What is the cap value of wins and losses?

[BADOLBILZ]

The salary cap figure is $109M and in order to make the playoffs a team really needs 10 wins. Nodody gets paid with the understanding that they are going to lose, so it's reasonable to say that a performance resulting in a win is worth about $10M or so. If you are a team who has paid for zero production for 7 years, what is the cost of setting your team back when it is on the verge of finally earning it's pay?

 

This may seem like a BS question to a lot of you, but this is actually the way a lot of businesses have to decide where they will spend their dollars. Do you buy durable goods or do you try to get by on the cheap and hope it lasts? Do you provide employee benefits?

 

These are not things employers want to do, but what is the ACTUAL cost of not doing it? As many of you know, I am very adamant that Nate Clements should have been franchised and that he should now be signed at market value. The dollar figures may seem scary, but knowing that this team just invested the better part of a season in a defense that was driven by his skill, and knowing that he is a young, durable, dynamic talent.......what is the COST of letting him leave? Will it take another half season to get this defense on the same page? 2-3 wins? A playoff spot?

 

If it's 2 wins, that's $20M. To me, paying Nate his bonus would likely be at most a 2 year return on investment for a contract that will keep him in town for at least 5 years. A lot can happen, but you have to make business decisions on foreseeable events, and IMO it's easy to foresee defensive problems without Nate.

 

I like Kelsay, but is he going to be a difference maker? Will they win more with him that without? He's a good player, but IMO this is like buying the cheap healthy insurance with the limited benefits. It's better than nothing, it looks good to the average employe, and it's fine if they stay pretty healthy, but when something serious happens they won't be much better off than having not had it at all.

 

Pay the man market value and position yourself to win.

[Dual RB way to go]

Your post makes complete sense but I would differ in one point; which position (s) should you pay the possible 8-11 million to get the most out of your franchise? Giving it to nate or stopping the run and maybe a FA CB for the same money? I think that you have to look what a playoff game is worth in revenue, difficulty in getting into the playoffs (Broncos), and will those players adapt and buy into the team concept?

 

If they don't bring him back, lets see if they can get more return on the 8-11 million in other areas.

[Pyrite Gal]

I think that any attempt to build an analogy for how the NFL should work based on how other businesses deal with their employees needs to understand, acknowledge and incorporate into this analysis some issues which make the NFL quite different from normal "employers".

 

1. Unlike other businesses, the employers and the employees are really partners in producing the product which they sell since the dispute in the mid-80s when the owners kicked the tail of the Ed Garvey led union. When the NFLPA under the far more successful leadership of Gene Upshaw threatened to decertify themselves and force the owners into a truer free-market, the owners ran kicking and screaming away from combative business practices to what clearly is far more profitable cooperative business practices.

 

This has a real world effect on issues like the NC franchising as there is actually real value to the Bills not developing a reputation for lying to a member of the trade association of their partners. Once the Bills gave their word not to tag NC in 07 it mattered little how well he played as if he was gonna test the market it would have been a stupid business practice for the Bills to renege on their word and tag him.

 

2. It is quite arguable that not only are these two parties partners, but actually the NFLPA is the majority partner in this duo as they receive by far the majority of total of the gross revenues. While the teams are certainly the titular owners, once the practical aspects that an NFL starting player and particularly a first day draftee with his slotted contract and salary is really set for life (unless he is a simpleton like Travis Henry) he is now only a partner as a group but really an empowered partner individually,

 

This has a real world impact that really once he has raked in the millions a 1st rounder gets from his first contract, if he chooses to test the market or even flat out leave if he wants, the player can do this. Though a hold out is silly financially in most cases (for example between his agent historically having clients who report and also after a disappointing season he would hurt himself a lot by holding out there is little or no danger of WM holding out on the Bills even though many posters were stating this certainly would happen as though it was a certainty).

