Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

[patmoran2006]

How many times must we hear about how Ralph Wilson spent $70 million on the offensive line..

Ya.. big spender. The one problem is that we DIDNT spend on Nate Clements and London Fletcher.. People forget that in order to spend on Dockery and Walker, we let Fletcher and Clements walk.

Were Fletch and Clements worth it? I'm not going to debate the point because it's not what I'm gettting at (but just for the record, I say Fletch was and Clements wasnt).

What I'm getting at is Wilson didn't spend **** last year.. He SAVED by money by not having to resign his best players.. and even if they weren't great players; he also saved a ton by unloading Spikes and McGahee for draft picks. (AGain, NOT debating if they were good football moves, I'm talking strictly financial bottom line)

The morale of the story is Ralph didn't lose ****, he saved a bundle.

This year there are no "past their primes" vet to get rid of, at least not any excusable ones (excluding minor ones like Price). This year, go spend another $70 million WITHOUT dumping some of your best players in order to do it, and maybe extend Crowell or Evans in the process, and then you can color me impressed.

Until then, everytime we spend money on a player, I'll be thinking immediately who's getting traded or cut to make up for the money.

[patmoran2006]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

BTW.
I haven't turned on the Bills.. I am a HUGE fan of a lot of this roster. I like the core of our team A LOT. I think a competent owner and/or GM could make this a playoff team.

I just have ZERO faith in our owner and front office, and with good reason.

[chernobylwraiths]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

And he will spend another $70 this offseason, and the SAME people will start threads saying how cheap he is.

Could sell the seats for more, could move the team for a boatload of $$$, could just not sign anybody and save the money, but no, he's cheap.

[Goobylal]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

Ralph spent the 4th most in actual dollars last year. Doesn't matter that he let an overpaid CB and a MLB on the wrong side of 30 go.

[Dr. Lecter]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

Calling Ralph cheap is a sign of being a moron.

It has been disproven time and time and time again.

[patmoran2006]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

Was signing Dockery and Walker more expensive or cheaper than letting Clements and Fletcher go?

And dont tell me this defense couldnt use Fletcher and Clements?

How much he spend is irrelevent if he's just going to dump and not resign other important players to make up for it.

[patmoran2006]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

Ralph spent the 4th most in actual dollars last year. Doesn't matter that he let an overpaid CB and a MLB on the wrong side of 30 go.

Stop adding in the ENTIRE signing bonus' on the first year of the contract and come back to me with that.

[Dr. Lecter]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

Was signing Dockery and Walker more expensive or cheaper than letting Clements and Fletcher go?

And dont tell me this defense couldnt use Fletcher and Clements?

How much he spend is irrelevent if he's just going to dump and not resign other important players to make up for it.

Fletcher and Clements were way overpaid, moreso than Walker and Dockery (one player you said sucked and the other you said Ralph would never sign, BTW)

As for Fletcher, if it were not for injuries he would have not been a big help.

He signed Dockery, Walker, Kelsay and Parrish to decent money contracts in the past year.
Was the money wisely spent? I dunno. But the man is not cheap.

[DMBcrew36]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

The one problem is that we DIDNT spend on Nate Clements and London Fletcher..

I don't see how that's a problem. I'm not giving Clements (a guy who plays when he wants to) an $80+ million dollar contract. He was overpaid. I don't want my Bills handcuffed because they signed that clown.

[Typ0]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

I don't think either of those guys were worth the money on this team. I was almost starting to get the feeling that Levy had a plan this season...but he's gone now. I sure hope it's Jarons plan because I'm sick of changing plans.

[THE END OF ALL DAYS]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

who cares who we keep or cut, unless JP is starting we will not sniff the playoffs for another 10 years!











HAHAHAHAAHHAHA, I'M JUST KIDDING LOL!

[Turf]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

Ralph needs to start spending the money on staff and administration. This way, his "roster" money won't be wasted.

[YardRat]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

Stop adding in the ENTIRE signing bonus' on the first year of the contract and come back to me with that.

Not a valid statement. In reality, regardless of the CBA's 'accepted accounting principles' relative to proration, signing bonuses are payments made with cash, up front, at one time and are more indicative of actual real dollars spent in a fiscal year.

Clements wasn't worth it, and neither was Fletch. Spikes is, for the most part, done and good riddance McGahee.

Ralph's money may not have been spent in the wisest of ways, but he still spent it.

[jmb1099]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

I'm not sure I'd call Ralph cheap for some of the players he's signed or not signed. What will be tell tale though is what he decides to do with the gm and oc positions.

[patmoran2006]

Re: Yep.. Wilson is definitely not "cheap"

I don't see how that's a problem. I'm not giving Clements (a guy who plays when he wants to) an $80+ million dollar contract. He was overpaid. I don't want my Bills handcuffed because they signed that clown.

I never thought Clements was worth the money. I agree with you.

My point is we sign a starting left guard and right tackle. In return we LOSE a middle linebacker and cornerback.

All we do is add one, lose one. add one, lose one.

We're not good enough to just lose starters everytime we sign one like the Patriots or Colts. Last year I've said a million times was understood. We couldnt win WITH Fletch and Clements, so why keep them.

All my focus is pointed towards THIS year. This year we shouldn't lose any starters and we have a ton of cap room. What I'm saying is will Wilson shell out the money he did for Walker and Dockery this year again, knowing he doesn't have big-contract guys to let go to offset the money?

Or, is he going to trade or cut some higher paid roster guys to make up for any money spent?

Maybe I'm wrong for anticipating that we're going to be highly inactive in the FA market because he doesn't have guys he can realistically just let walk. But this the stance I'm on given his history.