IndyJay1234 Posted March 23, 2007 Posted March 23, 2007 Who would this board not take if they signs on the cheap. That is the funniest phrase used on this board. Peyton Manning is available. Well I would take him if he signs on the cheap. on the cheap should be banned words....
Pyrite Gal Posted March 23, 2007 Posted March 23, 2007 Who would this board not take if they signs on the cheap. That is the funniest phrase used on this board. Peyton Manning is available. Well I would take him if he signs on the cheap. on the cheap should be banned words.... Consider it done. Moderator, please erase this thread.
IndyJay1234 Posted March 23, 2007 Author Posted March 23, 2007 Consider it done. Moderator, please erase this thread. Nothing would make me happier... I tire of reading how this board would sign every hunk of junk if they signed on the cheap.
marauderswr80 Posted March 23, 2007 Posted March 23, 2007 Well its a true fact most all NFL players are vastly overpaid to play a childs game....... You going to tell me Nate Clements was worth 80 million? I mean we all seen the season he had in 2005 right? He couldnt stop a one legged bum at wideout........and thats worth 80 million? Champ Bailey is the best corner in the game and Clements is getting paid more. Trust me next year Champ will want more money aswell....... its a never ending story! I still have an issue of Sports Illustrated when Deion Sanders signed with the Cowboys for 35 million dollars, that was alot of money back then, now 35 million, offensive lineman get that....... 15 years from now 80 million will seem like nothing....
IndyJay1234 Posted March 23, 2007 Author Posted March 23, 2007 Well its a true fact most all NFL players are vastly overpaid to play a childs game....... You going to tell me Nate Clements was worth 80 million? I mean we all seen the season he had in 2005 right? He couldnt stop a one legged bum at wideout........and thats worth 80 million? Champ Bailey is the best corner in the game and Clements is getting paid more. Trust me next year Champ will want more money aswell....... its a never ending story! I still have an issue of Sports Illustrated when Deion Sanders signed with the Cowboys for 35 million dollars, that was alot of money back then, now 35 million, offensive lineman get that....... 15 years from now 80 million will seem like nothing.... All I am saying is that any player that is on the trade block or free agent. Post his name on this board and it is a 100% guarantee that someone well say sign him if he is willing to sign on the cheap. Marauderswr80 is available well scoop him up if he is willing to sign on the cheap.
apuszczalowski Posted March 23, 2007 Posted March 23, 2007 Would it make it any better if everybody saysthey want the Bills to overpay for this player? I understand what you mean, someone could say theres a 3 foot tall WR with one leg, and a bad back who's also blind available and someone here would say they would be willing to sign him if he comes cheap I am not against signing anybody in the offseason if they come cheap (or at a the minimum) If the player sucks, you cut them, if they work out, you get the player cheap and look like a genius. More competition for spots can never hurt
marauderswr80 Posted March 23, 2007 Posted March 23, 2007 All I am saying is that any player that is on the trade block or free agent. Post his name on this board and it is a 100% guarantee that someone well say sign him if he is willing to sign on the cheap. Marauderswr80 is available well scoop him up if he is willing to sign on the cheap. Oh I know where u are coming from.........I see it all the time too........it is funny!
eball Posted March 23, 2007 Posted March 23, 2007 I see your point and it's kinda comical, but clearly you must understand that what people are really saying is "if the deal makes sense for the Bills financially." Nobody expects a player to undervalue himself, but there's a difference between a guy who is ONLY out for the money and one who understands that his salary has to fit within the construct of the team he's going to.
kgun Posted March 23, 2007 Posted March 23, 2007 Who would this board not take if they signs on the cheap. That is the funniest phrase used on this board. Peyton Manning is available. Well I would take him if he signs on the cheap. on the cheap should be banned words.... Ban the term "HIGH MOTOR" as well. That term means absolutely nothing. If a player does not have a high energy level then just say so!!!
IndyJay1234 Posted March 23, 2007 Author Posted March 23, 2007 I see your point and it's kinda comical, but clearly you must understand that what people are really saying is "if the deal makes sense for the Bills financially." Nobody expects a player to undervalue himself, but there's a difference between a guy who is ONLY out for the money and one who understands that his salary has to fit within the construct of the team he's going to. I have never seen. Go out and overpay the crap out of him on this board yet.
