JayFromDC Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 this money we have under the cap, we just refuse to pay anybody anything on offensive side of the ball?
nucci Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 this money we have under the cap, we just refuse to pay anybody anything on offensive side of the ball? Whom would you have liked us to pay? I recall we paid a lot of money last year.
DreamOnDan Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 I'd been pretty happy with Crumpler for 2 years... Heard an interview with Bryant Johnson and he said that he and his agent offered the Bills the same 1 year deal that he signed there. That wouldn't of been so bad. I would have offered fitzgerald money to Moss. Would have loved to sign trent Green for 3 years. DJ Hackett remains out there. I'd offer him a 2 year 7 million to be our backup to Lee and whoever they draft. Lorenzo Neal and Tony Richardson were both available, I love to have Neal who hasn't signed anywhere yet.
JayFromDC Posted March 16, 2008 Author Posted March 16, 2008 I mean I agree with you Dream, I mean damn, it's a problem to me when we can't even afford or want to pay a bryant johnson but yet we lose him to San Francisco who also paid Nate Clements 80 Mil, I mean whatsup
Stl Bills Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 I mean I agree with you Dream, I mean damn, it's a problem to me when we can't even afford or want to pay a bryant johnson but yet we lose him to San Francisco who also paid Nate Clements 80 Mil, I mean whatsup Dude are you serious? Do you not find it odd that B. Johnson shopped his services around to a number of different teams and all he was able to land was a one year deal with a team that might have the worst QB situation in the league? The Bills (and others) obviously weren't that impressed with what they saw in Johnson and decided not to overpay for him. My guess is that WR and TE will both be addressed through the draft. We did some really good things on defense this offseason and spent a ton of money on Offense last year. Calm down sparky, FA isn't like a Christmas wishlist. You have to be smart about where you spend your money and going out and overpaying for tier 2 free agents is how you get in cap hell for years to come. Our front office has decided to build this team throught the draft and it seems to be headed in the right direction, so just chill and wait for April.
Max997 Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 I dont think it was a matter of only being offered a one year deal from San Fran but not liking what they were being offered in multi year deals so they decided to take a one year deal in hopes of putting up good numbers in Mike Martz's offense and cashing in next year i dont think signing him to the same one yeat deal would have been a bad idea
Navy Chief Navy Pride Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 I mean I agree with you Dream, I mean damn, it's a problem to me when we can't even afford or want to pay a bryant johnson but yet we lose him to San Francisco who also paid Nate Clements 80 Mil, I mean whatsup The Bills turned down the 1 yr deal because that is NOT how you build a team. IF BJ had a great year then he was gone to the highest bidder anyway. The Bills said take the long term deal we put out there or don't take anything at all. Simple as that. Why overpay for a # 3 WR that has not proven himself in the NFL? Last time I checked we had one #1 WR and then a whole bunch of #3 guys. Steve
Tim Anderson's Lunch Pail Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 I'd been pretty happy with Crumpler for 2 years... Heard an interview with Bryant Johnson and he said that he and his agent offered the Bills the same 1 year deal that he signed there. That wouldn't of been so bad. I would have offered fitzgerald money to Moss. Would have loved to sign trent Green for 3 years. DJ Hackett remains out there. I'd offer him a 2 year 7 million to be our backup to Lee and whoever they draft. Lorenzo Neal and Tony Richardson were both available, I love to have Neal who hasn't signed anywhere yet. OK, I don't want to rain on your parade, but I can take issue with each of those suggested moves: - Crumpler has serious knee issues. The Bills probably found it safer to go with a rookie in the draft than pickup someone that's 30 with degenerative knees. - The Bills said they will not sign Johnson to a one year deal because they'd be in the same scenario addressing the situation again next year. I think it takes a very disciplined team to do that. - Sure, Moss would be worth Fitzgerald money. But come on, would he ever work here? No way. - Trent Green for three years? In the last two seasons he's played, he's been knocked out of the year. He probably shouldn't be playing any more. And if you sign him, then whatever value Losman may have had goes out the window. I'm not saying that's not worth signing another backup, but not Green. - Hackett is more of a slot guy. If we sign him to that short-term deal, what do you do with Reed? And what do you do with our other flanked out receiver spot? - Tony Richardson 36. Lorenzo Neal 37.
CJPearl2 Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 This was a very weak free agent year. And I commend the Bills for not being the Raiders/Jets and throwing money at Free Agents just to appease the fan base (many of which are on these boards hopelessly wishing for signings we can get). On a side note: Where did all the love for Bryant Johnson come from? He is a constant underacheiving WR that isn't very good. A first round bust - and don't give me the Fitz/Bolden argument. He was playing a year before Fitz was drafted and still was average at best. i We will take a very good WR in the 2nd round after we draft our CB. The defense is not yet ready and is obviously the Bills' main concern.
CJPearl2 Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 OK, I don't want to rain on your parade, but I can take issue with each of those suggested moves: - Crumpler has serious knee issues. The Bills probably found it safer to go with a rookie in the draft than pickup someone that's 30 with degenerative knees. - The Bills said they will not sign Johnson to a one year deal because they'd be in the same scenario addressing the situation again next year. I think it takes a very disciplined team to do that. - Sure, Moss would be worth Fitzgerald money. But come on, would he ever work here? No way. - Trent Green for three years? In the last two seasons he's played, he's been knocked out of the year. He probably shouldn't be playing any more. And if you sign him, then whatever value Losman may have had goes out the window. I'm not saying that's not worth signing another backup, but not Green. - Hackett is more of a slot guy. If we sign him to that short-term deal, what do you do with Reed? And what do you do with our other flanked out receiver spot? - Tony Richardson 36. Lorenzo Neal 37. Great post!!
