jahnyc Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Sorry, cannot do a linky, but Czarnecki of FoxSports points out how some NFL teams are wondering how the Bills could go out and sign Dockery and Walker to deals in excess of $70 million while complaining about small market status and the need for big market teams to share their profits. I had a feeling that this would happen. For what it is worth, Czarnecki also notes that many NFL teams would have only paid Walker the veteran minimum base salary (and certainly not the $10 million in guarantees that the Bills gave him). My thoughts (not those of Czarnecki): I like the Dockery signing and the strategy the Bills used to get him. Steinbach is very good, but not a power run blocker. Plus, he seemed interested in Cleveland. Dielman wanted to stay in San Diego and Davis is overrated (and now overpaid). The Bills targeted the best run blocking guard that was available and a possibility for the Bills.
IDBillzFan Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Let me guess. He thinks we should have signed Nate, too.
JAMIEBUF12 Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Sorry, cannot do a linky, but Czarnecki of FoxSports points out how some NFL teams are wondering how the Bills could go out and sign Dockery and Walker to deals in excess of $70 million while complaining about small market status and the need for big market teams to share their profits. I had a feeling that this would happen. For what it is worth, Czarnecki also notes that many NFL teams would have only paid Walker the veteran minimum base salary (and certainly not the $10 million in guarantees that the Bills gave him). I like the Dockery signing and the strategy the Bills used to get him. Steinbach is very good, but not a power run blocker. Plus, he seemed interested in Cleveland. Dielman wanted to stay in San Diego and Davis is overrated (and now overpaid). The Bills targeted the best run blocking guard that was available and a possibility for the Bills. well the bills were also 30 million under the cap and they did just lose their starting middle linebacker and corner...marv said all along he would pay cash to cap meaning we would use our entire cap but we would not amoritize the future meaning no 20 million dollar signing bonuses.that is where the bills cant compete with the redskins or cowboys.its not like the bills went out and tried to sign a nate clements or a eric steinback if they had tried they would have been blown out of the water.i do like the dockery for london fletcher trade with the skins though i think we finially won one lol go bills in"07
jahnyc Posted March 5, 2007 Author Posted March 5, 2007 My thoughts in the last paragraph. Is there a way to fix the original message in a thread? I don't think he said anything about Nate.
jahnyc Posted March 5, 2007 Author Posted March 5, 2007 Figured out how to edit and fixed my original message.
Git'er Done Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Sorry, cannot do a linky, but Czarnecki of FoxSports points out how some NFL teams are wondering how the Bills could go out and sign Dockery and Walker to deals in excess of $70 million while complaining about small market status and the need for big market teams to share their profits. I had a feeling that this would happen. For what it is worth, Czarnecki also notes that many NFL teams would have only paid Walker the veteran minimum base salary (and certainly not the $10 million in guarantees that the Bills gave him). I like the Dockery signing and the strategy the Bills used to get him. Steinbach is very good, but not a power run blocker. Plus, he seemed interested in Cleveland. Dielman wanted to stay in San Diego and Davis is overrated (and now overpaid). The Bills targeted the best run blocking guard that was available and a possibility for the Bills. FOX News??!? They are probably in one of the "New Guard" owners' pockets. They are a "newscast" for hire.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Sorry, cannot do a linky, but Czarnecki of FoxSports points out how some NFL teams are wondering how the Bills could go out and sign Dockery and Walker to deals in excess of $70 million while complaining about small market status and the need for big market teams to share their profits. I had a feeling that this would happen. After agreeing to that horrible CBA, I have no doubt "some NFL teams are wondering..." For what it is worth, Czarnecki also notes that many NFL teams would have only paid Walker the veteran minimum base salary (and certainly not the $10 million in guarantees that the Bills gave him). The worth of this statement will be proven as the season unfolds.
