BillsFan74 Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 Here are a few interesting points from ESPN's AFC East Blog regarding Greer. He is Buffalo's most significant free agent. Cornerbacks are a precious commodity in the NFL, and there aren't a lot in this year's pool. Greer could be looking at a four-year contract worth between $4 million and $5 million on the open market.But Greer isn't necessarily interested in going up for bids. "I definitely want to get something done with Buffalo," said Greer, who will turn 27 next week. "It's a spot that I have so much appreciation for. I appreciate the opportunity that they gave me. "It's kind of weird to be in this situation, to have a choice. But at the end of the day, I know the community. I know my teammates. They're a spectacular group of guys, and it's a fun place to play." A long-term contract for Greer would make left cornerback Terrence McGee a lame duck. McGee, a Pro Bowl return man, is entering the final year of his contract and will turn 29 during next season. With all that being said would the Bills be better off signing Greer and trying to get something for McGee this offseason?
LabattBlue Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 A long-term contract for Greer would make left cornerback Terrence McGee a lame duck. McGee, a Pro Bowl return man, is entering the final year of his contract and will turn 29 during next season. With all that being said would the Bills be better off signing Greer and trying to get something for McGee this offseason? I'd prefer to sign Greer and either trade McGee this offseason or keep him for 2009 and let him walk afterwards. If you think Greer is going to command a lot of money, wait until you see what kind of money McGee will be looking for.
Ramius Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 It comes down to a choice: Greer this season or McGee next year. Probably better off keeping greer and letting mcgee walk or seeing if we cant deal him. Probably cheaper in the long run too.
Stl Bills Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 I'd prefer to sign Greer and either trade McGee this offseason or keep him for 2009 and let him walk afterwards. If you think Greer is going to command a lot of money, wait until you see what kind of money McGee will be looking for. Why Greer is younger and a better corner, I like T Mcgee but I don't think he'll get more money than Greer.
BillsFan74 Posted January 28, 2009 Author Posted January 28, 2009 It comes down to a choice: Greer this season or McGee next year. Probably better off keeping greer and letting mcgee walk or seeing if we cant deal him. Probably cheaper in the long run too. I was thinking along the same line, Greer is younger and cheaper and if you get something for McGee maybe that would free up some cash to fill a position of need.
Magox Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 Why Greer is younger and a better corner, I like T Mcgee but I don't think he'll get more money than Greer. Mcgee won't be cheaper, I guarantee you
Dawgg Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 Here are a few interesting points from ESPN's AFC East Blog regarding Greer. He is Buffalo's most significant free agent. Cornerbacks are a precious commodity in the NFL, and there aren't a lot in this year's pool. Greer could be looking at a four-year contract worth between $4 million and $5 million on the open market.But Greer isn't necessarily interested in going up for bids. "I definitely want to get something done with Buffalo," said Greer, who will turn 27 next week. "It's a spot that I have so much appreciation for. I appreciate the opportunity that they gave me. "It's kind of weird to be in this situation, to have a choice. But at the end of the day, I know the community. I know my teammates. They're a spectacular group of guys, and it's a fun place to play." A long-term contract for Greer would make left cornerback Terrence McGee a lame duck. McGee, a Pro Bowl return man, is entering the final year of his contract and will turn 29 during next season. With all that being said would the Bills be better off signing Greer and trying to get something for McGee this offseason? Keep McGee. He's a gamer and he has 3-4 good years left in him.
2003Contenders Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 Signing Greer provides all kinds of flexibility. It is insurance in case McGee walks next year. It is also insurance in case McKelvin struggles in his sophomore year. It also would keep us from having to invest a high draft pick on a CB yet again in 2009 or 2010. It sounds like Greer, who is coming off a knee injury, is willing to take a home team discount. So why not oblige?
SuperKillerRobots Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 Here are a few interesting points from ESPN's AFC East Blog regarding Greer. He is Buffalo's most significant free agent. Cornerbacks are a precious commodity in the NFL, and there aren't a lot in this year's pool. Greer could be looking at a four-year contract worth between $4 million and $5 million on the open market.But Greer isn't necessarily interested in going up for bids. "I definitely want to get something done with Buffalo," said Greer, who will turn 27 next week. "It's a spot that I have so much appreciation for. I appreciate the opportunity that they gave me. "It's kind of weird to be in this situation, to have a choice. But at the end of the day, I know the community. I know my teammates. They're a spectacular group of guys, and it's a fun place to play." A long-term contract for Greer would make left cornerback Terrence McGee a lame duck. McGee, a Pro Bowl return man, is entering the final year of his contract and will turn 29 during next season. With all that being said would the Bills be better off signing Greer and trying to get something for McGee this offseason? YES! McGee could turn into a 2nd round pick or possibly a low 1st - BJ Raji, pick 1, Michael Johnson, pick 2, Eric Wood pick 3. If they could just find a TE, they'd be fine.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 The choice is obvious: Greer. I think it's obvious the other way: keep McGee. They are about the same age, and will command about the same amount of money. McGee is better; and can return kicks too.
Dawgg Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 I think it's obvious the other way: keep McGee. They are about the same age, and will command about the same amount of money. McGee is better; and can return kicks too. Exactly. McGee is a very good corner and an underrated one at that! Sign him up.
Hardy Pyle Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 I love both players, but I think McGee is better. Greer is damn good too though.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 I love both players, but I think McGee is better. Greer is damn good too though. I know. I'd hate to choose. But it just doesn't make $$ sense when we have McKelvin (and even Youboty and Corner too).
ropeerasers Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 YES! McGee could turn into a 2nd round pick or possibly a low 1st - BJ Raji, pick 1, Michael Johnson, pick 2, Eric Wood pick 3. If they could just find a TE, they'd be fine. Absolutely no one is going to offer a 1st for McGee under any circumstance, and it would be more than a slight understatement if you called a 2nd unlikely.
Fixxxer Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 If McGee is willing to move to FS (he played there in college), I'd try to resign Greer. This way you don't have find depth for the secondary in the draft, instead you focus that needed depth on the lines.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 If McGee is willing to move to FS (he played there in college), I'd try to resign Greer. This way you don't have find depth for the secondary in the draft, instead you focus that needed depth on the lines. The problem then is that you're paying a free safety #1-CB money.
Magox Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 I think it's obvious the other way: keep McGee. They are about the same age, and will command about the same amount of money. McGee is better; and can return kicks too. No they won't Mcgee will command much more money than Greer on the open market. He has a bigger name, is viewed in the league as our #1 corner and has considerable value as a return man. Don't get me wrong, I like Mcgee a lot and I wish we could keep them both, and I would be happy if we resigned him, but it makes a lot of football business sense to me to resign Greer at a considerably less valued contract, get similar cb coverage value as mcgee and with the emergence of Mckelvin's Return skills, plus the added depth that we apparently have at DB i makes Mcgee more expendible. Plus he does have one year left on his contract, and to me it makes sense to try to get something in return for him before he walks. He could be worth a second rounder. Either way we gotta keep one of them.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted January 28, 2009 Posted January 28, 2009 We need to keep them both. Then why did we draft McKelvin? The FO clearly had designs on losing either Greer or McGee. If we can sign Greer, and get something good out of a trade for McGee, isn't that the optimal solution?
Recommended Posts