 

The real world effect of this is that even if someone assets the Bills should sign NC for whatever the market says he will get this wish does not guarantee he would sign even if BAGOL who whoever wants to make it so. Is there any amount of # that BADOL or others who argue for signing him think is too much (I would guess the numeric method he has offered would generate that number. However, do not be shocked if NC actually signs with someone else for more than that # and if so then he is gone anyway.

 

Perhaps they want to argue that the answer to that is that he should have been signed prior to this season when likely he could have been had cheaper. Yet, the answer to that question is first this puts the control in NC's hands and this does not sound like a winning or good strategy for the Bills. it also raises the 3rd difference.

 

3, There are few (if any) other businesses which operate within an agreement to cooperate not simply with the union but also between teams as they set policy so that in theory anyone of the teams can win, Thus, the key decision regarding NC was when he decided to take matters into his own control by demanding to still get the top contract for any corner even though his performance was substandard in 2005.

 

The Bills either could take a huge risk and show him a big chunk of change this past off-season after he had failed miserably to produce in a contract year, or they could do something innovative which they did. They tagged him as the CB salary was quite affordable and also brought in Kiwaukee Thomas just in case he stuggled in 06 like he did in 05. Marv made a good decision by essentially buying NC's service for one year with the tag and his cooperation (which the Bills were owed under the agreement, but this player looked out for himself rather than playing by the mutually agreed upon CBA.

 

I really would have been bad football to pay him off big time after he had a bad season and once he decided to have things in a manner which guranteed him freedom to test the market Marv bought a year of peace to better implement the new system andalso to give Youbouty more training.

 

All in all, I think the Bills did what they had to do and given the limits of the CB role in the cover 2, I think also in this case the right thing for giving us a chance to produce more Ws is actually the same thing whih is to let him go.

[BillsVet]

BADOLBILZ, I think this post is way too rational for most people. I for one think management needs to think about what it COULD feel like to go 8 seasons without the playoffs. In today's NFL, more teams make the playoffs and Super Bowls than ever before each season. I understand the concept of trying to have a good team year after year with responsible spending, but we're not in the position to keep telling our fans we're trying and then go 7-9, 8-8, or 9-7 and miss the playoffs. I think fans are catching on.

 

If Buffalo thinks they have another season to rebuild as part of a larger plan, they may have erred. I think the better NFL teams in the near future will be able to get by on less talent, but if they can keep a team intact for a certain period of time that will be something. It's similar to a senior laden college basketball team that plays a big name team in the tourney and beats them. Give me an offensive and defensive line that's played together for 3 years and I'm sure you'll be better off than getting new bodies on every season. That goes for a secondary as well.

 

By no means do I wish to say Buffalo isn't going to the playoffs, it's way to early to tell. But how many years must Bills fans wait to get a playoff team? It's already been 7, albeit not on Marv's watch. For those who don't mind another, I'm not so sure you're in the majority.

 

If Nate goes, it happens. I'd rather they maintain him, but if they get a good CB and another immediate starter for the money they'd give Nate, that's fine too. But they sure bungled the NC thing.

[Dibs]

The salary cap figure is $109M and in order to make the playoffs a team really needs 10 wins. Nodody gets paid with the understanding that they are going to lose, so it's reasonable to say that a performance resulting in a win is worth about $10M or so......

Honestly, I don't understand where you equate a win with $10mil.

Many teams spend up close to the cap & come away with far less wins.....or spend less & end up with more.

 

The only thing you can say is that spending up to the average amount will net the average amount of wins(8).

 

I understand exactly what it is you are saying & agree with the principle but $$$$$ don't buy 'wins'.

I agree we should not limit ourselves with the monies when we are on the verge but spending the money will not get us over the edge unless the players we spend the money on live up to the money spent. There is no point spending on the best RB in FA if the OL will not be able to open up holes for him(see Arizona/Edge). There is no point spending on the best pass catching TE if he will mainly be used as a blocker. There is no point spending on one of the best man-cover CBs if he will be asked to play zone more than most teams will ask.

 

Basically......it's not how much money we spend.....but how well we spend the money.

 

*not limiting the money is the main point though*