Benford has to be next

[Mister Defense]

11 hours ago, whorlnut said:

With Benford considered a top 5-10 corner in the league, he has to be next for an extension, right?  IMO, if Beane allows him to hit FA, it will be a crazy bidding war for this guy. With corner already being a need, we can’t risk losing this guy. I’m honestly surprised he wasn’t the first one to get paid this offseason. He’s a game changer. Thoughts?

 

Why would it be Benford next up and not Cook?  Two of the top five players on the Bills.

 

I don't think the Bills want to make Cook the one player not getting an early extension.  That is not how they operate.

 

If the Bills know what's good for them, they would sign both in the next few days, as the price will continue to go up.

 

 

 

Edited Saturday at 03:03 AM by Mister Defense

[Doc Brown]

16 minutes ago, Mister Defense said:

Why would it be Benford next up and not Cook?  Two of the top five players on the Bills.

 

I don't think the Bills want to make Cook the one player not getting an early extension.  That is not how they operate.

 

If the Bills know what's good for them, they would sign both in the next few days, as the price will continue to go up.

The agents seem far apart based upon Cook's social media posts.  None of the other extension candidates have taken to social media so it's harder to determine how close they are to an extension.

[Thurman#1]

15 hours ago, whorlnut said:

With Benford considered a top 5-10 corner in the league, he has to be next for an extension, right?  IMO, if Beane allows him to hit FA, it will be a crazy bidding war for this guy. With corner already being a need, we can’t risk losing this guy. I’m honestly surprised he wasn’t the first one to get paid this offseason. He’s a game changer. Thoughts?

 

 

I don't see any particular rush. The order doesn't matter much, IMO.

 

I'd love to see them talking but if they think they can get a better deal in a few months when the pressure is a bit higher, it's alright with me.

 

Certainly I'd like to see them extend Benford, though. My guess it's coming whether or not he's next.

 

4 hours ago, Mister Defense said:

 

Why would it be Benford next up and not Cook?  Two of the top five players on the Bills.

 

I don't think the Bills want to make Cook the one player not getting an early extension.  That is not how they operate.

 

If the Bills know what's good for them, they would sign both in the next few days, as the price will continue to go up.

 

 

 

 

 

Sign Cook for an extension? Sure, that'd be great.

 

Sign Cook for an extension for the price he's asking? No, no thanks. It all depends on the contract language of course, but $15M AAV for Cook does not look good. Or likely. 

 

But if that was just an opening shot, by all means bring him back.

 

 

Edited Saturday at 07:26 AM by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

8 hours ago, BananaB said:

No he wasn’t. He was the best of a poor group. Is he worth top 10 money, ***** NO!  He’s an average player then is benefiting from having weak guys around him who get the bulk of the targets. What team is going afte a solid player when you have 3 other weaknesses in the back end? He’s a good player, he’s overrated by Bills fans. Bills fans have a tendency to fall in love with low round picks that are average players. They ain’t bad players, they just get more hype because of where they were drafted. Been like that for years

 

 

More trolling?  *snore*

[Mister Defense]

6 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

I don't see any particular rush. The order doesn't matter much, IMO.

 

I'd love to see them talking but if they think they can get a better deal in a few months when the pressure is a bit higher, it's alright with me.

 

Certainly I'd like to see them extend Benford, though. My guess it's coming whether or not he's next.

 

 

 

Sign Cook for an extension? Sure, that'd be great.

 

Sign Cook for an extension for the price he's asking? No, no thanks. It all depends on the contract language of course, but $15M AAV for Cook does not look good. Or likely. 

 

But if that was just an opening shot, by all means bring him back.

 

 

 

 

Well, for Cook the 15 million was likely as you say, an opening shot in negotiations. But the Barkley signing changes things, as now a running back is finally making 20 million plus, and into the high 20s with incentives.

 

I now think it is likely that Cook does receive 15 million a year, at least on the later years in his contract.  Hard for the Bills to offer him, a superb runner and  catcher, half than of what Barkley just signed for. 75% seems likely though. 

 

I was very happy it was you Thurman, who responded, one of my favorite players. Great to see you are on here and then can filter your ideas to One Bills Drive. 

 

Something to think about, Thurm:  What if in the early 90s the Bills decided they were not going to pay you market rate for your 2nd contract and you left the Bills? Do you think that would have changed that team much, diminished it?  I do.

 

 

[KOKBILLS]

21 hours ago, KOKBILLS said:

 

Depends... If it comes down to clearing Cap space Groot has to be next...

 

Just saying... 

[glazeduck]

Haven't scoured this entire thread, so apologies if this was already brought up, buuuuut...

 

If it's true that we're moving to more of a man-based defense, that's going to impact Benford. I don't think I'd go so far to as to say that he's exclusively a zone cb, but it would seem like a pretty massive risk making a top-5/10 positional investment in a guy who's a bit of a square peg/round hole fit. He's probably a better fit as a FS in a man defense. 

 

I wonder if those discussions are at least part of the reason why his deal hasn't gotten done yet? That's a tough situation, you want to reward the guy for significantly outplaying his draft spot and hang onto a guy who's been great for you, but a structural change within the framework is now, arguably, making that more difficult and less appealing...

[Warriorspikes51]

 

[JerseyBills]

We beat KC if Benford doesn't get injured, that close to a SB appearance 

[SoCal Deek]

10 minutes ago, JerseyBills said:

We beat KC if Benford doesn't get injured, that close to a SB appearance 

Or if Kincaid simply catches the damn ball! 