JoeF Posted March 23, 2007 Posted March 23, 2007 I have never seen. Go out and overpay the crap out of him on this board yet. Or the statement..."We should sign him on the expensive" How about if we use vet minimum...such as... "Oft injured, fragile as fine china RB Chris Brown would be an okay signing if he were to agree to a deal that was at or near the vet minimum...." Is it the lack of specificity of "sign him on the cheap" or too much cliche' that bothers you? By the way--I am an offender -- I have used this before in posts--but I do agree with you.
IndyJay1234 Posted March 23, 2007 Author Posted March 23, 2007 Or the statement..."We should sign him on the expensive" How about if we use vet minimum...such as... "Oft injured, fragile as fine china RB Chris Brown would be an okay signing if he were to agree to a deal that was at or near the vet minimum...." Is it the lack of specificity of "sign him on the cheap" or too much cliche' that bothers you? By the way--I am an offender -- I have used this before in posts--but I do agree with you. What makes me laugh is the fact that it appears in every post regarding available players. Even this offseason when we talked about players like Eric Steinbach it was the same. Everyone knows the guy is going to be paid but someone always says well I like it if we sign him on the cheap. It makes me laugh but not as hard as talking about Press Conferences does or ridiculous trade proposals involving ProBowl players for 4th round picks.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 23, 2007 Posted March 23, 2007 I can't speak for everyone else, but I only use "on the cheap" when it applies to lower-tier or high risk/reward players. Meaning if they passed on them, no big deal, but if they DO sign them, I wouldn't want them to break the bank.
JoeF Posted March 23, 2007 Posted March 23, 2007 I can't speak for everyone else, but I only use "on the cheap" when it applies to lower-tier or high risk/reward players. Meaning if they passed on them, no big deal, but if they DO sign them, I wouldn't want them to break the bank. I think we are getting close to TBD law (as opposed to a Lite Beer Man Law)..the term "on the cheap" is in its proper context when used as Mad outlines. Someone should craft legislation on re-sign vs. resign
eball Posted March 23, 2007 Posted March 23, 2007 Hey, if we're eliminating useless football phrases let's really clean up our act: "He's a football player" "He can make all the throws" "He runs well in space" And the worst one of all: "The Cardinals will surprise people this year"
Nanker Posted March 24, 2007 Posted March 24, 2007 Hey, if we're eliminating useless football phrases let's really clean up our act: "He's a football player" "He can make all the throws" "He runs well in space" And the worst one of all: "The Cardinals will surprise people this year" Revealing the real thought behind the words: "He's a football player" " Douche Bag's lucky he is or he'd be a security guard." "He can make all the throws" "Too bad we don't have anybody that can catch them." "He runs well in space" "Yeah, that's right - in space - as long as nobody's around to tackle him, he can run." And the worst one of all: "The Cardinals will surprise people this year" "Hope springs eternal. It's the Niners and The Bills in the Superbowl this year."
drnykterstein Posted March 25, 2007 Posted March 25, 2007 Well, I'm going to use this thread now to suggest players the Bills should sign (as if it would make a difference), because obviously no matter who I post the next posting will read "if he signs on the cheap". So did you know Ed Hartwell got cut? Yes injuries and such, but I think he is at least worth bringing in to look at. The biggest reason the falcons cut him was the cap. I suppose marv and co have though it over at least. If nothing else he'd make a good backup plan in we find no MLB anywhere else.
K-Gun10 Posted March 25, 2007 Posted March 25, 2007 Well, I'm going to use this thread now to suggest players the Bills should sign (as if it would make a difference), because obviously no matter who I post the next posting will read "if he signs on the cheap". So did you know Ed Hartwell got cut? Yes injuries and such, but I think he is at least worth bringing in to look at. The biggest reason the falcons cut him was the cap. I suppose marv and co have though it over at least. If nothing else he'd make a good backup plan in we find no MLB anywhere else. i dont mind giving him a look
Recommended Posts