Yet another curse left by TD with the fans

[Pyrite Gal]

Even when TD did something well I think it comes back to haunt us.

 

TD really did an extraordinary thing by putting the transition tag on Peerless after Arthur Blank owner of the Falcs shot off his fat mouth and guaranteed AT fans and more important Micheal Bick he was going to buy him the best WR on the market. As it turned out, it was not even close that PP was easily the most and almost only desirable big production (he was coming off a 94 catch season and had improved his yards, TDs and catches each of his 4 years in the league prior to teaming with Moulds to produce over 90 receptions.

 

TD surprised everyone with his use of the tag and even talked Peerless down from being upset about this and got a 1st rounder in exchange. Even more humorously for us Blanks ended up shooting blanks with this acquisition.

 

The bad effect of TDs move though is that it has created an expectation among many Bills fans that we are entitled to and can get some compensation for an FA when he leaves here.

 

There are posts on TSW where fans whine that we should have traded Nate last year and gotten compensation for him or that we should trade Willis now for any first day pick lest he leave when his contract is up and we get nothing.

 

First off, getting compensation for an FA and in fact trades at all are a relative rarity rather than the rule in the NFL. It can happen but the default is that it will not. Its a nice suggestion, but the reality is that it is not something we should expect at all to have happen because it so rarely does.

 

I think the very nice maneuver pulled off by TD in the PP case has really set this odd idea in people's minds as the norm. it aint/

 

Second, losing an FA compensation is not only the norm for the most part it is the rule and sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. if folks are looking for the precedent about what type of compensation to expect for losing an FA, they should not look to the unusual case of Peerless but to a case like TKO or Fletcher. What did the Bills give up in compensation to obtain this multi time Pro Bowler and our leading tackler every year he was here?

 

Nada, nothing, zip.

 

That really is the default and what should honestly be expected we should get in compensation for losing NC and if we lose WM.

 

In addition, while not getting compensation is regrettable, this actually OK and simply the general rules of the road. For example, in the WM case, if we lose him as an FA it will be after we got 4 seasons of play and a season under contract for rehab out of him. 5 years is actually about the average life span for an NFL RB and we have no complaints to make if he walks after we got that out of him. In fact, if he does turn out to have a great year this year, we have the right to tag him not once but in fact twice and there is no need to get compensation for him (though it always is nice to get stuff).

 

In fact it would simply be bad football strategy IMHO for the Bills to trade away their #1 RB (like him or not that is what he is) for the wing and a prayer of a draft choice with Thomas as our new #1. Thank gosh the Bills braintrust is not as panicky as some fans seem to be.

[bills_fan]

He also got rid of the fried bologna! Bastard!!

[oregonbbfan]

PG, I respectfuly disagree. I was one to say we should get some compensation for Nate. You have a highly sought after commodity and a deal like PP could be worked out. Willis is a different commodity and not as likely to bring a lot of value back although I wouldn't bet against Rosencrook to find a buyer.

 

I am not knowledeable about every word in the CBA but I would think there are ways to make the Franchise tag work for both parties whether it is Tag one or two. In each case, all the team has to do is say, " go out and find a team willing to give you a contract you are happy with and compensation we can live with". This happened with PP and franchise tag, and a little different situation but similar with D. Branch and NE and their loggerhead. In each case , something can be worked out if each wants it to be worked out and both come out with something, maybe not all they want, but something.

 

In Nates case, we know it can be done because TD did it. As for our case, Tag#1 was was a given so we could try to work out a deal. Now on Tag#2, yes it is a little unfair because it restricts Nate for a second year and the injury risks that go along with it, even with compensation. If the Bills or anyone else lets it lapse or proceed to completion, the team gets nothing but use of the player that year and costs associated with that years salary requirements. The trick is to get something for that valuable commodity that you have a vested interest in. If an interested team must put up 2 first rounders and then do a contract, it is a big hit. But , if the players owner ( franchise tag wise ) allows the player and his agent to seek out a a trade partner who will give him the contact he wishes and the compensation the owner team desires ( less than the 2 first rounds ), a deal can be made. The owner team drops the tag, the trade takes place and each got what they wanted.

 

The player has tested free agency because he contacted a number of teams, played them against one another, got the best deal that both teams agree to it and the deal is done. It is actually advantagous for teams to bid because it may be less of a pool because of compensation and it less than a free for all. So I feel with the tag on, things can and will get worked out if they work at it. There are ways to work around all the rules as in the "Poison pill" for RFA, someone under contract ( D. Branch), and swapping First Round choices when a player doesn't want to play for a franchise. So , there are ways around all the rules and compensation is being lost by not utilizing all options available.

 

I also know Marv gave his word, but Marv shoud have re tagged Nate explaining that he will get his payday and that it is only fair to get something for all the Bill's time, risk and effort. I would have hoped Nate would see this and release Marv from his word and preserving Marv's integrity. Obviously these scenarios require a lot of work but I feel is feasible.

[Pyrite Gal]

Thank you for a thoughtful and interesting reply.

 

I agree that the situation you describe is theoretically possible but I think one has to note the significant differences between the PP/TD case and the Nate/Marv case which by themselves probably reduce this to a nice theory that just could not happen in the real 06 Bills situation.

 

Among the key differences between the two situations was the reality that the PP deal came in the midst of the TD reign and actually coming off of his Bills mounting an extremely successful campaign led by the TD acquired Bledsoe which saw TD actually being hailed in the good old days or overseeing us getting out of cap hell at least a year earlier than expected and his team having produced an 8-8 record after the 3-13 record produced by us downloading to reload.

