Forked Thread: Bills one of the most profitable teams in the league

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • X-Era
    What this generation tolerates, the next generation will embrace
    • Feb 2005
    • 27670

    Forked Thread: Bills one of the most profitable teams in the league

    Forked from: Bills one of the most profitable teams in the league

    I forked this out because it's an area that we haven't really covered much. The concept is this... What should the Bills total annual player salary be? Break it down by areas and certain positions. Give your answer in a per year salary and then as a total. It should look like a overall structure for what level of player you think we need and what it should cost for that.

    So, I don't hate their shrewd philosophy and I don't want a Dan Snyder like approach. But for this team to become good we shoudl have a few very good players at a reasonable yet more expensive value. This has a given amount of upgrades which will cost a given amount of money.

    To me,

    The OL needs solid and proven players, 2, maybe 3 plus extensions for the remaining 2 or 3. That means 5 mill per times 2 or 3 for a 15 mill expense total. That's what it will likely cost maximum. I would be fine with 2 FA's and a draftee or even 1 FA and 2 draftees who step up. It could be done for as little as 5 mill per and 2 rookie contracts. As far as extensions, Wood will get top 10 C pay... That's going to mean 5 or 6 mill. Levitre can probably be had for 4-5 mill per. So, a quality OL, which assumes we sign quality players, costs us 20-25 mill per. That should be the target. This may mean as much as 7 or 8 mill in new money.

    At WR, Evans contract money went right back in our pocket so extending Stevie to the 7 or 8 mill per he may command should be a given. But yes, I'd like a WR who's deserving of that kind of money. Depending on how the Evans trade worked out, Stevie could be resigned with his money or maybe less. Evans's extension was 4 years for around 37 so that would pay for it.

    The QB spot is another issue. Set aside Fitz for a second. A quality starting QB is probably going to cost you 8 or 9 mill per. IMO, we need better than that but not the best in the league. I think we should be thinking about wanting to have a 10-11 mill per QB. I'm good with a top 15 guy, but would like top 10. Fitz gets 4 or 5 mill now with incentives so that would mean as much as 5-6 mill in new money toward this spot.

    On the defense, I think we need to add a serious pass rusher or extend Merriman if he pans out. We could be looking at something in the neighborhood of 8-9 mill per. The franchise tag is 10. If Dareus becomes our stud DT along with Kyle I'm good. If Dareus becomes that we could be looking at 10 mill per for him. The franchise tag number is almost 13. We pay 5 mill for Dareus and 5 mill for Merriman now. Total we should be thinking 8-10 mill in new money should be invested.

    And at that point, I'm good with the salary structure across the rest of the team. That doesn't mean were right on target with who we have at all of our positions currently. It simply means that spending wise we aren't looking to bad. CB could be another factor down the road but I like our current spending there, maybe we simply need to change the faces, not the spending level. I don't need Asomugha.

    Add it up and I want us to be right around 120-123 mill in total salary. It would be 20 - 24 mill per in new spending. We are hovering around 100 and I want us to spend to jump this team into a solid NFL squad. I realize it all has to be the right players to make it a smart move. But, I'd like us to be thinking about having a team of that caliber and at that total cost.

    I'd like us to be close to the cap by league accounting rules. To me, if done right, we could say we put forth our best effort to provide a competitive product at that point.[/quote]

  • YardRat
    Well, lookie here...
    • Dec 2004
    • 86189

    #2
    Re: Forked Thread: Bills one of the most profitable teams in the league

    I'd like to have 10-15% available throughout the season for new acquisitions that are necessary due to injury and for extending current players that are in the last season (or so) of an existing contract that we're planning on keeping here.

    Trying to budget a team's salary by position would be ridiculous.
    YardRat Wall of Fame
    #56 DARRYL TALLEY
    #29 DERRICK BURROUGHS#22 FRED JACKSON #95 KYLE WILLIAMS

    Comment

    • X-Era
      What this generation tolerates, the next generation will embrace
      • Feb 2005
      • 27670

      #3
      Re: Forked Thread: Bills one of the most profitable teams in the league

      Originally posted by YardRat
      I'd like to have 10-15% available throughout the season for new acquisitions that are necessary due to injury and for extending current players that are in the last season (or so) of an existing contract that we're planning on keeping here.

      Trying to budget a team's salary by position would be ridiculous.
      I don't think it is when folks around here want to penny pinch. They argue we will be better without the additional spending so show it. But, I didn't say to cover every position, more like groups and a few key positions. For example, expecting a quality starting OL when you're total spending is 10-15 mill on per on that unit is ridiculous to me.
      Last edited by X-Era; 09-10-2011, 01:09 PM.

      Comment

      • YardRat
        Well, lookie here...
        • Dec 2004
        • 86189

        #4
        Re: Forked Thread: Bills one of the most profitable teams in the league

        Originally posted by X-Era
        I don't think it is when folks around here want to penny pinch. They argue we will be better without the additional spending so show it. But, I didn't say to cover every position, more like groups and a few key positions. For example, expecting a quality starting OL when you're total spending is 10-15 mill on per on that unit is ridiculous to me.
        It isn't what is spent, it's how it's spent, and every team has to deal with it and it's dependent on where the current talent is, what's out there, etc.
        YardRat Wall of Fame
        #56 DARRYL TALLEY
        #29 DERRICK BURROUGHS#22 FRED JACKSON #95 KYLE WILLIAMS

        Comment

        • X-Era
          What this generation tolerates, the next generation will embrace
          • Feb 2005
          • 27670

          #5
          Re: Forked Thread: Bills one of the most profitable teams in the league

          Originally posted by YardRat
          It isn't what is spent, it's how it's spent, and every team has to deal with it and it's dependent on where the current talent is, what's out there, etc.
          No it's both.

          Comment

          • YardRat
            Well, lookie here...
            • Dec 2004
            • 86189

            #6
            Re: Forked Thread: Bills one of the most profitable teams in the league

            Originally posted by X-Era
            No it's both.
            No, it isn't.

            If it were, than the Super Bowl winner would always be the highest spending team in the league.
            YardRat Wall of Fame
            #56 DARRYL TALLEY
            #29 DERRICK BURROUGHS#22 FRED JACKSON #95 KYLE WILLIAMS

            Comment

            • X-Era
              What this generation tolerates, the next generation will embrace
              • Feb 2005
              • 27670

              #7
              Re: Forked Thread: Bills one of the most profitable teams in the league

              Originally posted by YardRat
              No, it isn't.

              If it were, than the Super Bowl winner would always be the highest spending team in the league.
              Yes it is.

              Logically if a team spends 50 mill but has good value at each position it will not have the same level of talent as a team that spends 100 mill but has good value at each position.

              A 10 mill QB who is worth the money is a better QB than a 5 mill QB who is worth the money... Because player talent level and salary go together.

              Teams that spend a lot but don't win the SB don't have good value for their money do they?

              Comment

              Working...
              X