Where are we cap wise?

[patmoran2006]

Not saying the old geezer wont spend anything more. But dont we have like a ****load of cap room left, and a bunch of cash to cap money??

Stroud was signed (nice)
Mitchell was signed (nice)

Johnson was signed (nice) but isnt his contract for around the same we saved in cutting Tripplett?

I havent seen or looked in a few weeks, but we must have near the top of the league in cap space right now.

[Dr. Lecter]

I really don't know. I amsure Clump can (and will) tell us.

The thing is, there is not much out there to spend money on. James would be nice. One of the WRs would be nice, not none of them are world beaters. The TEs are not the long term answer and Crumpler was picked up before he came here.

If there is money, use it to extend Lee and Crowell.

[patmoran2006]

True.
By rule, they HAVE to spend a certain amount, no?

[Dr. Lecter]

Yes.

[Dr. Lecter]

Hell, they could even try to get Peters up real long term or McCargo.

[patmoran2006]

Or pull a Paul Brown 90's Bengal style and spend the BARE minimum?

Without being sarcastic, would that surprise you?

[clumping platelets]

Plenty of both cap space and cash to cap

[gr8slayer]

Hell, they could even try to get Peters up real long term or McCargo.
McCargo, already? Seems a bit early for that.

I would like to get Peters and Evans locked up this year if we are done spending. There really isn't anyone left out there worth paying big money anyway.

[TedMock]

Not defending or condemning Ralph here. I'm just sitting here thinking about the FA's and although I think it would be nice to sign a Johnson or Hackett, I don't see either as being worth a whole heck of a lot more than a rookie if we're only looking for a No.2 this season.

I understand that rookies have to adjust, etc, but a lot of rookies also play very well when they are not put at the number one spot right away. This would be our case. Don't get me wrong - signing a guy makes the draft wide open for us. We still have needs, but none would necessarily HAVE to be picked in a certain round. BPA amongst the needs. We're still close to that situation. A lot of teams have a ton of money this year and nobody except the Raiders is doing anything too foolish.

I still say we draft BPA in round one (most likely a CB unless somebody extraordinary falls to us or to someone who wants to trade up). CB, WR, TE and DT would all be good picks in the first three rounds and the order doesn't necessarily/completely matter. I would say that DT is now the least pressing, but if Stroud gets hurt we're in trouble. Round one - CB or WR. Round two - CB, WR or TE. Round 3 - CB, WR, TE, or DT. Round 4 - TE or DT.

[Mitchy moo]

Plenty of both cap space and cash to cap

Thx Clump!

[clumping platelets]

:up:

[Michael82]

Plenty of both cap space and cash to cap
That really annoys me. Especially if we don't do anything to extend Lee Evans, Angelo Crowell or Jason Peters.... :mad:

[clumping platelets]

That really annoys me. Especially if we don't do anything to extend Lee Evans, Angelo Crowell or Jason Peters.... :mad:


It's called PATIENCE! I just don't get why everyone is sooooooo frickin impatient :shakeno:

The 2008 League Year only started 2 weeks ago................there is PLENTY of time to work out extensions for both Evans and Crowell (i.e. after start of regular season so the Bills can use the Philly loophole). Peters can wait until next offseason

[Dr. Lecter]

It's called PATIENCE! I just don't get why everyone is sooooooo frickin impatient :shakeno:

The 2008 League Year only started 2 weeks ago................there is PLENTY of time to work out extensions for both Evans and Crowell (i.e. after start of regular season so the Bills can use the Philly loophole). Peters can wait until next offseason

Patience?

On this board?

:rofl: :rofl:

Are you :boozer: or something?

[clumping platelets]

How'd you guess? :boozer:

[YardRat]

I hope Bryant Johnson gets buried on SF's depth chart and Ben Troupe is a TC cut.

That would be the only outcome that would justify them not being in a Bill's uni this year.

[Dr. Lecter]

I disagree.

If Johnson did not want a long term deal unless it was 5 million or more, he is not worth it. You do not give guys like that 1 year deals.

And Troupe is a slight improvement over Royal.

[gr8slayer]

I disagree.

If Johnson did not want a long term deal unless it was 5 million or more, he is not worth it. You do not give guys like that 1 year deals.

And Troupe is a slight improvement over Royal.
To a point I'd argue that statement.

[YardRat]

If Johnson did not want a long term deal unless it was 5 million or more, he is not worth it. You do not give guys like that 1 year deals.

Why not?

[X-Era]

Im running a Buffalo Sabres ball style cap... Ohh, THAT cap.

[Dr. Lecter]

Why not?