 

TD came into the 02 off-season with enormous capital which not only likely held him in good stead and a willingness to give him extreme benefit of the doubt from the press, fans, PP and most important Ralph when he laid the transition tag on PP, and gave him the confidence to pull off this rarely seen maneuver.

 

In addition, he also in particular must have had a relationship with PP which allowed him to tamp down PP's initial upset at being tagged to have PP buy it when he likely said trust me on this and after we secure compensation I will make sure you are compensated.

 

Marv had just taken the GM job and was working through the needed efforts to hire an HC and right the Bills ship of state after the upheaval of TD getting deservedly canned and then MM walking out the door.

 

He simply was in no position to do something extraordinary with a potential FA and likely did not have the relationship time with NC or a stable situation where NC or any player would simply just trust him and keep his powder dry after having his ability to go onto the free market nipped in the bud by his tagging.

 

In fact, Marv and Jauron actually demonstrated some far sightedness and the fact they had a multi-year team building plan they were implementing by showing they had decided to go with the Tampa 2 version of the Cover 2 and assessing that there was no way they would want to meet the likely top avg. contract of CBs in 2007. Thus, by verbally agreeing not to tag NC again and buying peace and his services in a contract year in 2006. though the Bills passed by making the extraordinary effort to get compensation for NC they really gave up nothing to buy peace from him.

 

Though what you say is theoretically true, it was actually fairly unlikely to turn out that way (in PPs case while he like NC really lead the FA market at their position, this was not a good bet or even a likelihood at the time as no one knew whether a year like Samuels would be had and if so whether he would be tagged. NC himself was coming off of a pretty bad 05 where he was nothing like PP coming off of a great 02. Add in that no owner has been as stupid about MC as Blank was about PP where he essentially forced AT to do whatever was necessary to acquire PP or the team would have a lot of splainin to do to fans and to Michael Vick as to why they had not done what they said which was to acquire the best WR possible for AT.

 

The main point of my post is actually somewhat shown by the lengths you went through to demonstrate what would be necessary for the Bills to obtain direct compensation for a loss FA. What TD pulled off for PP was simply extraordinary (can you name the plethora of cases where teams got direct compensation for an FA or do you see that his is such a rarity that though it is a nice thing to wish for because it is possible it is nothing at all to expect because it is a relative rarity.

 

To demand that Marv should have traded NC or should trade WM in order to get compensation is little more than a longshot dream.

[oregonbbfan]

It's true all cases are different and I mentioned that. Also, it is a rare instance when a tag and trade is done and I cannot understand why this is true. I'm sure everything must be lined up such as the client beiing a hot commodity, willing teams, good agent and two teams willing to compromise and work out a deal. The only reason I can see for this rarity may be requirement that compensation be at least a #1 draft pick and someone willing to part with one. Maybe someone knowledgeable about franchise tag ( non exclusive ) and compensation can explain if less is acceptable.

 

But in the case of Nate, all the stars are lined up were it not for Marv's word and his credibility, which we all agree is important to him. Again, my contention is we should get something for losing Nate, and I don't mean a compensatory pick next year. I don't understand why there is not more discussion on this. A small market team cannot lose top talent and get nothing in return. We cannot be a training ground for other teams. I know this is not possible with all FA's but this is a great opportunity (missed?).

 

Marv still has time to work out an agreement with regard to a non exclusive tag with Nate. Actually, this is a terrible way to learn on the job. Marv should have conulted his confidants and not stepped into this trap. My God, we did it before so should have a clue how to do it again. If Marv would have been smart, on the first day of the tags, he should have talked to Nate and said, " I'm putting the non exclusive Franchise tag on you so you get a head start on free agency" which allows his agent to contact other teams. Other teams have all their money, the pool is a litttle smaller but probably teams needing that last piece to go over the top and would be willing to part with a #1 choice that a) they won't have alot of extra money to sign, b) would probably be a lower choice anyway and c) get a proven player vs a player that may make it in the future.

 

Not to drag this out but I am sad that we get nothing for a good player we will have to replace. Marv needs to get up to speed and not let this happen again. I'm a Marv guy but he needs to do a bettter job in not letting our best talent get away.

[oregonbbfan]

PS.- I am not a pro TD person but I don't think this is a TD curse. He showed how it should be done and didn't give our talent away without compensation. Why shouldn't we expect something when possible, we know it's not going to happen on all tags but when it is lined up, go get it.

 

Also, I believe that PP was a non exclusive Franchise, not a transition tag

[Dual RB way to go]

In addition, while not getting compensation is regrettable, this actually OK and simply the general rules of the road.

 

It wasn't OK for the New England patriots to let Deion Branch go without getting a 1st round draft pick. They could have let him sit the whole season (because of getting a draft pick, it's really what they did), then release him because it would have been TOO difficult to make a trade; but wait! They got a 1st round draft pick!

 

This "getting nothing in return is OK" attitude might work for the teams without financial pressures because they can just roll out the dough and sign them. A small market team needs to capitalize their resouces; investment (long term contracts) or replacement (value or prospects in return).

 

It's not always going to happen, but those damm patriots always seem to find a way to win and win and win, while others just say "it's OK, it can't be done like that".

 

Since these are all opinions by us on this board, hopefully you don't group all the posters as whiners if they don't agree with your line of thinking.

 

Exchanging ideas and opinions that are different are alot more entertaining then everyone sharing the same opinion. Do you agree on that one?