[VW82]

I love Benford but does it really make sense to pay a zone corner 20M AAV? Edit: glazeduck beat me to it and said it way better 

Edited Saturday at 07:48 PM by VW82

[Turbo44]

I seriously worry about Benfords 2 concussions in a week.

 

as for Cooke, I think 4 years 50-52 millions seems about right. He’s a below average blocker so won’t get a high percentage of 3rd down plays

[Shaw66]

There are a lot of really interesting discussions going on here. Some of the best we've had. 

 

My take on Bedford is that he is simply too good a defensive back to let go. He can do almost anything. He isn't a top cover guy, but he's very good. And he's he's an outstanding tackler.

 

I think he has to get paid. 

 

As for Cook, I'm not sure it makes sense to pay him. There seem to be runs on positions, and the inflation drives prices higher than makes sense for good management of the payroll. I think particularly in light of the Barkley deal, teams are probably entering a period of overpaying for running backs.

 

I think it is smart to stay away from "hot" markets like that. There's better value to be had shopping for less glamorous positions.

[klos63]

11 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

There are a lot of really interesting discussions going on here. Some of the best we've had. 

 

My take on Bedford is that he is simply too good a defensive back to let go. He can do almost anything. He isn't a top cover guy, but he's very good. And he's he's an outstanding tackler.

 

I think he has to get paid. 

 

As for Cook, I'm not sure it makes sense to pay him. There seem to be runs on positions, and the inflation drives prices higher than makes sense for good management of the payroll. I think particularly in light of the Barkley deal, teams are probably entering a period of overpaying for running backs.

 

I think it is smart to stay away from "hot" markets like that. There's better value to be had shopping for less glamorous positions.

I'm totally in on signing Benford, but I also think we should sign Cook. I think he has superstar talent and will be a huge asset for the length of a contract extension. 

The goal is to win th Super Bowl next season.  Time to go all in. 

[eball]

15 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

There are a lot of really interesting discussions going on here. Some of the best we've had. 

 

My take on Bedford is that he is simply too good a defensive back to let go. He can do almost anything. He isn't a top cover guy, but he's very good. And he's he's an outstanding tackler.

 

I think he has to get paid. 

 

As for Cook, I'm not sure it makes sense to pay him. There seem to be runs on positions, and the inflation drives prices higher than makes sense for good management of the payroll. I think particularly in light of the Barkley deal, teams are probably entering a period of overpaying for running backs.

 

I think it is smart to stay away from "hot" markets like that. There's better value to be had shopping for less glamorous positions.

 

3 minutes ago, klos63 said:

I'm totally in on signing Benford, but I also think we should sign Cook. I think he has superstar talent and will be a huge asset for the length of a contract extension. 

The goal is to win th Super Bowl next season.  Time to go all in. 

 

@klos63, you beat me to it.  Cook was a difference maker in the KC AFCCG; one of the best players on the field.  I know RBs are “a dime a dozen” but Jimbo is a superstar.

 

[Augie]

4 minutes ago, eball said:

 

 

@klos63, you beat me to it.  Cook was a difference maker in the KC AFCCG; one of the best players on the field.  I know RBs are “a dime a dozen” but Jimbo is a superstar.

 

 

We keep saying we need more elite talent. Cook can jump off the screen at you and take over a game. I realize his limitations, but he’s someone people might ask “who is THAT guy?” I want more of that, then just use them right. See how easy this is? 

[billsfan89]

Locking up Benford would be a very prudent move he’s too valuable to the defense. Always good to lock up your own before they hit the market esp for a guy who’s been a starter for 3 seasons. Take care of Benford and then find some resolution with Cook and then if BBB has got some time McGovern would be a good veteran extension option 

1 hour ago, Turbo44 said:

I seriously worry about Benfords 2 concussions in a week.

 

as for Cooke, I think 4 years 50-52 millions seems about right. He’s a below average blocker so won’t get a high percentage of 3rd down plays

The concussions are less of a concern because he’s not had a history of them and he’s getting an offseason’s worth of rest immediately after the second concussion happening. That’s a major positive because concussions like many injuries benefit with rest

[Shaw66]

I hear what you guys are saying about Cook.  I agree; he's a special talent. I'd hate to see him go, especially because of what you're saying about going all in. I remember saying when last season started that the Bills would be fine in 2024, but the point of getting through 2024 was to get to 2025.  

 

Plus, not paying Cook would take an enormous amount of courage by Beane. Beane would lose his job if he let Cook walk and Cook put up 2000 all purpose yards for the Lombardi winner.  That is, imagine Cook makes Beane look like Schoen letting Barkley walk.  Every player at One Bills Drive will be asking what he thought he was doing.  

 

My point was from more of a long-term building point of view.  Overpaying players always hurts some in the long term, and chasing Cook with dollars will hurt in the long term, too. 

 

If it wins a Lombardi, overspending will have been worth it.  If Barkley returns to this planet this season, the Eagles won't complain. They have the trophy. 

 

Let me ask a different question. What if there was a trade to be made with Cleveland - Cook and Garrett and some picks, probably big picks, going one way or the other. Bottom line, lose Cook, get Garrett. 

[BullBuchanan]

McDermott's specialty is maximizing DBs. There's no way I'd pay a DB top money when we've been able to effectively turn day 3 picks and UDFAs into competent players. Spend that money on the trenches.

[TheBeaneBandit]

8 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

McDermott's specialty is maximizing DBs. There's no way I'd pay a DB top money when we've been able to effectively turn day 3 picks and UDFAs into competent players. Spend that money on the trenches.

Idk man I think we seriously have to upgrade the talent in the back end as I think the secondary has been our Achilles heel just as much as anything else in the playoffs. The DB whisperer crap is an urban legend.