1. He has shown nothing to indicate he is a 5 million per year guy.
2. One year deals for young players a team plans on starting is a problem for the team. If he performs poorly, you are staring over. If he performs well, he will get #1 money elsewhere next year.

[YardRat]

1. He has shown nothing to indicate he is a 5 million per year guy.
2. One year deals for young players a team plans on starting is a problem for the team. If he performs poorly, you are staring over. If he performs well, he will get #1 money elsewhere next year.

1. I agree. I wasn't ever advocating paying that kind of money for Johnson and my question was geared more toward....

2. A one year contract, especially in our situation and assuming we still draft a rookie in a higher round, is ideal for the team because... A) BJ fills a slot starting for maybe the year, maybe just a few games until the rookie comes up to speed B) There is no long term commitment or large guarantees tied up to worry about future financial liabilities C) If he performs well and goes elsewhere for big bucks next year, who cares? because we got a year's worth of production out of him at a reasonable price and his replacement in the lineup is already on the team (rookie) and finally D) If he underperforms he can be replaced by the rookie with very little love or money lost.

A one year contract for BJ could've been Win-Win-Win-Win in my book.

[Dr. Lecter]

I was going under the assumption if he is signed, the Bill can focus on another need (i.e. CB) in round 1.

[YardRat]

I was going under the assumption if he is signed, the Bill can focus on another need (i.e. CB) in round 1.

They still could have. BJ on a one year deal, a CB in round one, and a WR in two or three that should be able to start mid-season, next year at the latest.

I just feel the lack of any #2 at this point may put more of an onus on the FO to go WR in the first and pass up a CB. Even w/o BJ the team still could go CB-WR, but the onus is now on that WR to be able to come in and contribute right off the bat whereas otherwise we could have had a little 'cushion'.

Putting yourself in a position to go BPA anywhere in the draft is always most desirable, IMO, and we've hand-cuffed ourselves a little by not addressing WR or TE through FA. For the money we would've paid either Troupe or Johnson, I don't think it would have broken anybody's heart even if they ended up getting beat out by a couple of rookies in camp and cut before opening day.

[Midwesternbillsfan]

As for the argument that adding Johnson for a year at least would've facilliated a smoother transition in 2009 for a high rookie that we would look to add in April, that doesn't come with any guarantees, either. Peerless Price being the second wideout in 2002 and enabling Josh Reed to wait didn't transition itself to Reed being prepared to be the second wideout in 2003 once Price was in Atlanta and Reed was clearly overwhelmed as his replacement. I'm not saying that having Price stunted Reed's growth; not at all because Reed received plenty of playing time his rookie season and because he- as we all painfully know- just was never cut out to start in this league. I am saying, though, that it doesn't always work out that a vet provides a smoother transition for a rookie heading into his second season. In the end, it just depends on the players. If the Bills draft the right wideout(s) this April, players whose talent WILL be developed and not dormant in this league, we'll be just fine.

Still, whether we do or whether we don't, I think we'll look back at Bryant Johnson much the same way we look at Darwin Walker and appreciate and find humor in the overblown angst that both of their non-contributions caused. Bryant Johnson's addition would have been welcomed. But his absence will not be a death knell to this franchise. He's just another player who wanted more than anyone- and anyone else- offered and he'll be forgotten about soon enough, IMO.

[Don't Panic]

I think once we get into April we're going to get word of Crowell and Evans being extended. Although I was a fan of the BJ signing, I'm OK with the fact that it didn't happen. As was stated, patience is key, and all will be fine in Bills Nation so long as we do something to invest in our team's future before training camp rolls around.

[jamze132]

I think it's very important that we make sure we have the cap space to sign the core of our team. And the core of our team is still developing. Obviously Evans and Crowell should be included in that and arguably McCargo, but he needs to have a productive, full season this year.

From last years performance, Lynch looks like he might be around for a while and we need to look a few years ahead to make sure we have the money to keep him. And who knows what Edwards is going to do. If he throws for 3000+ and 20 TDs this year, we may have found our new QB. And if so, he's going to have to be resigned in a couple years.

I don't see any reason for us to throw a lot of guaranteed money at mediocre FAs this offseason that may handicap us down the road and not give us the productivity that is warranted.

One more thing, if we can start winning on a consistent basis, we can stop drafting guys in the top half of the draft and have to pay them accordingly. There is no law that states a player picked at 11 or 12 is more productive than a player picked at 20.

[Bert102176]

Clump we would be lost without you ty for all your work ya do

[clumping platelets]

I'll have an update in the next couple of days :up:

[Bills Juggernaut]

I'll have an update in the next couple of days :up:

Next couple of days?

What are we paying you for? Get it done man!!!!!!!!

[clumping platelets]

:tongue: