JPL7 Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 does anyone else find this deal a little odd? like most guys at his age and situation, look sign longer deals to settle in the offense and grow with the team, gain more financial security, etc. anyone know whats behind the 1 year deal?
WVUFootball29 Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 might have to do with the fact that he hasnt finished the last 2 seasons
AKC Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 might have to do with the fact that he hasnt finished the last 2 seasons 628147[/snapback] Maybe I'm missing your reference- this guy made the biggest play for the Patsies in their spanking by Denver in the playoffs last year and was being used more and more by the Pansies as the season closed- his role in their offense was as a home run threat and in that role he didn't drop a ball all year. And to the first question- I for one don't find the contract terms you've presented as anything peculiar- in fact I'd say they suggest Marv being maligned for being too old to shoot straight might be way off. To me the contract suggests Marv understands: A) We're rebuilding for real B) Depth at WR is a cheap commodity in the FA NFL of this decade
WVUFootball29 Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 My apologies...he was hurt at the beginning of this year and the end of 2004.
Buftex Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 does anyone else find this deal a little odd? like most guys at his age and situation, look sign longer deals to settle in the offense and grow with the team, gain more financial security, etc. anyone know whats behind the 1 year deal? 628138[/snapback] I posted something similar in another thread. I find it odd, from Davis' perspective, as well. Especially since he visited with no other teams, and signed only a day into the free agency cycle. WR and DT seem to be the most coveted positions in the free agency period so far. It would seem like if he held out, even another week, he would have gotten a longer, more lucrative deal, somewhere else. It doesn't seem like anyone signs 1 year deals any more, unless they are at the end of their career. My only guess is that Davis feels he is far more talented than his reputation in free agency indicates. He wanted a 1 year deal, to prove himself, and then cash in on a great season. That is all I can figure.
jarthur31 Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 Oh man, I automatically assumed it was a multi-year deal because he's still young. I need to really read this stuff first.
Albany,n.y. Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 The guy was traded for a 5th rounder last year, then he was placed on waivers in the middle of the season, nobody picked him up & later he re-signed with NE. That's not exactly the resume that gets you a multi year contract. I still don't understand why we gave him $500,000 to sign.
JDG Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 Because Davis might not make it out of Training Camp......
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 Because Davis might not make it out of Training Camp...... 628206[/snapback] If that's the case then why bother wasting money on him. Like we did I think with Clements. We could have got Brian Williams from the Vikings. Andre is I think a pretty good WR. And I think he should have earn more money and a longer contract. At least 3 years.
ACor58 Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 This could work in his favor too. If he has a very productive year this year he could sign a larger contract next year.
Poeticlaw Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 Too many questions! 628228[/snapback] A 1 year contract is smart on both the team and the players behalf. Andre Davis has something to prove and that is that hes not as injury prone as he has been 3 of the last 4 years. If he can prove himself worthy this season he could get a better multy year contract with us or another team next year. Plus hes a depth move this year for a 3 0r 4th receiver that could be worth more if he moves into say a #2 slot and does well if Moulds is gone. On the flipside. A one year contract for a player that has questions about him is good for the Bills because if he doesnt work out its not as big hit this year and nothing next year.
UConn James Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 This could work in his favor too. If he has a very productive year this year he could sign a larger contract next year. 628222[/snapback] Albeit, he could sign it with someone else.... It's not a bad deal for either camp. Provides the Bills with a receiver who, given an opportunity as #2 (who knows if he will), will be well motivated in order to cash in next year, but if he doesn't produce we can let him go w/ no hit. Davis stands to benefit in the example you provide.
Lurker Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 This could work in his favor too. If he has a very productive year this year he could sign a larger contract next year. 628222[/snapback] I agree. He's damage goods until he puts up a full season of quality numbers. Both sides are taking a chance here. Marv is limiting his liability in case Davis' history of foot injuries happens again. And Davis is betting he's land a bigger payday a year from now if he can overcome the injury bug and have a productive season.
HurlyBurly51 Posted March 14, 2006 Posted March 14, 2006 Because Davis might not make it out of Training Camp...... 628206[/snapback] $500,000 to sign for a one year deal indicates otherwise. If they were just taking a flyer on this guy then it makes no sense to give a big bonus. If you put no money down on a 1 year contract, it's pretty painless to cut him during camp. However, with $500,000 out of the $1.3M already out of your pockets whether he makes it or not makes it a little more painful to just cut him. My guess is he'd really have to do something drastic to not be on the roster next year.
Recommended Posts