Captain Hindsight Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 OK, I don't want to rain on your parade, but I can take issue with each of those suggested moves: - Crumpler has serious knee issues. The Bills probably found it safer to go with a rookie in the draft than pickup someone that's 30 with degenerative knees. - The Bills said they will not sign Johnson to a one year deal because they'd be in the same scenario addressing the situation again next year. I think it takes a very disciplined team to do that. - Sure, Moss would be worth Fitzgerald money. But come on, would he ever work here? No way. - Trent Green for three years? In the last two seasons he's played, he's been knocked out of the year. He probably shouldn't be playing any more. And if you sign him, then whatever value Losman may have had goes out the window. I'm not saying that's not worth signing another backup, but not Green. - Hackett is more of a slot guy. If we sign him to that short-term deal, what do you do with Reed? And what do you do with our other flanked out receiver spot? - Tony Richardson 36. Lorenzo Neal 37. Good post agree on all points
Sisyphean Bills Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 The Bills turned down the 1 yr deal because that is NOT how you build a team. IF BJ had a great year then he was gone to the highest bidder anyway. The Bills said take the long term deal we put out there or don't take anything at all. Simple as that. Why overpay for a # 3 WR that has not proven himself in the NFL? Last time I checked we had one #1 WR and then a whole bunch of #3 guys.Steve The 1 year deal is interesting. It's a gamble for Johnson, because if he doesn't establish himself as a bona-fide starter, he's going to be right back in the same boat again next year. The time it took for him to "land" this deal suggests that his market value was nowhere near what he thought it should be. I've also heard that the 49ers don't see Johnson as a savior and are taking hard looks at WRs for their draft. It's too bad for the Bills though, because Johnson has shown he isn't a puss and can and will go over the middle. The Bills passing game is anemic because it really can't threaten anyone between the hashes...
Dan Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 OK, I don't want to rain on your parade, but I can take issue with each of those suggested moves: - Crumpler has serious knee issues. The Bills probably found it safer to go with a rookie in the draft than pickup someone that's 30 with degenerative knees. - The Bills said they will not sign Johnson to a one year deal because they'd be in the same scenario addressing the situation again next year. I think it takes a very disciplined team to do that. - Sure, Moss would be worth Fitzgerald money. But come on, would he ever work here? No way. - Trent Green for three years? In the last two seasons he's played, he's been knocked out of the year. He probably shouldn't be playing any more. And if you sign him, then whatever value Losman may have had goes out the window. I'm not saying that's not worth signing another backup, but not Green. - Hackett is more of a slot guy. If we sign him to that short-term deal, what do you do with Reed? And what do you do with our other flanked out receiver spot? - Tony Richardson 36. Lorenzo Neal 37. Yes, on the surface, this all seems rational and you make some good points. But, come on, you really think we wouldn't be better if we signed a bunch of aging, question mark, vets to high salaries; just so we can get in cap hell in 2 years when they haven't panned out and are being cut or walking because we can't get under the cap. As if anyone even cares about 2 years from now. You know, as well as I do, that's its better to sign big name, big money contracts in March so we look good on ESPN. Screw the future, I want to win now. And by now I mean before the end of March.
ax4782 Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 If players that Buffalo wanted were out there they would have spent the money. Complaining that the team isn't willing to shell out has been disproven during the past two offseasons. They shelled out almost 75mil last offseason to address the O-Line, and the money proved to be worth it. All three guys were solid players for us last year. They signed Kelsay and Schobel long term, and while they are not the top two pass rushers in the NFL, they are solid guys who should have much improved play this year. They addressed huge needs on D and weren't shy with money there either, signing three guys to nearly 50 mil in total contract value. Come on. There weren't a lot of good prospects in the WR and TE market this FA. Better not to reach and waste money on a player than try and draft a much better one who will be more than happy to sign a long time deal. When the best TE available in FA is Ben Troupe, you know things aren't good. Same with WR. When Bryant Johnson is the next best target out there to Randy Moss (who was never going to leave NE), you don't want to waste money on him for a one year deal and have to address the position AGAIN next offseason. The FO is making very savvy decisions so far this offseason, and are certainly gaining a lot of respect around the league. After the draft, we should be in fantastic shape to do well this season.
ajzepp Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 I can't believe we didn't sign Brett Favre...stupid front office. I also think there are too many Dan's on this board. We need to cut a couple to make room for some free agents.
Dan Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 I can't believe we didn't sign Brett Favre...stupid front office. I also think there are too many Dan's on this board. We need to cut a couple to make room for some free agents. I agree completely.
ajzepp Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 I agree completely. We need to make room for more Fockers.
Ramius Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 Instead of wasting money on mediocre players, we're going to need some cash to lock up Evans and Crowell. Keeping your own good players is much more important than overpaying for someone's else's FAs.
ajzepp Posted March 16, 2008 Posted March 16, 2008 Dan Fockers! Hmmm....hybrids, eh? Never thought of that....bring on the Dan Fockers!
Recommended Posts