tag him. That’s fine too. 

[DrDawkinstein]

1 hour ago, BarleyNY said:

 

 

The reason isn’t because teams are afraid of hurting players’ feelings. Teams have been smart enough to get ahead of signing their quality players and have been getting that done early. Cap considerations are certainly part of that. Players get security and teams get a cheaper deal. The huge jumps in the cap have been very helpful because it’s provided the space for teams to keep more of their own players. 

 

 

It not only pisses off the players, but more importantly, their agents. Remember Eugene Parker and how he prevented the Bills from signing a number of players, and made negotiations difficult with a handful of our good players.

 

It just isnt good business. And being known as a team that uses the tag opens up the player/agent side to at least consider a team is not negotiating in good faith.

[BillsFanForever19]

8 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Barkley had a once in a generation season.  It was crazy to bump him to 20 million after just signing him for less. 

 

That being said, there are 2 guys making over 14 million: him and McCaffrey.  On a terrible team, Barkley had 3 seasons over 1000.   With the best O-line in the NFL, he double that in Philly.  Cook cracked 1000 behind a very good O-line in Buff.  The Eagles hardly bothered passing this year, the Offense ran through Barkley.  The Bills don't run that Offense so Cook has less value here.

 

Let him ask someone else to make him the 3rd highest paid RB in the NFL. 

 

McCaffrey is a special case. He's technically a RB, but he's just as much a WR. So I don't even factor him. 

 

But like I said to your Original Post - whether you think Saquon's deal is "crazy" or not is beside the point.

 

The point is, the top RB just got paid 21m annually. Which means going forward, RB deals will be done relevant to that deal.

 

James Cook isn't Saquon Barkley. But if Saquon is 21m annually, that would put James Cook's market value at around exactly what he's looking for. 

 

Which I agree with you, is more than i'm willing to pay. But to say Saquon's deal exists in a vacuum and it has no relevancy on what big time RB's like Cook will be paid going forward is simply incorrect. The RB market HAS been reset.

Edited Thursday at 10:40 PM by BillsFanForever19

[BarleyNY]

1 hour ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

It not only pisses off the players, but more importantly, their agents. Remember Eugene Parker and how he prevented the Bills from signing a number of players, and made negotiations difficult with a handful of our good players.

 

It just isnt good business. And being known as a team that uses the tag opens up the player/agent side to at least consider a team is not negotiating in good faith.

 

At the end of the day everyone understands that it’s a business. Can there be hard feelings with the player that gets tagged? Sure. But so what? It’s the rules the players agreed to and it’s what everyone has to live by. 

 

As for whether it’s good business. Often it is. Teams that abuse it are the Bengals of the league. It’s not the defining issue with them, it’s a symptom of how they do business. 

[Mr. WEO]

2 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

McCaffrey is a special case. He's technically a RB, but he's just as much a WR. So I don't even factor him. 

 

But like I said to your Original Post - whether you think Saquon's deal is "crazy" or not is beside the point.

 

The point is, the top RB just got paid 21m annually. Which means going forward, RB deals will be done relevant to that deal.

 

James Cook isn't Saquon Barkley. But if Saquon is 21m annually, that would put James Cook's market value at around exactly what he's looking for. 

 

Which I agree with you, is more than i'm willing to pay. But to say Saquon's deal exists in a vacuum and it has no relevancy on what big time RB's like Cook will be paid going forward is simply incorrect. The RB market HAS been reset.

I don’t think extreme outliers reset the market.  They signed him a year ago for under 13 million per.  They just rewarded him for a crazy year.  But it’s just that—a reward.  They didn’t reset the market when they signed him.  
 

What would the Bills be rewarding Cook for?

[Low Positive]

32 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

I don’t think extreme outliers reset the market.  They signed him a year ago for under 13 million per.  They just rewarded him for a crazy year.  But it’s just that—a reward.  They didn’t reset the market when they signed him.  
 

What would the Bills be rewarding Cook for?

 

You're discounting how good James Cook was this year because you want to make a point about not paying RBs. He made something out of nothing many times, and has the burst to turn 10-yard gains into long TDs. That TD against SF that I linked above is about a 5 yard gain with Singletary. He was the Bills' best offensive skill player outside of Josh Allen. I don't know that he's worth 15 million, but he's not easily replaceable. 

[Dablitzkrieg]

I think he gets paid, just not $15 mill per

[Ray Stonada]

If Knox got what he got, Cook is worth 15/year for where he stands among backs. That was a great season.

“I don’t pay running backs” sounds tough coming from armchair warriors.

[Dablitzkrieg]

2 minutes ago, Ray Stonada said:

If Knox got what he got, Cook is worth 15/year for where he stands among backs. That was a great season.

“I don’t pay running backs” sounds tough coming from armchair warriors.

Armchair warriors is a dumb term.  He's not worth $15 mill per year.  I'm guessing if he signs, it's closer to 12  

[BillsFanForever19]

7 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

I don’t think extreme outliers reset the market.  They signed him a year ago for under 13 million per.  They just rewarded him for a crazy year.  But it’s just that—a reward.  They didn’t reset the market when they signed him.  
 

What would the Bills be rewarding Cook for?

 

That's not how things work. 

 

The league and player's agents didn't look at Tyreek Hill's deal and say "Well, that's crazy. We'll just ignore it and stick to the numbers before it". The WR market exploded. For every WR at his level and under it. 

 

The Quarterback market keeps rising and rising based on recent contracts. At one point Josh was the 2nd highest QB in NFL History. Now he's the 6th highest QB contract in the league, below players like Trevor Lawrence and Justin Herbert.

 

Any time a new top contract is made at a positional group, the contracts of everyone goes up. Again, James Cook isn't going to get 21m. But he isn't going to be a guy who gets only half of that anymore. 6m less, his asking price, seems about right now.

Edited Friday at 08:53 AM by BillsFanForever19

[bmur66]

I'd try to keep him for one more year somehow. Contract must have a reasonable way out after that. Beane needs to work some magic on this one.

Edited Friday at 11:21 AM by bmur66