DanInSouthBuffalo Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Sorry, cannot do a linky, but Czarnecki of FoxSports points out how some NFL teams are wondering how the Bills could go out and sign Dockery and Walker to deals in excess of $70 million while complaining about small market status and the need for big market teams to share their profits. I had a feeling that this would happen. For what it is worth, Czarnecki also notes that many NFL teams would have only paid Walker the veteran minimum base salary (and certainly not the $10 million in guarantees that the Bills gave him). How does he know how Walker would have been paid by other teams? This is a BS article to create a story. First of all the Bills HAVE TO SPEND MONEY. They can't stay $30 million under the cap as it's against the rules. I believe the salary cap is $109 million and the minimum cap is like $102 million. Where the Bills lose out to large market teams is on revenue from corporate sponsors, things like that. This idiot should know that. Dan Snyder is buying radio stations in the DC area that will broadcast the Skins games!! The Bills probably can't afford to do that and shouldn't even try.
Arkady Renko Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 http://community.foxsports.com/blogs/NFL_C...for_Chris_Simms
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Let me guess. He thinks we should have signed Nate, too. AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A TERRIBLE IDEA!
Kelly the Dog Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 I don't believe him for this reason: He said that Walker got a 10 mil signing bonus, and I think that's probably not even close. First, I haven't seen that figure anywhere. The News reported that the Bills spent 32 mil in guaranteed money. We know Dockery's was 18.5, a number reported everywhere. Kelsay's was reportedly 8 and may be as much as 11. And that's "guaranteed money", which doesn't necessarily mean signing bonus or this year. If Kelsay's was 8, that leaves 5.5 for Walker, which I think is probably about right.
Steven in MD Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 First of all the Bills HAVE TO SPEND MONEY. They can't stay $30 million under the cap as it's against the rules. I believe the salary cap is $109 million and the minimum cap is like $102 million. I never knew there was a minimum teams had to spend..that is news to me.
Stussy109 Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 well the bills were also 30 million under the cap and they did just lose their starting middle linebacker and corner...marv said all along he would pay cash to cap meaning we would use our entire cap but we would not amoritize the future meaning no 20 million dollar signing bonuses.that is where the bills cant compete with the redskins or cowboys.its not like the bills went out and tried to sign a nate clements or a eric steinback if they had tried they would have been blown out of the water.i do like the dockery for london fletcher trade with the skins though i think we finially won one lol go bills in"07 We gave dockery 18.5 mill guranteed, whereas steinbach only got 18... I think so far, we have bee THE biggest players in free agency (signing bonus wise). Essentially we traded Nate for two OL. nate 80 million, dockery 49 mill, walker 25 mill
Kelly the Dog Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 I never knew there was a minimum teams had to spend..that is news to me. It's actually 85%, so the figure i closer to 93 million. We're probably right around that mark already.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 We gave dockery 18.5 mill guranteed, whereas steinbach only got 18... I think so far, we have bee THE biggest players in free agency (signing bonus wise). Essentially we traded Nate for two OL. nate 80 million, dockery 49 mill, walker 25 mill Guaranteed money doesn't necessarily mean signing bonus money. I highly doubt they gave Dockery 18.5 mil this year. It's probably two or three years with some guaranteed bonuses.
Tortured Soul Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 I don't believe him for this reason: He said that Walker got a 10 mil signing bonus, and I think that's probably not even close. First, I haven't seen that figure anywhere. The News reported that the Bills spent 32 mil in guaranteed money. We know Dockery's was 18.5, a number reported everywhere. Kelsay's was reportedly 8 and may be as much as 11. And that's "guaranteed money", which doesn't necessarily mean signing bonus or this year. If Kelsay's was 8, that leaves 5.5 for Walker, which I think is probably about right. I tried to find this info in the Buffalo News. Do you have a link? And didn' Kelsay get 14 million guaranteed? What is the first-three-years number for Walker?
Beerball Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 I tried to find this info in the Buffalo News. Do you have a link? And didn' Kelsay get 14 million guaranteed? What is the first-three-years number for Walker? Wait with baited breath for clumpy's cap page. I'm sure he is working on this 'as we speak'.
stuckincincy Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Wait with baited breath for clumpy's cap page. I'm sure he is working on this 'as we speak'. bated.
Recommended Posts